HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Secret Service revokes se...

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 05:17 PM

Secret Service revokes security clearances of 11 accused of misconduct

Source: CBS/AP

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - The Secret Service has revoked the top secret security clearances for all 11 agents and officers accused of misconduct during a presidential mission to Colombia over the weekend.

The Secret Service personnel were sent back to the U.S. through Miami and interviewed in Washington regarding the alleged hiring of prostitutes and other misconduct. They have been placed on administrative leave and barred from entering Secret Service facilities worldwide.

"They are 'do no admit' and their equipment has been taken," a law enforcement official told CBS News correspondent Norah O'Donnell.

Two Secret Service supervisors were among the 11 involved. A top official confirms that the group also included three members of the Counter-Assault Teams, the agents who wear black commando outfits and carry large weapons.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57414811/secret-service-revokes-security-clearances-of-11-accused-of-misconduct/



!

PB

72 replies, 6062 views

Thread informationRemove bookmarkTrash this thread

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 72 replies Author Time Post
Reply Secret Service revokes security clearances of 11 accused of misconduct (Original post)
Poll_Blind Apr 2012 OP
truthisfreedom Apr 2012 #1
Yo_Mama Apr 2012 #29
former9thward May 2012 #63
HipChick Apr 2012 #2
Grassy Knoll Apr 2012 #3
aquart Apr 2012 #4
sulphurdunn Apr 2012 #5
tabasco Apr 2012 #6
razorman Apr 2012 #7
Blue_Tires May 2012 #56
razorman May 2012 #57
RebelOne Apr 2012 #8
Poll_Blind Apr 2012 #9
Liber-AL Apr 2012 #10
tabasco Apr 2012 #13
Liber-AL Apr 2012 #17
lunatica Apr 2012 #22
Liber-AL Apr 2012 #24
lunatica Apr 2012 #25
MADem Apr 2012 #27
Liber-AL Apr 2012 #35
MADem Apr 2012 #37
janx May 2012 #55
Yo_Mama Apr 2012 #31
Skittles Apr 2012 #18
Liber-AL Apr 2012 #20
Skittles Apr 2012 #21
lunatica Apr 2012 #23
boppers May 2012 #66
LanternWaste May 2012 #54
Danmel Apr 2012 #11
gmpierce Apr 2012 #16
crunch60 Apr 2012 #12
Earth_First Apr 2012 #14
Skittles Apr 2012 #19
Posteritatis Apr 2012 #28
Bacchus4.0 Apr 2012 #30
discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #33
Marrah_G May 2012 #60
discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #62
Marrah_G May 2012 #59
discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #61
boppers May 2012 #67
discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #68
Fuddnik Apr 2012 #15
MADem Apr 2012 #26
marshall Apr 2012 #32
24601 Apr 2012 #34
MADem Apr 2012 #38
Liber-AL Apr 2012 #39
MADem Apr 2012 #40
HillWilliam Apr 2012 #41
MADem Apr 2012 #42
HillWilliam Apr 2012 #44
MADem Apr 2012 #45
Marrah_G May 2012 #53
Liber-AL Apr 2012 #36
Marrah_G May 2012 #58
MADem Apr 2012 #43
24601 Apr 2012 #46
MADem Apr 2012 #47
24601 May 2012 #51
MADem May 2012 #64
Nye Bevan May 2012 #52
unionworks Apr 2012 #48
MADem Apr 2012 #49
unionworks Apr 2012 #50
bitchkitty May 2012 #65
Scout May 2012 #69
bitchkitty May 2012 #70
Scout May 2012 #71
bitchkitty May 2012 #72

Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 05:19 PM

1. This is seriously f-ed up. I'm glad it happened so long before the election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truthisfreedom (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:58 PM

29. Huh?

What does it have to do with the election?

Presidents don't run these outfits, and neither do the representatives. Obviously discipline is lacking among some of the Secret Service, but that's an issue about that department. It's a not a political thing at all. That's a very non-political group.

