The administrator of the DEA, Michelle Leonhart, told a House committee that she could not fire agents who allegedly had:
1) Allowed prostitutes onto government (as in our government) leased property, that property being the quarters of the agents while on assignment in Colombia.
2) Had sex with those prostitutes, in the above government leased property, at sex parties which were funded by a narcotics cartel (a fact of which it is claimed the agents should have been aware).
3) Left their firearms, official smart phones and computers in the care of corrupt foreign police while they were engaged with prostitutes.
4) These parties took place over the course of several years.
5) Had upwards of 15 to 20 such parties (although it is not clear if the same agents were at each or the parties or even if some were at more than one).
6) Used government money do so.
(Source of the above.)
I am no prude; in fact, I don't think anyone would have to be fired for soliciting sex with a prostitute while off duty stateside or maybe even while abroad and off duty. (I am quite the Libertarian on that issue, I don't think the government has any business restricting the world's oldest business.) Yet, to participate in these sex parties and have narcotics cartels pay for them and to leave your weapons and other government property like smart phones and computers in the possession of corrupt foreign officials (who easily could have compromised the information on them) and to somehow use government money in all that is beyond the realm of professionalism and more than hints of negligence, and possibly criminal negligence, in ones duties.
So, I kind of am wondering, which higher up DEA managers, or administrators, or maybe even higher up folks like Obama Administration bureaucrats or politicians also partook of these orgies (imagine the government is calling them sex parties). It seems almost to beg the question of who else must have been involved when Michelle Leonhart reportedly is trying to get us to believe she cannot fire any of the agents involved and can only give them a 2 week suspension. A slap on the wrist like that, with all the agents keeping their jobs and not facing other serious repercussions and keeping their salaries and pensions intact, certainly might at least hint at said punishment amounting to nothing more or less than hush money.
All the best,