The Washington Examiner has a scoop on a Secret Service agent who wrote a Facebook post saying she wasn’t prepared to take a bullet for Trump. In the same post, she endorsed Hillary Clinton despite knowing that doing so could violate the Hatch Act:

Kerry O’Grady, the special agent in charge of the Secret Service’s Denver district, oversees coordination with Washington-based advance teams for all presidential candidate and presidential trips to the area, including all upcoming or future trips by the president, vice president or Trump administration officials…

In one Facebook post O’Grady wrote at 11:07 p.m. on a Sunday in October, she endorsed Hillary Clinton and said she would endure “jail time” rather than “taking a bullet” for what she regarded as a “disaster” for America.

The post didn’t mention Trump by name but clearly referred to him.

O’Grady wrote the following to her followers on Facebook, among them other Secret Service agents:

As a public servant for nearly 23 years, I struggle not to violate the Hatch Act. So I keep quiet and skirt the median. To do otherwise can be a criminal offense for those in my position. Despite the fact that I am expected to take a bullet for both sides. But this world has changed and I have changed. And I would take jail time over a bullet or an endorsement for what I believe to be disaster to this country and the strong and amazing women and minorities who reside here. Hatch Act be damned. I am with Her.

Secret Service agents are specifically prohibited from expressing partisan political opinions on social media. O’Grady was clearly aware of this when she wrote her statement back in October and decided to do it anyway.

O’Grady has since thought better of her choice. “It was an internal struggle for me but as soon as I put it up, I thought it was not the sentiment that I needed to share because I care very deeply about the mission,” she told the Washington Examiner. However, as recently as last Friday she was posting an image of Princess Leia with the caption “A woman’s place is in the resistance.” The resistance is the name given to efforts to progressive efforts to obstruct the President at every turn. O’Grady removed the posts Monday after talking with the Examiner.

In general I’m not a fan of trying to get people fired for things they say on social media. However, in this case O’Grady’s opinions seem to directly impinge on her ability to do her job. If she wants to be part of the resistance with Princess Leia, she can certainly do that. However, to extend the Star Wars metaphor, her day job is to be one of the red storm troopers guarding the Emperor (No, Trump isn’t an Emperor. It’s her silly metaphor, not mine). The point is you probably can’t proclaim your allegiance to protect someone you also despise and want to resist at every turn. Why should the President be asked to trust this person with his life or the lives of his family?