Former Secret Service Director Kim Cheatle is now receiving taxpayer-funded protection following her resignation last month, a move ordered by President Joe Biden amid mounting threats against her. Cheatle’s tenure was marred by the near-fatal July 13 assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, and other high-profile security lapses. Despite her abrupt departure after a contentious House Oversight Committee hearing, Cheatle has been granted this protection due to ongoing threats, including confrontations in person and aggressive posts on social media.
According to a report by RealClearPolitics, Cheatle has faced intense backlash from the public and even within the Secret Service ranks over her handling of Trump’s security, particularly on the day of the Butler rally. The attack left Trump grazed by a bullet and resulted in the tragic death of a firefighter, leading many to question the agency’s preparedness and decision-making under Cheatle’s leadership.
The public outcry has been swift, with critics accusing the Biden administration of prioritizing the protection of a failed official over addressing the glaring issues that nearly cost Trump his life. “Is this an effort to make her a victim?” some are asking, pointing out that the real victim was Trump, who was the target of a deadly attack due to security breakdowns.
Adding fuel to the fire is the close relationship between Cheatle and the Biden family. Reports indicate that First Lady Jill Biden played a key role in selecting Cheatle for the director position in 2022. This has led to accusations of favoritism, as the administration swiftly arranged protection for Cheatle while delaying similar measures for others like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who only received security after widespread public outcry.
The timing of Cheatle’s protection order has also raised eyebrows. Many believe that the Secret Service should focus on rectifying the failures that led to the Butler incident, rather than providing additional perks to the person responsible for those very shortcomings. The agency has yet to fully explain why essential safety measures, such as communication radios, were reportedly not deployed during Trump’s visit, further eroding public trust.
The situation highlights growing concerns about accountability within federal agencies, particularly when political connections appear to influence decisions. The question remains: Will Cheatle’s protection be more effective than the protection she oversaw for Trump, or is this simply a case of shielding the powerful while the real issues go unresolved?
