It also marks one of the first public attempts to monitor the two new satellite offices the Capitol Police set up to help with security outside of DC in the wake of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. .
One of Lofgren’s main areas of interest was security protocols for the line of succession. She asked the department for answers on home security, threats and security protocols for key congressional leaders. Pelosi is second in line for the presidency as speaker, and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is third as acting speaker of the chamber.
In particular, Lofgren seeks to clarify a new residential security program launched for all House members in August and whether it was based on proven security measures taken at residences already under Capitol Police surveillance, such as that of Pelosi. The program, launched in August, allows the House Sergeant-at-Arms to cover a limited set of security costs for lawmakers’ personal residences, up to a combined total of $10,000.
Capitol Police released a statement Wednesday “receiving comments and questions from our stakeholders in Congress.” The department acknowledged in the statement that Pelosi’s residence cameras were “not actively monitored” during the home invasion as officers would if she was at home.
“Command center personnel noticed police activity on the screen and used the feeds to monitor the response and assist investigators,” Capitol Police said.
The department also said it was “tremendously grateful” for the support Congress already provided after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, so now they would “accelerate” their existing work to improve protections for outside lawmakers. of Washington, DC. said they would do so “while providing new protection options that will address concerns after Friday’s targeted attack.”
Lofgren also asked Capitol Police if they would fix issues with the force training program for its dignitary protection division, which is tasked with protecting lawmakers.
The Chairman of the Administrative Committee asked the department for the strategic plan for field offices, policy guidelines, standard operating procedures, and short and long-term goals for the agency’s new regional approach to threats against legislators – and asked for an explanation if any of these did not exist. The locations in California and Florida were chosen based on the number of threats coming from those states, and Mr. Manger said the offices were intended to help investigate and prosecute threats.
Members have pressed the Capitol Police for years to improve and streamline cooperation with local law enforcement to facilitate security for major events and basic district office operations. Lofgren’s letter examines formal agreements the department had with local law enforcement across the country and whether there was a formal agreement with the San Francisco Police Department prior to the attack on Paul Pelosi.
San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said Tuesday there were no Capitol police or private security present at Pelosi’s home when the attack took place. Paul Pelosi called 911 after the intruder broke into the home and police stopped the assault after entering Pelosi’s home.
The San Francisco Police Department on Wednesday denied POLITICO’s request for a recording of Paul Pelosi’s service call and for body camera footage of responding officers, both of which were cited by prosecutors to detail their allegations. against DePape. Jenkins said she would not release the 911 call and said body camera footage could show up in a trial.
“We have to make sure that what we release to the public is what we think is necessary to put this case right and what we think the public should have access to,” Jenkins said Tuesday, “but that’s not going to be every detail of this case.
Jeremy B. White contributed to this report.