As if his administration needed any more controversy during an election year, President Obama is now facing allegations that up to 12 Secret Service agents were preparing for his impending visit with lots of alcohol and prostitute activity.
It doesn't sound like Obama's Secret Service agents take guarding the president as a serious job during this administration.
According to The Guardian, Spokesman Edwin Donovan said "the agents involved were relieved of duty and replaced with other agency personnel."
"And as many as 12 agents were involved, some married," according to a former Post reporter, Ronald Kessler, who is the author of a book about the Secret Service.
A dozen Secret Service men dared to tie one on right before they were supposed to guard the president? What were they thinking? And having physical encounters with hookers, and despite some of the men being married? They are supposed to be Americans who obey the law, not help break it by sleeping with prostitutes. And what happened to their moral code of keeping the vows made to their wives?
No wonder America continues to lose credibility around the world and its economy and government falters. It has a president who disses its Supreme Court, and his Secret Service men follow suit by dissing him and his protection detail, as well as their families and country.
The story was bound to get out, too, as The Guardian also reported that Obama's Secret Service agent activity occurred right under the nose of the White House staff and press corps, who were also staying at the Hotel Caribe, where the Secret Service men had rooms.
If this administration can't even get the Secret Service to agree to protect the president—and it's already known they can't get the economy back on track—do Americans need to give them four more years to make the country even worse? They can't control or improve anything, it seems.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 83
They should be ashamed of themselves, but everyone involved will be fired.
I'm going to do something which I have never done before, that is;
Respectfully request that you take this article down and rewrite it without any reference to the SS Agents being those of President Obama. You well know, that they are hired members of the U.S. Secret Service Agency, a federal agency which no president, past nor present, has anything to do with.
It was most inappropriate of you to write the article in the manner which you chose. Your protrayal of the agents as being members of President Obama's Administration was sinisterly underhanded as well as totally false in it's context and references. I don't for one minute believe that you were misinformed nor meant no harm in associating the agents directly with President Obama. It was quite obvious that you fully intended to bring disgrace upon the president and his administration with this article, since you made the false reference no less than four (4) times in your article.
If you want to be viewed as an honest reporter and your articles to be respected for their content, then you must without delay, correct the misinformation which you referenced within your above article. To do less, will certainly cause you to be viewed as not only extremely biased in your reporting, but personally dishonest as well.
"Why are you pumping gas, dad? I thought you were in the Secret Service."
"Couldn't keep my servicing secret, son."
None! They're all screwing in Cartagena!
....and I did not pay her either......"
;)
Well Jane, Char, at least they aren't lying down on the job...oh, wait...
now look buddy - might be nice to say they were laying down on the job - BUT
could have been standing, kneeling, seated in a chair, leaning over the armrest of a couch, propped against a wall, floating in water, slightly elevated in a 'superman' pose, suspended from a trapeze harness, hanging in gravity boots, or drifting in an anti-gravity chamber.
in these sensitive cases, ................ argh - it demands we be serious and stick to what we DO know ........
*sheeesh*, *TSK TSK**PSHAW* and *HARUMPH*
And that you use this disgraceful incident to try to attack President Obama is just bewildering although not particularly surprising. So when Reagan got shot, did you also say that "Reagans secret services" inefficiency should have been a great reason not to give Reagan another 4 years? Somehow I think not..
Might I ask how long it took you to complete your high school diploma (I will liberally assume that you made it eventually), seven years? eight perhaps? Come on, dont be shy.. I wont laugh... I promise.....
(rimshot)
because it was the agents assigned to obama that did it.
if it had been agents to say harry reid, it woud say reids secret service agents.
is english a second language for you?
oh and i spent 4 years in high school - and needed only 3 years to get my bachelors degree because i was able to test out of several classes by talin ght efinal exam and passing without taking the courses. now yes, i had been working in my field for many years and already knew the information - but i still graduated summa cum laude (hint that it not a sexual term).
Also, I say no to your limp "point" about Harry Reid. Its a national issue, and a very embarrassing one at that. Had they been protecting Rick Perry would you have said Perrys secret service? Dont bother answering that... I can see that things have got a little too deep for you here.
In fact I heard that one of these agents even tried to stiff a taxi driver out of a dollar. Can you believe that? Huh? I hope you wont be trying to blame that on Obama too rather than the individual. After all, you conservative always yell about "personal responsibility" dont you? That someone can sink as low as to attempt to make this a partisan issue is troubling but not surprising considering.....
Somehow, going on your pitiful attempt to defend Mrs Brown, I would hazard a guess that you did not graduate summa cum laude. Just saying...
"@WorldB Free: If Reagan had tried to force-feed a health care law down American's throats, appointed someone to head the GSA and then more than $800,000 dollars worth of Las Vegas party abuses happened...and then 11 SS agents got caught with their pants down on the job...and drugs...and minors might be involved in it....yeah, I'd have taken the same position. You mean you don't?"
No I wouldnt have.....
What's it going to take to wake you, Sir? Don't you understand you're being had?
