America First Legal (AFL) has taken legal action against multiple federal agencies. They are accusing them of withholding crucial records related to an assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump. Agencies accused of knowing about threat posed by Ryan Routh. There is bipartisan concern that there is a lack of transparency from the agencies.
AFL Takes Legal Action Against Federal Agencies
America First Legal (AFL), an organization supporting former President Donald Trump, has filed a lawsuit against multiple federal agencies, including the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The suit alleges these agencies are illegally concealing records related to Ryan Routh, an individual charged with attempting to assassinate Trump at his golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida, on September 15.
The lawsuit extends beyond the USSS and DHS to include the U.S. Department of State, Department of Defense, and Department of Justice. AFL claims these agencies were aware of Routh and the threat he posed to Trump but failed to act appropriately. This legal action comes in the wake of AFL’s repeated requests for documents concerning USSS staffing, hiring standards, and communications involving key DHS officials.
🚨🚨 NEW WHISTLEBLOWER allegations – this time about the latest attempt on Trump’s life. Whistleblower alleges Secret Service apparently failed to account for “known vulnerabilities” at Trump’s golf course. Shooter was able to lie in wait for 12 hours. What is the explanation? pic.twitter.com/8g9J1aFgog
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) September 19, 2024
Bipartisan Concern Over Lack of Transparency
The situation has drawn criticism from both sides of the political aisle. Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, expressed his frustration with the DHS’s lack of response.
“Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) recently told reporters on Capitol Hill that “I am reaching the point of total outrage because the response from the Department of Homeland Security has been totally lacking. In fact, I think it’s tantamount to stonewalling in many respects.”
On the Republican side, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri released a whistleblower report outlining failures of the USSS in connection with the assassination attempt. Hawley introduced an amendment for the Secret Service to release information on the July 13 attempt, which passed unanimously in a Senate committee.
UPDATE: Trump Assassination Attempt
Senator Josh Hawley has a whistleblower who says Local Law Enforcement Partners Offered Drones to Secret Service BEFORE the Rally – but Secret Service Declined
Drop a . If you believe this was an inside job pic.twitter.com/1KOTxF0YyX
— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) July 25, 2024
Ongoing Concerns and Unanswered Questions
Senator Ron Johnson has noted missing reports, such as toxicology and bullet trajectory analyses, raising questions about the handling of the crime scene. Johnson expressed concern over the Secret Service’s refusal to release the autopsy report of the would-be assassin and other critical documents, highlighting the lack of basic information available.
“The American people have every right to know what the federal government knew about Ryan Routh. There is simply no possible way that a man who traveled to foreign battlefields and recruited foreign fighters to engage in war was not on the federal government’s radar,” Gene Hamilton, America First Legal Executive director said in a statement.
The lawsuit seeks to compel these agencies to release the requested information, arguing that the public has a right to know about potential threats to a former president and how federal agencies respond to such threats. AFL maintains that understanding these details is crucial for assessing the agencies’ priorities and resource allocation.
Implications for National Security and Transparency
This legal action by AFL underscores the ongoing debate about balancing national security concerns with the public’s right to information. The organization’s pursuit of these records highlights the tension between government agencies’ need for operational secrecy and the importance of transparency in a democratic society, especially when it comes to matters involving the safety of public figures.
As the lawsuit progresses, it may shed light on the inner workings of federal security agencies and their protocols for handling threats against high-profile individuals. The outcome could have significant implications for how such agencies operate and communicate with the public in the future, potentially setting new precedents for transparency and accountability in matters of national security.
