Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

The Secret Service thinks it's Congress!

TeachTeach Senior MemberPosts: 18,428 Senior Member
Another black eye for the Obummer administration- - - - -11 secret service agents assigned to a security detail in Bogota Colombia in advance of the prez visiting a summit conference there have been relieved of duty- - - - - -supposedly for shenanigans with the local prostitutes including one agent refusing to pay up. Who do they think they are, congress-critters? Latest reports seem to suggest some U.S. military involvement, in addition to the secret service people. Why am I not surprised?
Jerry
«13

Replies

  • mkk41mkk41 Banned Posts: 1,932 Senior Member
    Hmmm , Secret Service = SS , right? Didn't another regime have an SS?
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,921 Senior Member
    Hang on a minute....prostitution is legal in Columbia, so technically they weren't breaking any laws...

    also the agent was refusing to pay the hotel for "an extra occupant" in his room...not refusing to pay the hooker...

    Not that I agree with it...just wanted to get all the facts out there...

    I actually kinda feel that what these guys do on their off time is their own business....it ain't like someone took a shot at the President while these guys were "otherwise engaged"
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,921 Senior Member
    mkk41 wrote: »
    Hmmm , Secret Service = SS , right? Didn't another regime have an SS?

    Yeah, but our SS has been around longer than their SS...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • mkk41mkk41 Banned Posts: 1,932 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Yeah, but our SS has been around longer than their SS...

    Who learned from who?
  • PFDPFD Senior Member Posts: 1,331 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    11 secret service agents assigned to a security detail in Bogota Colombia in advance of the prez visiting a summit conference there have been relieved of duty- - - - - -supposedly for shenanigans with the local prostitutes including one agent refusing to pay up.

    Seriously, under what circumstances does anyone see them saying "My fault, my mistake, I'll take the blame for my actions even though I'm a SS agent for the president?"

    It would be honorable of them if they did.









    i
    That's all I got.

    Paul
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    Wow! That's just. . .I mean. . .Jeez! I can't even. . .

    What I mean to say is that I'm paralyzed with NOT CARING VERY MUCH!:roll:

    "American serviceman abroad hires local prostitute"

    Howya figger this headline is in any way NEWS, Teach?

    Much like with Bill Clinton's dalliances, I've got to vent my frustration at the fact that amidst all the legitimate travesties this administration is committing, the best people seem to be able to do to attack it is to point fingers and say "OOOOOOOOOH! Look at who THEY'RE sleeping with!"

    Seriously, our AG is selling guns to the Mexican Mafia as a ploy to enhance gun control at home, and you actually care who the President's housekeeping staff is banging?
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    With this administration's penchant for stepping on their crank, you're probably right- - - - -it's just par for the course for the elite corps of bodyguards for the president to go to a foreign capitol city and be a public embarassment to the entire nation. For the entire contingent of SS to get canned, and publicly humiliated must mean that it's a little more serious than some GI hiring a little companionship in a back alley somewhere.

    Apparently, somebody in this incredibly inept and corrupt government must still have some sense of outrage remaining, even if the vast majority of the country sees nothing wrong with people tasked with publicly representing this nation thinking with the little head. After all, Bill Clinton did it all the time, didn't he?
    Jerry
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    Teach, you have IM.
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    My concern is that a secret service agent could be blackmailed for engaging with a prostitute in some way and compromise the president's security. We do not need a martyred Obama in any way, shape or form. I want him to leave office next January in perfect health (besides the fact that he looks like he has aged 15 years in the last 3).
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,798 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Seriously, our AG is selling guns to the Mexican Mafia as a ploy to enhance gun control at home, and you actually care who the President's housekeeping staff is banging?

    This administration cares nothing about what anybody thinks, unless they are going to punch the Democrat straight ticket button at the polls. And once they have done that, they don't care about them, either. You could fill a bus with all the people Obama has thrown under it, to keep his 'base' on board.

    So, naturally, when they are having trouble on issues that they do not want in the headlines, it is nothing for them to throw a little red meat out there for conspiracy nuts and the morality police. They could have easily stifled this story or toned it down, but it draws attention away from the really damaging stuff they have done and continue to do, so they let it go, and may even throw fuel on the fire.