By GOD! Wake up, Man! I have no problem with what you believe, but for Christs' sake, have the huevos to admit that what you believe is what you believe! And, that what you believe is RUBBISH. Garbage! What you believe is hurting YOU, and every American in This Great Country.
Open your Eyes, Man!
yes to answer your question - if it had been perry's, romneys. gingrich' bush, pelosi, or boehner - i would have said "(insert name)'s secret service agents"
how dare you impugn my intelliogence by saying Dont bother answering that... I can see that things have got a little too deep for you here.
i explained a small part of my credentials, where are yours?
too deep?
what would you lile to discuss? neitzche? schoppenhaur? jung? aristotle? freud? keynes? smith? freidman? monet? manet? warhol? bach? beethoven? chopin? tellemann? rachmaninoff? prokofiev? rimsky-korsakov? blake? johnson? cummings? poe? shakespeare? joyce? burns?
come on big boy - show us your incredible intelligence!
you can doubt the truth all you want - and i see you already do!
were YOU invited to attend lse?
were YOU sponsered to a special masters degree at rutgers?
you wouldnt understand summa cum laude if it bit you on the arse.
THEY WERE THE AGENTSW FOR OBAMA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and white house staff were right there and said and did nothing, or were too stupid to be paying attention.
the ONLY blame placed on obama - whioch is not at all partisan except for in you partisan muddled mind - is that he obviously has no talent at picking the people that work for him.
Apparently it was a "drive-by," Del.
or maybe even a Troll-scroll-by posting!
then again it may have been a "oh-crap-someone-has-some-facts-i-better-run" posting??????
"wbf,
yes to answer your question - if it had been perry's, romneys. gingrich' bush, pelosi, or boehner - i would have said "(insert name)'s secret service agents"
I dont believe you. In fact I think you are lying
"how dare you impugn my intelliogence by saying Dont bother answering that... I can see that things have got a little too deep for you here.
i explained a small part of my credentials, where are yours?"
I doubt there is much to "impugn" going on your demented ravings here. Let me spare you from disgrace and just say, that I received an excellent education. That should be enough for you without me having to boast
"what would you lile to discuss? neitzche? schoppenhaur? jung? aristotle? freud? keynes? smith? freidman? monet? manet? warhol? bach? beethoven? chopin? tellemann? rachmaninoff? prokofiev? rimsky-korsakov? blake? johnson? cummings? poe? shakespeare? joyce? burns?
come on big boy - show us your incredible intelligence!"
I did economics and frankly speaking, I did not sink so low as to do a cheap course involving Andy Warhol or any musician. Some intelligent people have studied music and many would indeed have heard of some of the musicians you have mentioned, but few of us have time for that sort of thing. Music is a course that tended to be done by those unable to qualify for the major ones I would be willing to debate the merits of the arguments of some of the philosophers you have mentioned though
"you can doubt the truth all you want - and i see you already do!
were YOU invited to attend lse?"
Actually I was back in 1991. I chose to go to a different university though. My sister was there in the mid nineties
"were YOU sponsered to a special masters degree at rutgers?"
No. And I would have had no reason to want to do a masters degree there
you wouldnt understand summa cum laude if it bit you on the arse.
I would as a matter of fact...
"THEY WERE THE AGENTSW FOR OBAMA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and white house staff were right there and said and did nothing, or were too stupid to be paying attention."
The white house staff you presumably refer to are not security agents. The security agents I believe, are supplied by the federal secret service as clearly stated in most articles on this subject.
"the ONLY blame placed on obama - whioch is not at all partisan except for in you partisan muddled mind - is that he obviously has no talent at picking the people that work for him."
My understanding is that President Obama does not pick the secret agents that work for him. Most people who genuinely got invited to the London School of economics or to Rutgers would know this... Perhaps you might be able to explain how it is that you arrived at this conclusion? Nevermind.... keep pumping though. Maybe one day you will manage the feat of actually putting a set of thoughts and analysis together that makes sense to those who are not feeble minded...
you can believe what you want - but the article clearly implies, it is discussing the agents that were ASSIGNED to obama.
nothing more, and nothing less.
and do not EVER call me a liar.
i spent my entire career of having the highest of respect, and honest reputation, with people that would not bother to wipe their shoes on you.
how DARE you!
the above was not at all a rant - it was factual, direct, and in response to your obtuse, irrelevant, disingenuous, inculpating, innocouos, comments. then you finally return, with not a single shred of specificity, with no rejoiner when the exact ssame assinine, redicules demands you made of others are posed to you!
you may profess to have some massive accumen, with an aptitude for discernment - but next time you want to challenge a truly educated, intelligent person - bring some small amount of that peculiarty with you.
in the meantime - as w.c.fields said - go away kid, ya bother me!
now THAT is a rant!
I quite agree, Del. Nothing of Wisdom, either. All of those sought-after Academic Documents...and an Obama supporter.
