Will someone please explain to me, in plain English, whether President Trump, after two assassination attempts, now has presidential-level protection on the campaign trail? No bureaucrat-ese: Does he have it? Or does he not?

Following the Butler, Pennsylvania, assassination attempt, the Secret Service apparently told some House members that Trump had presidential-type protection. Then came the attempted assassination at the Trump golf course in Florida, where there was clearly no outside perimeter protection and insufficient resources on the golf course itself.

Here’s what the Palm Beach County sheriff said: “He’s not the sitting President. If he was, we would’ve had this entire golf course surrounded. But because he’s not, security is limited to the areas that the Secret Service deems possible.”

I’ll just say — and I’m no security expert — that there just wasn’t any sweep of the outside perimeter. So, clearly, the Secret Service was telling an untruth to House members. At that point last Sunday, there was no presidential-level protection.

On Tuesday evening, at a Politico event, Secretary Mayorkas issued an incredible word salad that seems to dodge any clarity.

The Secret Service “has indeed enhanced the former president’s security posture so that he is receiving a level of security commensurate with the fact that he’s a former president and on the campaign trail and so his alignment with the security posture of our president is, in fact, quite approximate,” the homeland security secretary said.

I don’t see any clarity here.

What is he talking about?

And why hasn’t he made any official appearances?

The guy is nowhere to be found, whether it’s Secret Service protection, or the catastrophe at the U.S. southern border.

For clarity, we have to look to a bipartisan House bill that passed today by a vote of 405 to zero and “imposes uniform standards for the security of presidents, vice presidents, and major White House candidates.”

Okay, there you have it. There’s no “commensurate,” there’s no “approximate” — it’s clear.

Undoubtedly, this House bill will pass the Senate, and that will mandate presidential protection for Trump.

A former homeland security secretary, Chad Wolf, in an interview a couple of days ago, talked about “threat-based” resource model. “This needs to be threat based,” he said. “President Trump definitely has a different threat picture than Vice President Harris. And so the resources needed to be allocated as such.”

So far, though, neither President Biden nor Mr. Mayorkas has seemingly given any clear orders.

Trump himself has been gracious about the Secret Service and local law enforcement after the golf course assassination attempt. “This evil would-be assassin got within a few hundred yards of where I stood, but thankfully, our outstanding Secret Service agent and they are outstanding. I want to express my thanks to the U.S. Secret Service who was there that day. And to all of the sheriffs and law enforcement down in Florida, the heroes who helped to apprehend the attacker.”

All this begs the question of whether even blanket presidential-level Secret Service protection has the high value that we all hope it does. At a press conference today, the agency’s acting director, Ronald Rowe, talked about communication deficiencies between the Secret Service and local law enforcement at Butler.

He said the Secret Service was to blame, because the preparation for that rally was a failure, there had not been adequate guidance for the local authorities, and then he offered some word salad about how the agency is now moving into “the accountability phase.”

I don’t know what that means. Mr. Rowe’s entire presser seemed like yet more word salad, with words like “paradigm shift” or “needed shift in operations” or “principles of Secret Service methodologies.”

Yet from recent experience, we’ve had poor principles and failed methodology. He talked about disciplining certain agents and various internal review processes.

As I have suggested many times before, neither the Secret Service nor the FBI can be counted on for anything remotely like a true review of what has been going wrong with the service, and, for that matter, the FBI, and, for that matter, the intelligence agencies — including the CIA.

The left-wing bias in all these agencies, including DEI hiring policies, has created a rats’ nest that needs to be completely cleared out.

And this shouldn’t be partisan. Democratic presidential candidates should be grateful for significant changes in their protection, as much as Republican candidates.

Meanwhile, as Washington dithers, there are 46 days left in the current presidential campaign. Heaven help us if those days aren’t completely safe.

From Mr. Kudlow’s broadcast on Fox Business Network.