    They love it when their opposition spends all their time being outraged over juicy side issues, and completely ignores their systematic disassembly of our Constitution and our economy.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Really? Sounds EXACTLY the same. Obama's just become so sensitive to criticism that they pretty much fire everyone at the slightest wiff of a scandal.

    Frankly it's no ones business what these citizens were doing on their own time as long as they weren't breaking any laws. We seriously need to join the 21st century when it comes to sex in this country and quit pretending like we're still a bunch of puritans.

    Soliders aren't allowed d to visit houses of "Ill Repute" in places like Korea (Everywhere) anymore and probably not federal employees. Some new regs under "Human Trafficking" are on the books. I don't know what is on the books these days and what UCMJ says.

    Here from the article below:

    The act goes hand in hand with Executive Order 13387 signed by the President Oct. 14 2005. Among other changes to the law, the order expands the Uniform Code of Military Justice to specifically criminalize patronizing a prostitute. Patronizing a prostitute is punishable by a Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 1 year, reduction in grade to E-1 and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.


    So a GI can't legally visit the Cat Houses in Germany anymore??????? Even though it is a legal activity?


    OK from the Air Force Europe:

    http://www.usafe.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123017180

    President signs law against human trafficking

    Posted 2/10/2006 Updated 3/13/2006 Email story Print story

    Share

    2/10/2006 - RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, Germany (USAFENS) -- On Jan. 10, The President of the United States signed into law the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005. This is the latest effort in the U.S. Government’s “Zero Tolerance” policy toward human trafficking. Any employee of the Federal Government faces fines, mandatory restitution, and up to 20 years imprisonment for knowingly taking part in, patronizing, or simply tolerating trafficking networks.

    “Human trafficking is an offense against human dignity, a crime in which human beings, many of them teenagers and young children, are bought and sold and often sexually abused by violent criminals,” President George Bush said at the White House before signing the bill. “Our nation is determined to fight and end this modern form of slavery.”

    Human trafficking is the illegal practice of procuring human beings for unpaid work in physically abusive settings and locations from which they are not allowed to leave. Trafficking in persons is the third largest criminal activity in the world, after illegal arms and drugs sales.




    Trafficking Victims Prevention Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) 2005

    Public Law 109-164, enacted January 10, 2006, provides U.S. courts jurisdiction over federal government employees and contractors for trafficking offenses committed abroad. It has enhanced specified U.S. efforts to combat trafficking in persons, including the prevention of such activities by international peacekeepers. This law requires the Attorney General to study and report to Congress on the prevalence of severe forms of trafficking and sex trafficking in the U.S., and the approach to combat these crimes by law enforcement. A grant program has been established for states and local law enforcement, totaling $50 million in 2006 and 2007 to investigate and prosecute acts of trafficking in persons and criminals who purchase commercial sex acts within the United States. This law is also directed at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to investigate acts of: (1) severe forms of trafficking in persons other than domestic trafficking in persons; and (2) domestic trafficking in persons
    William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008

    The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 7311), passed both the House and the Senate on December 10, 2008. The President signed it into law on December 23, 2008, P.L. 110-457, 122 Stat. 5044 (2008). The Act enhances federal efforts to combat both international and domestic traffic in human beings. The bill directs the President to create a system to monitor anti-trafficking efforts and programs at the federal level. There are a number of important expansions to the criminal provisions included in the Act. For example, prosecutors no longer have to prove that a defendant knew the victim was a minor; they just need to show that a defendant had a "reasonable opportunity to observe" the victim. In addition, the standard of proof is lowered to "reckless disregard" for traffickers or defendants who come into contact with victims forced to engage in commercial sex acts. Additional provisions are made to provide assistance for domestic trafficking victims. The Act requires the Department of Justice to create a new model law that based in part on D.C. Criminal Code �22-2701 et seq. making all acts of pimping and pandering per se crimes, even without proof of force, fraud or coercion or a victim's minor age.

