IMO, there are three ways to view this:
- DEI aided incompetence
- deliberate benign neglect of best security practices
- an outright assassination plot with government involvement.
The powers that be would have us believe in choice #1, and that they'll do a better job going forward.
Personally, I'm somewhere between choice 1 and 2 at the moment, given what I've read, and allowing for the distortion and promotion of different narratives. #3 is not out of the question, but I doubt it happened here... Crooks was too unstable and unprofessional to trust with the job.
I think that's mostly true depending on what you mean by "trust". And involvement from a Secret Service agent need not be part of a large conspiracy, the conspiracy could be fairly small.
But IF there's Secret Service involvement, it almost has to involve the on-site supervisor. That's why I'd like to see/hear all communications to and from this person, (who has not yet been relieved of duties).
Imagine a possibly small group wanting to kill Trump and the on-site supervisor is one of them. The leader of the group might say to the on-site supervisor, "We've found a patsy willing to do the job. We've shown him that he might be able to get on the roof of a nearby building and we've told him we won't cover that building and so go ahead and try. So, don't cover THAT building, and don't approve a kill shot until the patsy has taken at least one shot. Maybe we'll get lucky."