Kind of freaks me out, since we really need these people to keep their minds on their jobs, but it's not an election issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #29)

Thu May 10, 2012, 04:29 PM

63. Their representatives certainly do run the SS.

Her name is Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 05:28 PM

2. The power of the v-jay


I hope it was worth it..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HipChick (Reply #2)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 05:50 PM

3. I live in Nevada...

for 47 bucks you get to ring the doorbell, but hey, condoms are free.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 06:00 PM

4. Good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 06:03 PM

5. It sounds a lot like what happened

the night before JFK was assassinated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 06:37 PM

6. I hope they know how to flip burgers.

Is Blackwater still hiring?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabasco (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 07:21 PM

7. Without security clearances, not even Blackwater will have a use for them.

They will now be persona-non-grata for anything concerning the government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to razorman (Reply #7)

Wed May 9, 2012, 04:37 PM

56. there are still plenty of private security/protection firms that will hire them up...

they won't have to wait long for employment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #56)

Thu May 10, 2012, 01:25 PM

57. Perhaps for some sort of menial job, or as a mall cop. Even private security firms do not want

anyone without a security clearance, especially of that firm has federal government contracts. Simply having these guys as employees might disqualify a firm from much contract work. A sympathetic employer might wish to hire them, but if it affects the bottom line, then "tough".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 07:51 PM

8. Can you imagine the wraith these guys

are going to face from their wives and girlfriends when they return home. They may also lose their jobs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RebelOne (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 08:06 PM

9. Having a security clearance revoked like that is the career kiss of death.

That on top of infidelity? Not making for a happy week for some people.

PB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 08:07 PM

10. Boys will be boys

 

Men will be men...

The male sex drive is one given to him by nature. Beautiful females who look like movie stars are going to be hard for testosterone laden males to resist. Mix that with a little alcohol and...welll....you can guess the rest!

I suspect this is an ongoing practice that has always gone on under the radar. One prostitute haggled about a "price" and brought the whole tradition down!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #10)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 08:45 PM

13. I believe the United States government

expects a little bit more form Secret Service agents than "WOOHOO - LET'S GET DRUNK AND FUCK!!!"

This is the kind of shit you expect from infantry lieutenants, not SS professionals.

Hope it helps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabasco (Reply #13)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 11:54 PM

17. What about the head of IMF and George Washington and

 

Thomas Jefferson and other high profile individuals who indulged in this "manly" transgression? I don't personally condone such conduct, but as a man I understand perfectly. Men have given up a lot in modern times and each tine we do a little masculinity erodes with it. Role reversals are becoming common place nowadays and I just found it a bit refreshing to hear some men are still acting like men... No offense intended

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:49 AM

22. I think you should keep talking

I remember when we used the term male chauvinist pig when men said what you just did. It's really helped the women's movement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:41 AM

24. That's just the point...

 

Damn if we do, damn if we don't!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #24)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:50 AM

25. Of course! The victim card.

Last edited Tue Apr 17, 2012, 07:51 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #17)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:42 PM

27. Are you completely obtuse? Their job--their J-O-B was to protect our President.

Not run around hiring prostitutes.

When you are on a Secret Service detail outside the country, you are "on duty" 24-7. If you're hiring prostitutes, you aren't doing your damn job.

Thomas Jefferson wasn't a Secret Service agent.

"Men have given up a lot in modern times?" Oh, really? I'd like to see THAT list!



You've done a fine job showing us your 'particulars' so early in the game. The kids would call that a colossal FAIL, I suppose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #27)

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 11:59 PM

35. Well done. lady...I guess you told me..YESIREE... You sure put me in my place!

 

I guess I will just shut up and join the rest of the psychologically emasculated males in this country.
If I don't, you might even get a jury of 6 females to silence me forever in this forum...so, I will tuck my tail, bow my head and shuffle off into cyber obscurity, never to be heard or seen from again!

