A senior agent with the Secret Service who stated she did not want to defend the president by “taking a bullet” for him has managed to escape any severe disciplinary actions, despite the precedent set by others who have made similar statements in the past.
The Washington Free Beacon is reporting, Kerry O’Grady, the agent in question, was removed from her position as head of the Secret Service’s Denver district in March amid an investigation into her pre-election Facebook comments about Trump. O’Grady remains on paid administrative leave and retains her security clearance six months after the agency first started looking into the allegations of misconduct against her.
Additionally, senior managers have never placed O’Grady on a “Do Not Admit” list—an agency-wide notification that an employee whose conduct is under investigation is not allowed access to any Secret Service offices or resources, according to two former agents.
Disciplinary cases against Secret Service employees and those of other federal law enforcement agencies often take months, if not years, to resolve. Despite calls for her swift firing among retired Secret Service officers and other critics, the agency must follow a legal process to impose any permanent disciplinary action against O’Grady. Secret Service employees are federal workers with multiple layers of job protections and legal due-process rights.
While O’Grady’s continued employment with the agency is not unusual as the process plays out, attorneys who have represented Secret Service agents and officers and other law enforcement employees in disciplinary cases say she has not faced some of the harsh sanctions imposed on many of their clients.
Sean Bigley, a partner at Bigley Ranish, a firm specializing in security-clearance denials, said the Secret Service regularly places employees accused of wrongdoing on unpaid leave while they investigate the allegations.
“All the clients I have are on unpaid administrative leave,” he said. “Then they have to sit around for a year cooling their heels before anything is proven. It’s very punitive.”
If other agents have had to pay for their careless words and actions with severe penalties, why is O’Grady getting away it? Hardly seems fair, right?
Could it possibly be because her comments were aimed at President Trump? We all know how it’s become the “cool kid” thing to do to hate on Donald Trump, and how acts of hostility and indecency are suddenly excused when they’re aimed at someone like him who is largely unpopular with the left.
It’s hypocrisy at its finest. Just imagine the outrage that would ensue if someone were to say such a statement while they were supposed to be protecting Obama during his administration? The left would be super angry, as they should be.
The duty of Secret Service agents is to protect the president and his family, regardless of their own personal politics. They’re to check their opinion at the door, which is precisely what O’Grady didn’t do, and why she needs to be held accountable for her actions.
[Note: This article was written by Michael Cantrell]