Yesterday, I was watching Fox News' Shepherd Smith's show when he had a segment on alleged DEA corruption. His special guest was that daffy Fox anchor, who goes by the moniker of "Kennedy". Below is the Fox "report", with the video and a link to the Office of Professional Responsibility files obtained (2010).
http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/09/28/report-dea-agents-kept-jobs-after-serious-misconduct-including-handing-out-drugs
While watching the segment on TV, as a retired DEA agent, I was hoping to hear some degree of detail about the allegations. Instead, what I saw and heard were broad generalities.
I might note that there seems to be a discrepancy between Smith's statement "since" 2010 and the document which indicates that all the cases cited were in 2010. As far as "dealing drugs" was concerned, there was one case in 2010 where an agent was accused of distributing drugs. The original recommendation was termination, and the final adjudication was a 14-day suspension. I can tell you that had a charge of distribution of drugs been substantiated, termination would have been the final result-as well as prosecution. So there must be more to this case.
In addition, there were two cases of an agent failing a drug test. In both cases the agent concerned resigned.
Of course, DEA is still reeling from allegations of Colombia-based agents participating in sex parties with women allegedly being furnished by drug traffickers. That was one reason that former administrator Michele Leonhart resigned under pressure even though the acts had occurred before she became administrator of DEA.
In summary, it seems to me that Smith and "Kennedy" are overstating their case against DEA. Let me be clear: If agents are engaged in dealing drugs themselves, nobody wants to see them fired and prosecuted more than I do, and I can speak for my fellow agents-past and present on that point. Yet it seems that there is some over-generalization going on here based on sloppy documentation to make a point that DEA is an agency populated by corrupt agents and administrators-which I do not accept.
As for "Kennedy's" assertion that we can do without DEA and just leave it to state and local cops and the FBI, what are the former going to do when the traffickers they are investigating cross national and international jurisdictions? True, the FBI does have agents assigned to drug investigations, but they have had to cut back on that in favor of investigating terrorism-a wise move in my view. They are in no position to take over the role of DEA.
As for Smith and "Kennedy" they should provide more detail before they go around making blanket conclusions about DEA corruption.
Have you seen the series "Narcos"? It's on Netflix, and it's about the DEA and its fight against Pablo Escobar. I would imagine that you could write a pretty interesting review of that show.
ReplyDeleteI have not seen it. I was never stationed in Colombia, so I would defer any reviews to the agents who did. I did participate in a training seminar in Bogota in 1995. Overall, I greatly respect the Colombians who put their lives on the line to stand up to the Cali and Medellin cartels. Ditto for the agents of DEA who accepted added danger by working in Colombia. That doofus Kennedy should have gone down there personally to see what they did. It would have been an education for her.
ReplyDelete