YEAH, in a RATSAZZ!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #35)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 08:45 AM

37. There's so much wrong with your comment, it simply illustrates what I said in the first place.

You are obtuse. Woefully so.

I don't --and did not-- suggest you "shut up and join the psychologically emasculated," I would suggest that you actually THINK before you comment. Then you wouldn't have people telling you that your remarks are not cogent.

And you might want to work on your attitude towards women. That said, it's certainly no wonder you have such an overarching interest in this topic. I'll say no more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #27)

Wed May 9, 2012, 02:42 PM

55. I agree about

the particulars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabasco (Reply #13)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:00 PM

31. Um - thanks for writing that

Especially in a foreign country, ya know?

We all have a lot riding on the safety of the president, and this is not a confidence builder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #10)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:24 AM

18. do you not get it?

Last edited Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:25 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

these men are a fucking DISGRACE

by the way, there are plenty of men who not feel the need to buy women to use as semen receptacles

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #18)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 03:26 AM

20. I get it!

 

Is that the real issue? Is it because these men are guilty of doing something that men have been doing since the dawn of Homo Sapiens that you demonize them? Their disgrace is that they were not more careful and got caught... unlike many of their detractors who feign a higher morality. How many of your congressmen, governors or mayors have done the same thing, only more discretely?
Sure, there are some SS men who probably did resist the urge to , "party hardy" I commend them. But I cannot with a good conscience condemn those who gave in to their more prurient urges when I know that many who rail against them have done the same thing.

The one thing I do have a greater concern for though, is the possibility that the safety of the president might have been compromised in some way. Perhaps that should have been the overriding scheme of things when this first entered their minds.
From that perspective, the high ground would have been to abstain. However, as I said before, this is probably a tradition that hs been going on for some time. SO for there has been no reason for concerns about security or blackmail... But this time, they got caught.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:09 AM

21. WTF

you are HOPELESS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 06:57 AM

23. Is that why you don't rail against them?

Because you're guilty of doing the same thing? You sure are defending them vigorously. Takes one to know one or some such?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #20)

Fri May 11, 2012, 06:51 AM

66. If you are stupid enough to "get caught" doing something, then you don't belong in the service.

Regardless of the morality, they failed in terms of basic operational security, and broadcast a message to the world that our presidential security can be deeply compromised by nothing more than a few drinks and some hot women.

Is it the first time? Heck no. But it'll be the last time for this batch of idiots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #10)

Wed May 9, 2012, 02:30 PM

54. I would imagine that the normal urge to...

I would imagine that the normal urge to defecate is also wholly natural-- yet I imagine that most adults (regardless of sex) are able to better discipline themselves, and maintain appropriate decorum within the confines of social mores. "Lots of good, solid food is hard to resist. Mix that will and little alcohol and... well... you can guess the rest"

Unless of course, one simply holds fast to an ethical consistency and maintains that a member of secret service can and should be excused from taking a dump whenever and wherever they so choose, attributing that to, and then rationalizing it by the simplistic bumper-sticker of "boys will be boys..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 08:15 PM

11. good

They clearly lack the necessay discipline & judgment to be trusted with protecting the president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Danmel (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 10:12 PM

16. on the other hand,

 

They seem to have demonstrated what it takes to BE the president... or like Gingrich, to run for president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 08:35 PM

12. Seriously, Nookie Gate?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 08:56 PM

14. Career. Over.

They had better start looking for civilian law enforcement positions...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Earth_First (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:27 AM

19. marriages too, probably

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Earth_First (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:48 PM

28. And good luck with even those. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Earth_First (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:58 PM

30. civilian law enforcement as well as many private security firms often require security clearances

the federal government is the entity that issues these clearances. so they are really screwed with regards to ANY job that requires a security clearance. I imagine just about any law enforcement agency is out of the question for these guys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bacchus4.0 (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 05:00 PM

33. One day...

...a co-worker of mine had rather bad afternoon. He found out that one of his in-laws, who thought he was selling guns to the IRA, was actually selling them to the FBI. He was told this by the Defense Investigative Service (now the Defense Security Service) who stopped by to pull his clearance.

