Fury Erupts Over 'Double Standard' as Patel's Girlfriend Gets SWAT Team Over MTG Threats

Controversy has arisen over allegations of double standards after FBI Director Kash Patel assigned an elite SWAT team to protect his girlfriend, Alexis Wilkins, while prominent figures such as the Georgia representative Marjorie Taylor Greene say they've been left exposed to threats without similar government action.

Unprecedented Protection Sparks Outrage

Kash Patel's decision to deploy FBI SWAT agents to act as Wilkins's personal security detail has drawn criticism from both Capitol insiders and veteran law enforcement, with sources confirming to The New Republic that this marks the first time such resources have been used for a girlfriend of a top bureau official who neither shares a residence nor a legal oath with the director.

'A group of elite agents from the FBI Field Office in Nashville have been assigned to protect Patel's girlfriend, Alexis Wilkins,' two sources told MS NOW, formerly MSNBC.

'People familiar with FBI security protocols...had never heard of a top FBI official's girlfriend receiving a security detail staffed by government agents,' the report notes.

The SWAT team typically respond to mass shootings and hostage crises, meaning their ability to protect the public is put in jeopardy should an incident occur while they're reassigned.

'SWAT team agents on a detail with Wilkins would presumably be unable to respond or delayed in responding to crises that might develop in their territory, such as mass shootings or terror attacks,' MS NOW sources explained, as cited by Mediaite.

Double Standard Draws Political Fire

The appointment comes as Greene and other lawmakers highlight the apparent lack of equal treatment for those facing what they describe as genuine threats.

Greene herself has gone public with claims she's been 'swatted' multiple times—had SWAT teams sent to her home by hoax callers—and received direct death threats following high-profile disputes, particularly with former President Trump.

Greene declared, 'I've been down this road before...some of the most death threats of any Member of Congress...multiple men being convicted and serving time in prison,' yet reports indicate she and other political figures have seen existing security protections reduced or even revoked.

Democratic Rep Eric Swalwell commented on social media, saying, 'It's just ironic that [Patel] REFUSES to protect me and my kids from MULTIPLE specific death threats. Same for other Dem colleagues. Can only conclude he wants us dead,' as reported on MEAWW News. The criticism isn't simply about personal safety—it concerns ethical government administration.

The Backdrop: Patel's Use of Authority Under Scrutiny

Critics argue that Patel's handling of FBI assets crosses a line, especially since he recently flew Wilkins on a $60 million FBI jet to a wrestling event, defending his actions as 'mandated by Congress.'

Patel responded to criticism on X: 'Attacking her isn't just wrong—it's cowardly and jeopardises our safety. My love of family will always be my cornerstone, and you will never tear that down or keep me from them.'

Yet, law enforcement veterans have criticised these decisions. Christopher O'Leary, a former senior FBI agent, told MS NOW, 'There is no legitimate justification for this. This is a clear abuse of position and misuse of government resources. She is not his spouse, does not live in the same house or even the same city.'

Institutional Trust Erodes

The dispute over resources is not isolated to one office or party. The scale of public reaction highlights growing mistrust in the system, where the powerful appear shielded from danger while other lawmakers are left vulnerable.

As SWAT teams watch over Wilkins in Nashville, questions mount about the cost to public safety and the message sent to those not connected by personal relationships to the agency's top brass.

Looking Forward: Accountability Demanded

With public criticism growing, Patel's leadership and the FBI's use of state resources remain firmly under the microscope.

As Greene and others continue to receive threats, and as critics demand equitable access to protection, Patel's case has become a focal point for debate about who gets safeguarded—and who gets left out.