    There are a number of new provisions in the Act specific to data collection and reporting. The Act orders the Federal Bureau of Investigation to break down the categories of prostitution and commercialized vice arrests in the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) to show how many prostitutes, johns and pimps or traffickers were arrested. Additionally, a new category of "Human Trafficking" will appear in the serious crimes category of the UCR. The Act also requires several new studies from the Department of Justice about the enforcement of laws related to human trafficking.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,493 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    My concern is that a secret service agent could be blackmailed for engaging with a prostitute in some way and compromise the president's security. We do not need a martyred Obama in any way, shape or form. I want him to leave office next January in perfect health (besides the fact that he looks like he has aged 15 years in the last 3).
    This happened back in the 80's with some Embassy Marines, if I remember correctly. They were compromised into giving out intel info. That is the troubling part.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Another black eye for the Obummer administration- - - - -11 secret service agents assigned to a security detail in Bogota Colombia in advance of the prez visiting a summit conference there have been relieved of duty- - - - - -supposedly for shenanigans with the local prostitutes including one agent refusing to pay up. Who do they think they are, congress-critters? Latest reports seem to suggest some U.S. military involvement, in addition to the secret service people. Why am I not surprised?
    Jerry

    Yea Teach!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good One. Watching Face the Nation now, and they are going to do a little piece on this breaking story. Looks like our SS is following the ways and means of our GSA, and the ole Billy Bob Clinton Administration. Our tax dollars at work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Man 'O' Man are we in political trouble in this country!!!!!
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    With this administration's penchant for stepping on their crank, you're probably right- - - - -it's just par for the course for the elite corps of bodyguards for the president to go to a foreign capitol city and be a public embarassment to the entire nation. For the entire contingent of SS to get canned, and publicly humiliated must mean that it's a little more serious than some GI hiring a little companionship in a back alley somewhere.

    Apparently, somebody in this incredibly inept and corrupt government must still have some sense of outrage remaining, even if the vast majority of the country sees nothing wrong with people tasked with publicly representing this nation thinking with the little head. After all, Bill Clinton did it all the time, didn't he?
    Jerry

    :that::agree: Billy Bob Clinton shoved his show anywhere his show could be shoved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,713 Senior Member
    Watching Face the Nation now, and they are going to do a little piece on this breaking story.

    Breaking story my eye. A sad state of affairs when this is considered a breaking news story.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,921 Senior Member
    The standrds of conduct for people with security clearance are much higher than other citizens and this definitely crosses that line.

    But the conduct of people with security clearances generally isn't all that much higher than other citizens....about the only time they really think about their security clearances is when they are about to lose it because of their conduct
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 12,625 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    My concern is that a secret service agent could be blackmailed for engaging with a prostitute in some way and compromise the president's security. We do not need a martyred Obama in any way, shape or form. I want him to leave office next January in perfect health (besides the fact that he looks like he has aged 15 years in the last 3).

    Exactly, I would fire them if it was my detail.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • ThatMattGuyThatMattGuy Senior Member Posts: 666 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    about the only time they really think about their security clearances is when they are about to lose it because of their conduct

    Or when they bee bob up into a gun shop and throw it around and act like they are exempt from the rules on paperwork and background cheks when buying a firearm lol
    The poster formerly known as '69MercCougar
  • ThatMattGuyThatMattGuy Senior Member Posts: 666 Senior Member
    I bet those guys are so PO'ed that once guy ruined the off duty fun because he was too cheap to pay up......pay the bill....shut up....dont ruin it for everyone hahahahahahaha
    The poster formerly known as '69MercCougar
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,581 Senior Member
    In some countries age of consent is as low as 14, legal does not make it right.

    The guys that march at the tomb of the unknown soldier as part off their oath can't ever swear, never in their life's, no matter if they are outr of the service, retired or whatever, it is part of honoring those that have given their lifes for their countrymen in war.

    This is something they knowingly vow to do as part of the privilege of performong that service and they have my respect for doing so. Pretty sure there is an oath involved with becoming a SS guy and pretyy sure that not getting caught with their pants down a part of it.