So I wonder if the Yankee White process will change as a result of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #33)

Thu May 10, 2012, 01:40 PM

60. They do check out all the people around you

Even neighbors, local police, teachers, friends, etc. There are lots of questions about who you know here, who you might know in foreign countries, etc etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marrah_G (Reply #60)

Thu May 10, 2012, 04:00 PM

62. Yes I realize.

Many in the Secret Service are also subject to the Yankee White process and while there seems no undue influence has come to light, there are some troubling character issues here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bacchus4.0 (Reply #30)

Thu May 10, 2012, 01:37 PM

59. yup

And they had top secret clearance ( I think there is only one level above that). In the private sector that is worth 30,000 dollars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marrah_G (Reply #59)

Thu May 10, 2012, 03:56 PM

61. TS is the top.

There are 3 levels of classified information, Confidential, Secret and Top Secret. All CI is "need to know". Special access to comsec, crypto, SCI... are granted based on project assignment.

I just hope things have tightened up some.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #61)

Fri May 11, 2012, 06:58 AM

67. Well, there's also Q...

But that's more of an "equivalent" to TS, rather than above, or below, it, though it's kind of a combo of TS *and* CNWDI.... as you allude to, it isn't really a hierarchical system, but some general levels, and then lots of specialized groupings in addition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boppers (Reply #67)

Fri May 11, 2012, 10:20 AM

68. Quite so.

I can't really comment on DoE clearances, I've never had one and I'm not familiar. I'm told in total there are sixteen intelligence gathering agencies and several departments granting clearances. It's been a long time for me. I'm sure things have changed a bit.

Have a good day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 09:32 PM

15. Poor guys probably just got new I-Phones

And were just checking out the voice search function.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 02:38 PM

26. Well, it's all over but the termination letters, I'm guessing. And good enough for 'em.

I wonder how many of those cowboys were hired during the Bush years?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 04:02 PM

32. Do they take an oath of chastity?

Prostitution is LEGAL in Colombia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marshall (Reply #32)

Tue Apr 17, 2012, 08:54 PM

34. There is no legal right to a security clearance. Download an SF-86 and read the things you answer

for a clearance.

There are many things, e.g. excessive indebtedness, alcoholism, foreign connections, etc that aren't illegal but that can result in access suspension or clearance revocation.

The Secret Service chief has ordered polygraphs for the agents. Failure to cooperate with an investigation is grounds for termination. And lying to the investigator... well, ask Scooter if he has a felony conviction and no law license.

Some government agencies' employees are in the Excepted Service rather than the "competitive" civil service and they serve at the pleasure of their Directors. For the USSS, "Initial appointment to the special agent position is normally made in the excepted service."


http://www.secretservice.gov/opportunities_agent.shtml

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #34)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 09:00 AM

38. You have no privacy, that's true. You're an instrument of the government, in essence.

There are regulations against bringing discredit upon the organization--they have more than enough grounds for termination, for anyone who can be proven to have 'consorted' or tolerated said conduct.

I had a cousin who did that work from Johnson through Reagan. He's retired now, but he was a choir boy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #38)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 11:16 AM

39. Ummm, you can believe what you like...

 

but you weren't with that choirboy 24/7 so you cannot say what he did or didn't do under the "right" circumstances.
BTW, women do similar things under the "right" circumstances. If you were lounging around the pool on a tropical beach and George Clooney, or a look a like, approached you, I can imagine where your thoughts would be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #39)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 02:28 PM

40. So long Lie-ber-AL...it's been real, and it's been nice, but it hasn't been real nice.

Love the way you presume to speak for people you don't even know, to the point of predicting their conduct, in the hopes of goading and baiting posters on this message board. Your pattern, though, is far too obvious, you're a veritable bull in a china shop.

