Rumble should be partitioned from the internet, but that's not the subject here.
No, I got that part. It was clear.
This sounds like they were just keeping calm, or one of them didn't communicate it correctly (misheard, etc.), or didn't believe it was real (perhaps they trusted the USSS to have done the protection correctly in preparation).
Was in Dan Boingo-boingo? I have no problem believing the protocols were not properly followed. That does not make this a conspiracy.
What were you expecting, wild panic? Remember that any sudden change in stance can trigger a panic. I would suspect that the standard procedure for a possible live device would be to quietly block out the area and calmly remove the protectee by another path. The second part certainly happened. (It was a pipe bomb, which is a nasty thing to any humans near it, but it wasn't going to knock down the building or anything. Just get away from any window that could send shattered glass and the chance of injury is basically zero.)
No one doubts that part. It does call into question the "bomb search" part of the protection protocol. (The higher police presence does seem to be how it was eventually found, almost too late.
I gave some possible explanations above. No reason to recapitulate. Remember that they could have made errors in applying their decisions. (Something that seems likely, frankly.)
The investigation of the bombing attempt is still underway and the motives are not clear, nor the perpetrators. I've seen a lot of speculation online about the persons and motive which I will not repeat as they are not based on facts. (I hold myself, not just my computer, to higher standards than Rumble videos.)
perhaps she isn't an egotist, or she doesn't want to make a big deal of it, or she was traumatized by it and doesn't want to relive it. (It could also be that as a USSS protectee, she doesn't want to bring extra attention to the Service or give nuts any ideas. [There are also security reasons to keep quiet.])
Determination of the device as "live" is done by close examination of it. That is not something the officers and agents would have done in the moment. It is possible that some of those responding in the immediate of the time and place of discovery thought it was a fake/dud and that explains some of their reactions to it. Nothing about the post-incident determination of "live device" status alters the way in which the response happened in the moment (including any errors in belief they had).
Sure dude.
I have looked at gobs of evidence from that day including a detailed examination of the bomb placement. I haven't seen any video of the discovery of the "DNC bomb", but I would look at it if you have a safer site for it like YouTube.
Not truth, computer attacks. I wouldn't trust sites like Rumble if they were connected to the internet with a 10-foot airgap.
The facts are legion and I have seen far more of them than most people, and certainly most you will discuss these events with.