G7 Security Anyone? @Fahrenthold point here that the mayor of Doral wasn't notified is more proof (do we need it?) that there was no real search for a locale. If the mayor wasn't contacted, neither was the police chief. No serious security review was done.
Background 1/
Background 1/
At @DHSgov, we used to take G7 security seriously in terms of risks and duty to protect foreign leaders. It would qualify as a National Special Security Event (NSSE) which puts @secretservice as lead security agency, managing local, state and federal assets to provide safety. 2/
Any locale site selection that is not already geographically pre-determined (like an inauguration) would have gone through a federal security review to assess the capacity of the jurisdiction to actually protect people and respond. 3/
fas.org/sgp/crs/homese…
fas.org/sgp/crs/homese…
For example, we would assess access points to the locale, street closures and disruptions, water/sea access, proximity to hospitals, potential weather disruptions (hurricanes!), state assets, crime rates, etc. Not rocket science, but the usual drill. 4/
The locations under consideration would be contacted as part of a site selection in any REAL review. It just would be done. You can't ask world leaders -- nor their security details -- to attend an event without having done so. 5/
So Fahrenthold reporting that the locals had no idea is further proof that the Doral selection process didn't actually happen. No one picked up a phone. The result is that we are now asking world leaders to attend an event where basic safety analysis hasn't been performed. 6/
Not shocking. Not surprising. Just typical. But in this case, the Trump corruption extends to the safety and security of the leaders of our closest allies. So let's add dangerous into the mix. 7/7
