Who Was Charlie Kirk's Security Contractor?

Would you hire a security team that was used by someone who was assassinated on their watch to protect you from being assassinated? A security team that had a full week to prepare for securing an event and whose efforts to do so, according to the feds, was entirely defeated by a single 22-year-old, after having been radicalized by his fury, homosexual, transitioning lover?

I can't speak for anyone else, but personally, I would not ever hire that company unless I was attempting to successfully have someone assassinated because they have at least one successful incident of doing that.

NOTE: We wouldn't recommend using any security services company with less than a 100% success rate of their protectee walking away from then event they were securing, alive. In other words, I wouldn't use a security company to protect me with one(1) single failure to perform perfectly in their attempt to keep their clients alive during an event they secured.

That said, Brian Harpole has to know this failure on the part of his company to prevent Charlie's assassination is likely going to be the end of his company. He should have the greatest incentive to find the truth about who killed Charlie Kirk, more so than virtually anyone else, yet in this interview he seems to not be concerned about pursuing any answers. Why? It is like he's simply admitting and accepting that a 22-year-old man defeated him and his entire company and prevented them from successfully doing what they had been getting paid for.

Is he unconcerned about the image and the reputation of his security company?