Enjoy your PPR, I have no doubt we'll be seeing more of your calcetines in the months ahead--because you lack something most people have, apparently--and that would be a LIFE. Poor, poor you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #40)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 02:44 PM

41. Nicely done!

Another one with front-row seating at the Permanent Pizza Repast!

Thanks! That one was making the thread tiresome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HillWilliam (Reply #41)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 03:00 PM

42. Seems like there's a fungus amongus lately! The poor MIRT!

They must feel like one-armed paperhangers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #42)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 04:23 PM

44. I suspect the fungus is distributed

amongst sundry calcetines. There are telling, sticky li'l fingerprints all over.

Glad I'm not MIRT. Have they gotten any sleep lately?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HillWilliam (Reply #44)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 05:42 PM

45. Great minds think alike! I'll bet the MIRT could use an expresso machine! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #34)

Tue May 8, 2012, 09:34 PM

53. They are fools

They could have put the President in danger.

I have a son with this clearance. He knows that he CANNOT behave the way alot of other college students behave. He values his clearance and the opportunities it provides for him. How these grown men could be in the secret service and have so little self control is astounding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marshall (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 12:14 AM

36. Well, finally a voice of reason emerges!

 

Last edited Thu Apr 19, 2012, 12:16 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

We don't know if these guys were married or not. We just assume they are/were.

Off duty time is theirs, but I think I would have opted to make better choices of what to do with my time.
But since they wanted to have fantasy sex with a dream woman for once in their miserable lives, we ought to be able to forgive them, tell them to sin no more and move on! No jobs should be lost over this... A heavy fine? YES.. .But, we have to accept the reality that at least some of them have wives and children. They deserve a second chance!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liber-AL (Reply #36)

Thu May 10, 2012, 01:35 PM

58. They lost their clearance for good reason

They have a pretty damn important job to do. Getting wasted, bringing hookers or any person you just picked up at a bar, back to your room is very good cause to lose your clearance and therefore your job. You put the office you are sworn to protect in jeopardy by doing so.

That job, that clearance, is not an easy thing to obtain. It is quite valuable. The people with it are supposed to be the best. They are supposed to be held to a higher standard because they have a dangerous and important job to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marshall (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 03:05 PM

43. Drinking under the age of 21 is legal in many nations.

It's still contrary to the UCMJ and if a servicemember under the age of majority is caught they can be hung out to dry for it.

Same deal with federal civil service--if your conduct brings discredit upon the organization or the government, you can and will be held to account.

Don't for a second think your life is your own when you choose to work for the federal government. You agree--and the key word there is AGREE--to abide by certain standards of conduct as a consequence of your employment, and you AGREE--and again, there's that word--that if you fail to meet the stated expectations that you can be dismissed and/or otherwise disciplined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #43)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 08:12 PM

46. Well, the biggest question really is going to be whether any of the women were under 18. If

so, US sex-tourism laws with world-wide application kick in. Consent, local laws and payment become irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #46)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 09:14 PM

47. Apparently, they wanted Neiman-Marcus product at a K-Mart price--that's what did them in.

The woman that they (forgive the expression) stiffed for the payment has spoken to investigators. I am given to understand that she is a 24 year old single mother working for a high-end escort service. I don't know for certain if all of the prostitutes came from that service, but it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case, as they were all in a group at a disco, which is where they met these fellahs.

They've got surveillance tape at the hotel as well. It's all over but the tortured explanations to wives and the sobbing, I think.

The latest: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/04/prostitute-describes-dispute-with-secret-service-agent/1#.T5C3fquudKs

A Colombian prostitute at the center of the Secret Service sex scandal tells The New York Times that the dispute was trigggered by a disagreement on how much to pay for her services, and that she had no idea the man was part of President Obama's security team.

"I tell him, 'Baby, my cash money,' " the woman tells Times reporter William Neuman in her first public comments on the incident.

She tells the Times that the man offered $30 for the night of sex but, in what may stem from a misunderstanding because of the language barrier, she thought they had agreed to $800.

