Secret Service Stonewalls Congress, But Complains to the Media About the Real Failure: The Failure of Conservatives to Propertly Appreciate the Different Lived Experiences of Its Incompetent DEI Hires

This is a real article from NBC "News:"

Trump isn't the victim here. The Real Victim is DEI hiring.

The U.S. Secret Service said Wednesday that it stood by its female agents and was appalled by some of the criticism they've received on conservative social media since Saturday's attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump.

The Secret Service, in a statement to NBC News, said that the criticism from pundits and influencers was baseless. The agency also stood by its commitment to diversity in recruiting as helping, not hurting, the effectiveness of its protective teams.

The statement follows a multiday campaign of derision by some conservatives who accused Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service director, of being unqualified and who said that female agents assigned to Trump hadn't been physically capable of protecting him. Some critics said the Secret Service should return to being all-male, which it hasn't been since 1970.

Anthony Guglielmi, the Secret Service's chief of communication, said in the statement: "We stand united against any attempt to discredit our personnel and their invaluable contributions to our mission and are appalled by the disparaging and disgusting comments against any of our personnel."

"As an elite law enforcement agency, all of our agents and officers are highly trained and fully capable of performing our missions," he said.

"It is an insult to the women of our agency to imply that they are unqualified based on gender. Such baseless assertions undermine the professionalism, dedication and expertise of our workforce," he added.

The failure of the Secret Service to stop the gunman before he was in a position to shoot has come under intense scrutiny, with lawmakers demanding answers and an independent review panel investigating the circumstances. Attendees have said they pointed out the would-be assassin to law enforcement and took video of him for at least two minutes before Trump was struck, according to an NBC News review of video clips.

But the criticism of the female agents has been different. At least three female agents were among those protecting Trump in the moments after the shooting, according to videos, and in the days since, their actions have become popular targets of criticism and jokes among conservatives, with several posts on X receiving more than 10 million views.

The criticisms follow a pattern from other recent news events where conservative pundits and lawmakers, without evidence, cite "diversity, equity and inclusion" (DEI) programs as a contributing cause in disasters as disparate as the Boeing-made airplane problems or the Baltimore bridge collapse.

...

Another conservative commentator used a photo of what appears to be the same female agent during or immediately after the shooting as evidence for "why women should not be allowed to do Presidential protection details." The photo shows the agent crouching near -- but not part of -- a huddle of other agents covering Trump's body. That post had more than 11 million views.

Kenneth Valentine, a retired Secret Service agent and supervisor, said the photo was not evidence by itself that the female agent was in the wrong position.

"There are a lot of reasons why she might not be on top of that pile," he said in an interview. He said that she might have been approaching from farther away or might have been in the process of switching positions.

Maybe she was in a squabble with her fellow agent Buffy.

Buffy think she cute. She know what she did.

Christopher Rufo is one of those racists who doesn't think that short fat women with experience as police or infantry soldiers should be projecting the most-threatened VIP in the world.

A surprising number of the Secret Service agents protecting the former president were women. And, according to video recordings of the scene, many did not acquit themselves favorably.

Scene one: after President Trump ducks, a group of agents leaps to him and protects him with their bodies. A female agent who rushes to the stage acts bravely, without a doubt, but the point of the "huddle" is to protect the president. The agent was much shorter than President Trump, leaving his head and neck exposed after he stood up.

Scene two: as Trump enters the escape vehicle, a female Secret Service agent fumbles her gun and cannot find her holster; another female agent appears confused and, in the moment of crisis, decides to use both of her hands to put on her sunglasses; a third looks frightened and uncertain.

These agents wear the typical Secret Service outfits--Kevlar vests pressing against white shirts; black blazers with gold pins; dark sunglasses--but to an impartial observer, they do not appear to have the same poise, confidence, and strength as the male agents around them.

The obvious question: Why so many female agents? The answer, unfortunately, is the same as in many other institutions: DEI. The Secret Service has highlighted "diversity" as a key priority and its director, Kimberly Cheatle, named to the position in 2022, has pledged to increase dramatically the number of women in the ranks.

