By Jim Glennon

After the July 13^th assassination attempt on former President Trump in Butler, PA, U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle was called to appear in front of Congress.

On July 22, she sat before the United States House Committee on Oversight and Accountability.

She was there to answer questions.

By almost all accounts, she didn’t.

She resigned on July 23^rd.

When I watched the hearing—and I watched all of it—the thing I noticed more than anything else, not surprisingly, was not just her lack of answers, but the way she avoided those answers.

She seemed coached, and heavily. I assumed that coaching was done by some DOJ lawyers but there was something else about her responses. There was a political flavor to her muddled meanderings.

Generally, I believe from watching her, the advice she was given amounted to this; “Don’t give them anything specific. Take responsibility without taking any responsibility. But don’t blame anyone outside of your office and certainly don’t blame anyone connected to the administration.”

If any of that is true, it is concerning. Her job, at the time, was to run a government law enforcement agency whose main purpose is to protect human beings, and not consider the political ramifications of a colossal failure!

Still, of all the non-answers and clumsy attempts at placating, one area of questioning particularly stuck out. The one about who was ultimately in charge on the day President Trump was shot and Corey Comperatore was murdered.

The Questions and Lack of Answers

Congressperson Marjorie Taylor Greene asked, “Who was the agent in charge? How long has she been the agent in charge and what is her Secret Service background?”

Director Cheatle’s response was, “So I’m not going to provide a name.”

Congressperson Luna then asked Director Cheatle, “Can you please give me the names of the individuals who are in charge of your CONOP (Concept of Operations – which basically means the Operational Plan) for the rally?”

Director Cheatle’s response for that question, “I’m not going to release names today.””

In an attempt to work with Cheatle, Mrs. Luna offered a compromise, “Can you give me the titles?”

“No.”

Think about that. She wouldn’t even provide the titles for those who were responsible and signed off on the Ops plan.

She wouldn’t provide the titles?!

Nothing specific remember?

Undaunted, Mrs. Luna continued her inquiry in an attempt to get some clarity concerning who, on the ground in Butler, was ultimately in charge that day. So, she instead asked how many individuals were part of the “final approval authority.”

Astonishingly, Director Cheatle refused to even answer that question. Instead, she said, “We had a full advance team that was responsible for advancing the site.”

A full team was responsible?? So no specific ONE person?

Mrs. Luna continued probing, “Can you give me a number (of people on the team)?”

Cheatle’s comeback, “No, I do not have a firm number.”

Cheatle admitted that she had six days, after getting the notice to appear before Congress, to prepare for the hearing.

This begs the question, what was she doing during those six days? Preparing to provide answers or learning how to avoid giving them?

I was a Commander for 15 years. I ran homicide investigations for a county-wide task force. I was an Investigations Commander and oversaw OPs plans for multiple drug raids. I guarantee you that someone – some ONE – was the final decision maker. Most of the time it was me. Even if one of my detectives, or several of my detectives, conceived the plan, I was the one who gave final approval, and thus, I knew it inside out and was ultimately responsible. If my boss asked me a question, you better believe I had better provide the correct answer.

Cheatle wasn’t the person who approved the Operation Plan on July 13, but by July 22, she damn well should have known every small detail of it and who was the ONE who signed off on its implementation.

OK Jim, but you are from a small police agency or a county-wide task force. That is nothing compared to the complexity of securing a rally site and coordinating safety for a former President.

To that I say, nonsense!

An Operation Plan is an Operation Plan and some ONE was still in charge. Some ONE had to make final approval.  And some ONE has to take responsibility.

Leadership and a Created Culture

Leadership and the culture leaders create, as well as cultivate, is the difference between success and failure. Nothing else is as important in an organization.

Nothing!

“The Buck Stops Here” is too often an empty and hollow cliché, meant to placate.

But, the buck does have to find a home somewhere, sometime.

How often do you hear top level bosses, after an obvious failure, spew the phrase, “I take full responsibility.”

What does that mean? Do they actually take responsibility?

I’ve never seen a Chief of Police, one time, one time, say something along these lines: “Yeah, my bad. It’s really all my fault that my 24-year-old police officer overreacted during that fight. We don’t train them the right way. We only do the mandated minimum. And we don’t really train our personnel and prepare them for leadership, so at least one third of my first-line supervisors woefully lack the skill and temperament to lead people. Oh yeah and one more thing, I’m certainly not going to risk my position and pension and argue with my politician bosses and demand more money and manpower so our officers are proficient in all aspects of the job.”

Cops especially, can spot a line of BS a mile away.

When it comes from their bosses and political leaders, it destroys the culture. It erodes trust. It is fatal for the organization.

After hours and hours of nonsense responses and evasive answers. After admitting that July 13 was a titanic failure. After outright refusing to give details to members of Congress, Director Cheatle declared, “I think that I’m the best person to lead the Secret Service at this time.”

Was she, despite her resignation less than 24 hours later?

During that same hearing, Representative Virginia Foxx addressed a little known, but alarming fact, about the Secret Service, a storied organization full of very, very dedicated agents.

She said and asked, “The Secret Service receives billions in funding each year. In fact, you have received increases of 55%. Clearly a lack of financial resources is not to blame for the staffing shortages. In 2022, the Secret Service saw nearly half its workforce leave in one year… can you explain why so many staff left in one year?”

Cheatle, “We are committed to hiring the best. Our men and women place service over self and a culture to get the job done.”

“…can you explain why so many staff left in one year?”

“We are committed to hiring the best, blah, blah, blah…”

No answer. Why?

Because the honest answer would have to include something like the following, “Our culture, which I’m ultimately responsible for, is in a freefall. Agents don’t have the same pride in the job as they used to because they don’t trust leadership. From some of those in first-line supervisor positions  to those of us at the top, line level agents have less faith in the abilities and commitment of those in charge, and rightfully so.”

Will a person in a politically appointed leadership position ever be that honest?

Representative Foxx gave honest opinion of the current state of the Service, “Those on the front lines certainly do have a great culture. They were willing to risk their lives to protect President Trump. I don’t have any confidence in the agency’s leadership culture.” 

Conclusion

I’ve been saying for over 30 years, it’s easy to be lazy in law enforcement. It is. Show up on time, in uniform, answer your calls, and you’re golden. Avoiding proactivity, not much can be done to compel more effort.

So, it is easy to be lazy.

It’s even easier to be a lazy supervisor.

Law enforcement agencies are legislated bureaucratic monopolies. They have no competition. They can’t go out of business. It’s a chore to discipline lazy cops and impossible to fire them.

Encouraging employees, motivating employees, inspiring employees, in such an environment, requires inspired, motivated first line supervisors that are encouraged by courageous bosses who understand that creating the right culture is the key.

Legendary management consultant and author Peter Drucker famously wrote, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.”

He insisted that a powerful and empowering culture was the only way for an organization to accomplish its mission.

It appears, at least from the outside, and from what we are hearing from Secret Service whistleblowers, that the culture of the Secret Service needs a serious readjustment.

Great leaders create culture, they don’t become victims of one already established.

Great leaders create those cultures by recognizing that employees are the greatest of assets, they are not merely costs. They recognize them as unique individuals. They reward based on merit. They cultivate talent and passion. They listen, they respond, they explain, they include, those at the line level.

How’s the culture in your agency?

If yours is toxic and losing large numbers of employees in a short amount of time, that is an indication of toxicity. Is anyone willing to step forward and demand change?

Is it too late for the Secret Service?

Send us your thoughts: [email protected]