The dispute turned into a hallway quarrel in the luxury Hotel Caribe, eventually drawing in another prostitute, Colombian police officers and other Secret Service agents who tried to defuse the argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #47)

Tue May 8, 2012, 09:23 PM

51. Government Discount?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #51)

Thu May 10, 2012, 10:51 PM

64. You generally don't get those overseas in any circumstance!

You can get it with car rentals and hotel rooms, but only if there's a pre-existing contract for services.

To the best of my knowledge, GSA doesn't have a prostitution contracts on file!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marshall (Reply #32)

Tue May 8, 2012, 09:28 PM

52. Right. Secret Service agents have EVERY RIGHT to get drunk and invite hookers to their hotel rooms

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 12:49 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

where they have files of classified information relating to the President's future itinerary. I can't understand why their superiors got pissed off about this behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Thu Apr 19, 2012, 10:44 PM

48. It's called a "honey trap"

 

Last edited Thu Apr 19, 2012, 11:03 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

It's something spooks are trained to recognize and avoid. These guys knew better, and they got caught, compromising our security and disgracing the honor of the Service.

Why do I get the feeling Hugo Chavez is laughing his ass off over this? Answer - Google search "Chavez - Columbia" and see what's been going on lately. T the very least an embarrasment, at most an encouragement to our enemies demonstrating how easily our MOST VITAL SECURITY CAN BE PENETRATED. I would not want to be in the shoes of these incredibly dumb bastards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unionworks (Reply #48)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 01:22 PM

49. Precisely.

As for Hugo, though, I don't think he's doing all that much laughing. He recently got back from Cuba and yet another round of chemo, trying to beat back some serious cancer.

He's also mired in a He Said/He Said judicial scandal:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/19/world/americas/venezuela-ex-judge/?hpt=hp_t2

I think his inclinations might be to gloat, but he's got a full plate of domestic and health problems and they're not looking better as time goes on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #49)

Fri Apr 20, 2012, 01:41 PM

50. don't quote me on this

 

But I read on the google that Hugo had cut off relationships with Columbia a while back, but in the weeks preceeding the SS inckident, had a summit with Lumbo looking to better relationships or something. What better way to kiss his ass than to slap the U.S. in the face with an embarrasment. Take it with a grain of salt, I do enjoy playing armchair spy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Poll_Blind (Original post)

Fri May 11, 2012, 04:40 AM

65. Am I the only one who doesn't care?

It's a dick thing, for God's sake. It's ridiculous to devote all the air time and space yammering on about it. I don't think they compromised national security by getting laid. News flash - happens all the time, and nobody dies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bitchkitty (Reply #65)

Fri May 11, 2012, 04:03 PM

69. "It's a dick thing"

as in, they were acting like dicks?

as in, men can't control their dicks?

and yes, you are the only one who doesn't care

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scout (Reply #69)

Fri May 11, 2012, 04:46 PM

70. You might have other information.

But as far as I know, the men paying for sex were men, and therefore had penises, also known as dicks.

I didn't care about Clinton's consensual sex acts, nor Weiner's consensual sex acts, and I don't care about this shit either. But then, I'm not a sexually repressed moron who keeps her nose glued to the zippers of government officials or employees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bitchkitty (Reply #70)

Fri May 11, 2012, 04:53 PM

71. "I'm not a sexually repressed moron who keeps her nose glued to the zippers of government officials"

neither am i. apparently the Secret Service is though:

The Secret Service has revoked the top secret security clearances for all 11 agents and officers accused of misconduct during a presidential mission to Colombia over the weekend.


so you still didn't explain what you meant by "it's a dick thing" ... do you mean that those men couldn't control their dicks? that they think with them? that's pretty damn insulting to men, if that's what you meant. so, i'm seeking clarification here.

what does "it's a dick thing" mean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scout (Reply #71)

Fri May 11, 2012, 04:57 PM

72. It means that they had

normal urges to copulate with sexy women. In this case, they were men, so it was a dick thing.

There are books you can read, you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread