Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigned Tuesday following congressional testimony on Monday in which she dodged questions about her handling of the July 13 assassination attempt on Donald Trump in Pennsylvania.

Cheatle left many questions unanswered in the wake of her resignation. Most importantly: was there a decision made by the Biden administration to deprive the Republican presidential candidate of adequate protection?

It is hardly peddling conspiracy theories to suggest that Cheatle’s answers to this and other questions appeared evasive to the point that they indicate a cover-up. Shortly before the assassination attempt, Democrats publicly advocated removing all Secret Service protection from Trump. Moreover, President Joe Biden has repeatedly accused Trump of being an existential threat to the country.

Cheatle’s testimony came a full nine days after the attempt on Donald Trump’s life, in which one man was killed and two others were badly injured. Until then, Cheatle continued to deny any wrongdoing on the part of the agency, despite the obvious bad outcome. As Cheatle testified under congressional subpoena, her purpose again seemed to be to obscure, deflect, and dissemble. Her answers were one part obstruction and two parts ignorance as she fumbled to regurgitate her inventory of pre-written talking points.

We learned more from the well-prepared congressmen questioning her than we did from the Secret Service director who, we discovered, apparently oversaw the investigation into her own incompetence. We learned, for example, that on the morning of July 13, 2024, the Pittsburgh field office of the Secret Service assigned two different groups of agents to high-profile events within the Pittsburgh area. The first group of 12 agents convened at a casino to protect First Lady Jill Biden. The second group of just three agents met at the Butler County fairgrounds, where former president Donald Trump would later address a crowd of thousands.

Congressman William Timmons (R-S.C.) asked the obvious question. Shouldn’t the Secret Service have allocated resources based on the risk profile of each event? Cheatle agreed. “Would you agree that the Trump event was a relatively high-risk event?” Timmons then asked. Cheatle agreed.

Timmons went on to note that the first lady’s Pittsburgh indoor event would take place behind a private security perimeter with metal detectors and was expected to draw just a small crowd. Cheatle agreed with that assessment. Timmons concluded that the Trump event was a relatively high-risk event when compared to the first lady’s event. Cheatle, again, agreed.

Timmons then asked Cheatle to explain why the Secret Service Pittsburgh office allocated four times as many agents to the relatively low-risk casino event with the first lady. Cheatle responded, “The number of personnel allocated to both events were comparable to the risk at both events.”

Timmons was taken aback. “Wow! Really?” he said, “You think the Pittsburgh Casino 400-person ballroom with ingress and egress through a probably well-guarded parking garage was four times more dangerous than a 20,000 person rally in an open field for the former president and the future president?” 

Cheatle then claimed she never said that.

“I have to think that if we had nine more [Secret Service] post standers at the Trump rally … I have a feeling that Crooks would have had somebody come say hello to him before he fired a bunch of shots,” Timmons retorted. When Timmons asked who made the decision to send more Pittsburgh agents to protect the first lady, Cheatle evaded the question.

Cheatle told the committee, “We feel that there was a sufficient number of agents assigned.” Timmons exploded with incredulity, “What did you just say? Did you just say there were sufficient resources? President Trump got shot. Somebody got killed. Clearly there were not sufficient resources.” Cheatle acknowledged, “there was a gap,” without elaborating any further.

When asked why the Secret Service didn’t cover the roof from which the would-be assassin, Thomas Crooks, shot Trump and three others, Cheatle responded vaguely that, “we’re looking into all the details of how the advanced was comprised,” referring to the advanced team of Secret Service agents who assessed the site.

So wait, what? She’s still looking into who made the decision not to place an agent on the roof? Are the lines of responsibility within the Secret Service so muddled and diffuse that nine days after the shooting the director herself cannot get an answer? It was a very strange answer nine days after the incident.

Cheatle then added, “But I can tell you that there was overwatch.” Did she mean the Secret Service had a drone in the air? Cheatle said there had not been one but refused to elaborate on what she meant by the term “overwatch.” Didn’t the overwatch fail? Based on the ability of the shooter to shoot Trump, isn’t that obvious? Cheatle responded, “I think we need to know the full details to understand how this occurred.”

But why aren’t these details known by now? Why was this rooftop left naked? Cheatle said she “could not speak to the specifics of this particular event site.” Does that mean she doesn’t know or that she knows but will not say?

Cheatle told the committee that there were no audio recordings of the radio traffic among agents. She also said the agents used a different communication system than the local law enforcement with whom they coordinated.

Cheatle admitted talking to the White House. She was asked whether she used encrypted communication devices on her personal phone. She said she did. “I do on occasion use encrypted apps to communicate.” When asked whether she used encrypted apps on her phone to communicate with other people in the federal government, she again deflected.

“Do you all use [the encrypted communication app] Signal to communicate with people at the White House?”

Cheatle paused, pretending not to understand the question.

“Signal, on your phone.” the congressman clarified.

“Oh, on occasion, I’m sure that there are people who use Signal, yes.”

Why would the Secret Service use encrypted apps to communicate with the White House instead of official government cell phones? Cheatle let the implication hang in the air without contradiction: The Secret Service used unofficial apps to communicate with the White House so the communication could not easily be reconstructed by auditors and investigators.

To their credit, the Democrats did not cover for Cheatle. Some asked good questions and criticized the director for her evasive answers. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez deserves recognition for scolding Cheatle’s investigation timeline, which involved another 60 days of stonewalling before Cheatle would share facts with Congress.

Make no mistake, the Democrats are angry with the Secret Service. At a time when they’re struggling to stay competitive in the 2024 election, the Secret Service’s incompetence led to one of the most iconic political moments in American history. If Trump wins in 2024, the margin will likely be larger because of that moment. Had she not been forced to resign, Cheatle appeared inclined to continue using her position to deflect blame and cover her own incompetence. It seems clear that the only reason she was not permitted to get away with it is because she committed the only inexcusable sin in Washington today: She inadvertently helped Trump. Now that she’s a private citizen, she owes the American people the names of the people responsible for failing to protect the candidate.