Several questions about protecting the inaugural, put to me by @ShawnAndersonDC and @bhaseltonWTOP on the air @wtop today.

1. How is Secret Service planning to protect the Inauguration from the violence that occurred last week?

Planning is the key word. They’ve been planning this inauguration for more than a year. And it’s important to note that comparing security around the Capitol on an ordinary day and an inauguration are like comparing an Apple to an entire Orange tree.
On Inauguration Day there are many thousands of people involved in protection that we don't see. There are technological capabilities, military and cyber assets, There are #WMD assets. The air, water and land are covered like a blanket.
2. What kind of threats are you hearing about...not just for the 20th...but other days too?
Many looking to engage violence in the run up to or during the inaugural are really upset because some of their social media sites are being taken offline, but plenty of others are still active and they are STILL talking about violence on those sites.
Here in the NCR and around the country. Some of the conversations involve going after Democratic and Republican politicians and the “mainstream media. There’s talk of a “civil war”.
3. We've been talking about the 7-foot tall fence put up around the Capitol after Wednesday's attack...but what will prevent Biden and Trump supporters from gathering outside that fence and possibly clashing with each other?
Where there’s a will there’s a way, but I can tell you, based on my experience with inaugurals, even if there is the will, the way is going to be awfully hard for them get into it down there.
There are going to layers and levels of police/military personnel barriers that’s going to make it awfully hard to cause any problems anywhere down there –now in other locations around the city, it might be easier, but down there –it will be really hard. @threadreaderapp unroll

More from Legal

You May Also Like

The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.