This is official policy. The Secret Service openly boasts that it "prioritizes recruiting women candidates" and has formulated an "affirmative action" plan to increase the number of women, LGBT, Native Americans, and other identity groups.

Cheatle herself told CBS News that her goal was to reach 30 percent female recruits by 2030: "I'm very conscious, as I sit in this chair now, of making sure that we need to attract diverse candidates and ensure that we are developing and giving opportunities to everybody in our workforce, and particularly women." The agency is well on its way. In 2021, for the first time, the special agent training class graduated more women than men.

To say it plainly: there is no need for women in a president's security detail. The Secret Service is an elite institution that can funnel down a large number of candidates to select the few who will protect the president. The best candidates--the strongest and fastest, the best marksmen--will be men. That's just reality.

It's a reality that the Secret Service is determined to circumvent. The agency itself has published its fitness standards in two parts: one for men, and a separate, less rigorous one for women.

These biological facts should be obvious. Every nightclub owner knows that physicality matters. A bouncer who is six-foot-five, 200 pounds, will provide better security than a smaller woman. Part of it is signal--size and strength act as a deterrent--and part of it is substance. When a fight breaks out, the nightclub owner learns quickly who is capable of maintaining order and who is not. If he makes the wrong hiring decision, he loses money. It is, in its own way, an honest business.

Why has the Secret Service lost sight of such a basic principle? Because large bureaucracies are insulated from consequences. Directors of large corporations and especially government agencies can afford to engage in vanity projects and pay the DEI tax.

Someone like Kimberly Cheatle, who did a stint at PepsiCo before accepting the directorship of the Secret Service, understands how to pursue success in the current environment: tell the story of "diversity" to advance in a career, degrade the quality of personnel by hiring ideologically, and hope that the remaining capable men who still represent the core of the service can make up the difference.

This is a major point: DEI rejects all criticisms of it based on incompetence of failure. DEI is a poisonous religious cult which claims that every failure of a DEI hire is actually the fault of the only people permitted under this system to be villains: White men.

The problem with DEI is that it dictates decisions based not on performance or on the old virtues, such as honor, but on demographics and ideology. Failure is easily dismissed and blame easily shifted.

Far too easily! The Secret Service claims it's a "zero failure" organization, but now, when it has clearly failed, what is it doing?

Is it grappling honestly and painfully with its own failures?

No -- it's pointing to people who have noticed their failure and attempting to shift attention to them.

For the crime of noticing.

And the head of the Secret Service, Cheeto-One, is stonewalling Congress' efforts to ask questions about who was responsible for these failures.

Protecting the president is a minor consideration. Protecting their DEI jobs is the only priority.

It is DEADLY to an organization to fill itself with Snowflake employees who, for ideological/cultic reasons, can under no circumstances ever be criticized or faulted.

How can someone correct errors if it's illegal to even point out those errors? How can someone ever improve when every failure is greeted as A Historic First worthy of praise?

And fill an organization with Snowflake Incompetents, and a "zero failure" institution now becomes yet another DEI failure factory -- except all failures are re-categorizes as Successes from a Non-White-Cishet-Male Perspective of Lived Experienced.

Do you think 2 + 2 =3? Congratulations, you have escaped the White Supremacy paradigm of "Old Thinking."

Do you think the small chance of falling from a roof sloped at about a three degree incline is a good enough reason to put the life of a President of the United States at lethal risk?

Well good for you! Here's a job at the Clinton-controlled Beacon Strategies.

We will pay you well for your Historic First Failures.

"Secret Service boss blames 'sloped roof' for not putting sniper team on building used by would-be Trump assassin: 'There's a safety factor'" https://t.co/8ZtR9SmLmf

👉An actual cow on a roof. Are we supposed to believe a US secret Service Agent can't climb a roof ❓🤡 pic.twitter.com/3ZX7VcuP6p

— NUNU MEBRATU (@desalgmailegn) July 18, 2024

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 05:08 PM

| Access Comments