    They either did not keep their word as per their oath of service, this THIS REGARDLESS IF YOU LIKE OR NOT THE PRESIDENT IN TURN, or are too stupid not to get caught, not their best day.

    Another reason why I detest politics and in particular the 2 party system, it heightens BIAS in an exponential and blind way and that is no good for anyone.
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,921 Senior Member
    bruchi wrote: »
    The guys that march at the tomb of the unknown soldier as part off their oath can't ever swear, never in their life's, no matter if they are outr of the service, retired or whatever, it is part of honoring those that have given their lifes for their countrymen in war.

    This is something they knowingly vow to do as part of the privilege of performong that service and they have my respect for doing so.

    THIS...is a fairy tale...perpetuated by the internet...For your edification, I provide the attached...

    http://www.snopes.com/military/unknown.asp

    They take the same oath as every other member of the uniformed service.
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • AiredaleAiredale Banned Posts: 624 Senior Member
    Excuse me, but weren't those agents had been in the employ of our government for past administrations?
    Come on guys.
    Blame the individuals.
    You're so blinded by politics that you can't see the obvious.
    Were any of you deployed overseas? Did y'all do less than honorable things that you wouldn't talk about to your wives?
    Should we blame our President for that??
    We all live in glass houses.
    Hypocracy exemplified.
  • mkk41mkk41 Banned Posts: 1,932 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    My concern is that a secret service agent could be blackmailed for engaging with a prostitute in some way and compromise the president's security.

    Maybe these agents were leftover from the Clinton Administration?
  • AiredaleAiredale Banned Posts: 624 Senior Member
    Martians??
    Under you're bed??
    Klingons??
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,581 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    THIS...is a fairy tale...perpetuated by the internet...For your edification, I provide the attached...

    http://www.snopes.com/military/unknown.asp

    They take the same oath as every other member of the uniformed service.


    I actually got my "facts" from a source even worse than the internet, television! One of those shows on History channel or something along those lines.

    Bad form using ANYTHING on the net to prove a point, "SNOPES" included, you will find stuff online for and against everything.

    http://www.metroedit.com/2009/05/how-accurate-is-snopescom/

    RE: SNOPES:


    "Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it -kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team – that’s right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It’s just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby. David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago – and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research. After a few years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral, but over the past couple of years people started asking questions who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation? The reason for the questions – or skepticism’s is a result of snopes.com claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain questions or issues, when in fact, they have been proven wrong. Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the ‘true’ bottom of various issues."
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,493 Senior Member
    Yeah, but this time Snopes is correct. Come to think of it, they're correct more often than not. Probably more often that Wikipedia. And using a website to disprove a website is kinda self-defeating...
    Overkill is underrated.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,921 Senior Member
    I merely used Snopes because in this particular case, it's correct and dissects the internet myth about the Tomb Guards effectively... They're soldiers, not monks...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,581 Senior Member
    Yeah, but this time Snopes is correct. Come to think of it, they're correct more often than not. Probably more often that Wikipedia. And using a website to disprove a website is kinda self-defeating...

    Using the internet to disprove info gathered on the internet is in my opinion a way to drive the point harder, but then that is me.

    My comment on the topic is about the Secret Service and an oath they vow to voluntarily before going into service, this to perform above and beyond which not only requires catching a bullet if so is required but also as symbols of the country here and abroad which signifies the image of it.

    This incident, which is not a huge one IMO does lower the image of the country around the globe, there is nothing positive about it and as some use it as a notch to lower the image of a president they happen to detest those that detest the US use it as ammunition to justify that hate.

    The point was the OATH and my mistake of "quoting" from a documentary (not the internet) should not kill the spirit of the message.

    Now it can be used to lower my image here by those that need to do so.
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,581 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    I merely used Snopes because in this particular case, it's correct and dissects the internet myth about the Tomb Guards effectively... They're soldiers, not monks...

    It is not espionage after all and I am more disgusted with the fact they got caught, if they are that careless they have no right to such a responsibility.

    Do you realize how pointless and self serving is your point that in this instance "snopes" happens to be correct?
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement