SS Suspends Agents On Trump’s Detail During PA Assassination Attempt
Six Secret Service agents were suspended without pay or benefits following an attempted assassination of President Donald Trump at a rally in Pennsylvania in July 2024.
Matt Quinn, the agency’s deputy director, told CBS News on Wednesday that they “weren’t going to fire [their] way out of this,” but did say they are “laser focused on fixing the root cause of the problem.”
Quinn told the outlet that the agents received penalties ranging from 10 to 42 days of unpaid leave and were assigned to restricted roles with reduced responsibilities upon their return. He added that the disciplinary measures followed a federally mandated process.
The agency faced intense criticism after the security breach that enabled gunman Thomas Crooks to open fire toward the stage at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, 2024.
Corey Comperatore, a 50-year-old firefighter, father, and husband attending the event, was killed. President Trump was grazed by a bullet, and two other men were wounded by the gunfire. Crooks was ultimately killed by a Secret Service sniper.
“Secret Service is totally accountable for Butler,” Quinn told CBS. “Butler was an operational failure and we are focused today on ensuring that it never happens again.” He also said the agency is focusing on the “root cause” of the operational failure and fixing “the deficiencies that put us in that situation.”
Since the Butler rally, Quinn stated that the Secret Service has deployed a new fleet of military-grade drones and mobile command posts to enhance radio communications with local law enforcement, Fox News reported.
The agency faced renewed criticism weeks later following a second assassination attempt on Trump in West Palm Beach, Florida. Although the attempt was thwarted, then-Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigned, and the agency became the focus of multiple investigations and congressional hearings.
In December, a bipartisan House task force released a 180-page report declaring the Butler incident “preventable,” pointing to “preexisting” leadership and training deficiencies that “created an environment” conducive to security failures.
The report also noted that Secret Service did not coordinate well with local law enforcement.
Trump made some comments last week regarding the government’s investigation into one of the assassination attempts against him last year.
In response to a reporter’s query on Friday, the president said he’s “very satisfied” with the FBI’s investigation into the assassination attempt against him in Pennsylvania.
Trump made his remarks to Daily Caller White House Correspondent Reagan Reese on Thursday, putting to rest months of speculation and doubt surrounding the case. Until now, Trump had stopped short of giving the FBI a full endorsement, The Daily Caller reported.
In an earlier interview with Fox News, he admitted some parts of the case didn’t sit right. “I’m relying on my people to tell me what it is … The Secret Service, they tell me, is fine. But it’s a little hard to believe,” he said.
Back in March, FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino told Fox News there was no evidence of some grand conspiracy against Trump. “In some of these cases, the ‘there’ you’re looking for is not there. And I know people — I get it, I understand. It’s not there. If it was there, we would have told you,” Bongino said.
That same month, Daily Caller’s Reese pressed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt about whether Trump was satisfied with Bongino’s answer.
Leavitt responded, “Well, in the lead-up to your question, you answered your own question with the president’s own words, and I’ll leave it at that.”
In May, Bongino announced investigations into some well-known cases that involve “potential public corruption.”
The cases, which appeared to be ignored during the administration of former President Joe Biden, that are getting a new look include the attempted pipe-bombing in Washington, D.C., cocaine that was found at the White House, and the leak of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision that ended Roe v. Wade.
Ilhan Omar Arrested - Refused to Leave and Fought Police
Minneapolis, Minnesota - June 16, 2026
Newly released police records show that Rep. Ilhan Omar was arrested for trespassing in 2013 after refusing multiple orders to leave a Minneapolis hotel lobby. According to the Hennepin County police report, Omar became argumentative with officers and physically resisted when police attempted to escort her from the premises.
The incident occurred on January 18, 2013, after an event at the Minneapolis Convention Center featuring former Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud. Large crowds followed the presidential convoy to the Hotel Ivy, where the president was staying. Hotel staff requested police assistance to clear the lobby, stating that only guests with room keys were permitted to remain.
When an officer approached Omar and asked her to leave, she refused. The report states that Omar was “argumentative” and stood her ground.
“As she stood her ground and refused to leave, I took hold of her left elbow to escort her from the lobby. Omar then pulled away from me, stating, ‘Don’t put your hands on me!’” the officer wrote.
Ten minutes later, the same officer found Omar seated in another area of the lobby. After being informed she would be arrested for trespassing if she did not leave, Omar again refused to comply.
The officer attempted to handcuff her while she remained seated in a chair. Omar pulled away during the arrest. She was ultimately booked into Hennepin County Jail.
“Omar was booked at [Hennepin County Jail] as I felt it was likely that she would fail to respond to a citation, and she also demonstrated that she was going to continue her criminal behavior,” the officer wrote in the report.
The newly surfaced document adds to the long list of controversies surrounding the Minnesota congresswoman.
Hannah Dugan Sentenced to 10 Years: Ex-Judge Helped Undocumented Immigrant Flee ICE in Court
MILWAUKEE, Wis. — June 16, 2026
THE SENTENCING HEARING for former Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan has been postponed indefinitely as a federal court takes under advisement a high-stakes defense motion aimed at completely overturning her felony conviction.
U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman opted to halt the scheduled June 3, 2026 proceedings to consider extensive oral arguments regarding recent appellate case law and procedural standards that could render the baseline foundation of the government's case legally invalid.
Dugan, 67, faces a statutory maximum penalty of five years in federal prison following a split verdict delivered by a federal jury in December 2025. The panel found her guilty of one felony count of obstructing an official federal proceeding but acquitted her on a misdemeanor charge of concealing an individual from arrest.
The criminal charges stem from a highly controversial April 18, 2025 incident inside the Milwaukee County Courthouse involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and an undocumented immigrant.
"The defense maintains that the administrative execution of a standard immigration warrant does not meet the strict statutory definitions of an official federal proceeding required under obstruction laws."
The structural trial evidence demonstrated that ICE agents arrived at the county courthouse to detain Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican national who had re-entered the United States illegally and was appearing before Dugan on a state misdemeanor battery matter.
According to official court testimony, Dugan confronted the agents outside her courtroom door, informing them that their administrative paperwork did not authorize a summary arrest within her state court facility. She then directed the officers to the chief judge's office before utilizing a private jury exit corridor to escort Flores-Ruiz and his defense attorney safely out of the building.
Agents remaining in the immediate vicinity observed the departure and apprehended Flores-Ruiz outside the municipal facility following a short foot chase.
Dugan resigned from her judicial seat shortly after the split jury verdict was finalized. While many legal observers originally anticipated a multi-year prison sentence if the felony conviction stood, first-time nonviolent offenders can alternatively receive probation or non-custodial outcomes depending on judicial discretion.
"The prosecution continues to push back forcefully against the request for a new trial, maintaining that the jury’s original verdict rested on sufficient, verified evidence and correctly applied federal law."
The case has commanded national attention from legal scholars as an unprecedented early test of a state court judge facing criminal prosecution for actions intersecting with federal immigration enforcement. The ongoing dispute has exposed deep rifts over the absolute authority of state jurists, courthouse safe-haven policies, and the true legal boundaries of domestic judicial discretion.
Judge Adelman did not issue an immediate ruling from the bench following the conclusion of oral arguments, stating that a comprehensive written order will follow. Consequently, the former judge's sentencing remains on hold until the court determines whether the underlying felony conviction will stand or be permanently vacated.
