Kimberly Cheatle's meeting with the committee in congress yesterday did not go well. It did not go average, it did not even go badly.
It went about as abysmally bad as you can imagine. It was a ShitShow.
Her fall-back position when asked any questions of substance was to refer the committee to the findings of the on-going investigation into the shooting of former President Trump.
But she couldn't answer even basic questions about that day. Instead saying she will get beck to the committee with details. Nine days after the shooting, I would have thought that she would have her staff collating all the relevant information for her benefit, so she could ascertain for herself what went on and satisfy herself that her staff were working appropriately.
Instead she couldn't care less.
There was a massive security lapse by the department she is head of and she couldn't be bothered to aske her staff to put together a basic synopsis of the day: how many people were employed on the security detail, what agencies were involved and how many people from each agency were employed doing what.
That's no prejudicial to the investigation. That's information that could be handed to the relevant authority (I believe the FBI) to save them asking for it.
Instead Kimberly sat there, in congress, apparently clueless. No information, hiding behind a separate agency, not doing any work herself to avail herself of relevant information.
Is that really the actions of a leader?
I don't think so. I think her attitude to the shooting is chilling.
She couldn't care less that Trump was shot.
She couldn't care less that a man lost his life.
She couldn't care less that she was subpoenaed to testify before congress.
She couldn't be bothered to collect and collate even basic information that she might be asked by Congress.
It says volumes about her leadership (or lack of it) her contempt of Congress and her contempt for Trump and especially her contempt for the victims of the shooting.
I get the impression she's just one of these people put into a position she has no clue about. So instead of being pro-active, she just let's things run as they are, she let's things slide on. She might throw in a bit of ideology just to put a bit of her flavour on the organisation because she thinks that has no real impact.
But as proved in this case, when working at a higher level, miniscule changes do have an impact.
I'm reminded of Paula Vennells in the Post Office Enquiry. Clueless on how to lead, Instead doing very little of substance and instead blaming everyone else when things go wrong.
True Leaders understand that you can't just let the ship sail itself and hope things go right. you need to constantly make adjustments whilst simultaneously justifying your actions, need to LEAD, need to make sure the ship doesn't eventually run aground.
There's only a limited amount of time non-leaders like these can stay in office before something substantial goes wrong. It's sadly happening every day in the NHS where lives are lost due to the inactions of those in charge and failures in challenging negligence and incompetence. Sadly they've been very good at covering things up. The NHS closes ranks very efficiently.
One of the prime reasons for the fall of the West is the rise of the non-leader and the replacement by them of true leaders.
I can see it will be a while before Kimberly reads the room and resigns. I think in her own mind she did no wrong, because she did nothing. She did nothing to lead, made no decisions, etc. She did NOTHING, quite literally.
But doing nothing is in itself wrong. It is not leadership. And leadership was the prime role of the position she accepted.
Posts