Del, remind me to forego Higher "Education," please...
ah - but he offered no pedigree - which would leave me to believe his so called "excellent" education, came from the "bubas higher skool of larnin" . you can sign up for it, by presenting 8 little comics from bazooka bubble-gum.
their motto is "danged gumb near half as good as a-gradiatin the 8th grade!"
to get the deeeeeeploma - ya need to successfully 'draw a fish'.
Have another look at the frothy comment you left as a response to my own last comment to you. You would be well advised to polish up on your spelling. I cant understand the odd typo here and there but your whole response is strewn with spelling errors.
You are trying to sound smart, quite admirably I would say, but you are not doing a very good job of it. I still hold my original view of your academic proficiency and lets just say its not a particularly flattering one.....
my spelling ............. lolololololol - well when you get extreme arthritis in your joints, let me know how your typing goes - yes, i hit a lot of keys above, below, and next to the ones i meant - and as i get further from my meds to help - it gets worse, and i have less patience to go back and endure the pain to correct. i take the meds 4 times a day - it comes and goes. that is why i do not use a lot of capitalization- using my pinkies to hit that shift key is quite painful.
also i never took typing - i always had someone like you to dictate too.
as to my knowledge of the most famous of artists, and musicians - yes, i have studied them. i have also studied their impact on entire societies, and economies throughout history.
my major was also in economics, with a minor in finance and accounting.
plus i made a point of study, of the most noted philosophers, and psychologists in history - it helps me understand how people can thinik the inane way you do.
i have no need to flatter, or impress you - YOU are the one that brought up credentials, not me.
frothy???
you dont know frothy ....................
but i saw no reason to be mean, and destroy totally any faint illusion of self-grandeur you have.
i also see no reason to contiunue this conversation with you.
you have been measured and weighed, by your own accusations and demands, and have been found wanting.
"We thotsh yew shaid we had to shave the Preshident...
Now, if any President thought there might be a problem with any of his protectors he would complain to the Secret Service and they would be decomissioned. Certainly,any President who values his life is not going to allow anyone he thinks is not doing that job to protect him adequately continue his position, and would file a complaint that would result in dismissal of those agents. This would be the case unless those SS Agents who have probably the closest connections and confidential information about the President of anyone, including perhaps his own wife, had information that caused to have him have to turn a blind eye.
As they mention in that article, this isn't the first time the SS agents assigned to protect Obama have been involved not only in an incident like this that could pose a threat to his security, but there was that incident at the Christmas party with the Selahis when they were allowed right into the dinner as invited guests. That was a huge security breach. Are Secret Service Agents these days just less professional than usual? Maybe there's some buzz among the SS agents that if you're assigned to Obama, you can do almost whatever you want to do as long as no one catches you because Obama wouldn't dare report them with the incriminating information they have.
Expecting...
And, while I can see Obama being stand-offish with Security, some Presidents have a somewhat close relationship with their Agents. It is known that Bush could walk up to ANY Agent, and ask him how the Wife and Children were doing...by name.
Despite the few who did not understand that readily (or chose to be purposefully argumentative), you were quick to catch it. So I applaud you.
I also think you have hit the nail on the head when it comes to why this most likely issue has remained quiet for so long, as I too think this isn't a once-in-a-blue-moon occurrence.
I do, however, think that the SS and the administration are doing everything they can to put a lid on this asap, so we aren't likely to hear anything else about the drugs, potential minors, etc until the disgruntled agent lets loose.
Certainly, everything I wrote about that was pure speculation, but it is odd that SS agents are so suddenly lax. Given that they are so close to the President and his family, It does make your mind work overtime. I also often think of private conversations before bed between Michelle and Barry. Frightening stuff! :)
Jane even I knew what you meant and I am a Brit, as Sue says there are quite a few who choose to see it another way it’s what they do in life. If you were to say white were white they would tell you that you were wrong and that you really meant white was actually black especially if it went against their political beliefs.
Sue I would imagine that plenty of close protection agents assigned to protect any President would over hear and see things that Presidents and their wives would rather they did not hear or see I would imagine that they would have to sign some sort of legal document not to reveal. I know that our secret service, police, and specialist units such as SAS and SBS do.
The document that we sign is called the Official Secret Act and it forbids us to write books, give press interviews, and in some cases forbids us even talking about incidents to our wives and partners. If we break the Official Secret Act, we can be jailed for quite some time and not only that it could in some serious instances be seen as treason.
SAS and SBS members in the past broke the unwritten law of writing books that revealed certain aspects of the job; however, none broke any secrets regarding the protection of certain members of the Royal Family or Cabinet Members of Parliament who they might have been helping to protect. And just a few years ago because it was noticed that certain members of these elite units were writing books our Government took steps to even stop this by making any new member sign away any right they had to write about anything of their experiences when in service.
I would be very surprised if your country has not taken any steps like this to protect your Presidents, after all if someone was to open his or her mouth about what your President and his wife were arguing about the night before or what the President got up to when his wife was a way and similar what the first lady got up to when he was away it could be quite embarrassing.
And similarly, what they actually think of the people that they meet such as other World leaders.
I can see it now Sue,
President to his wife. What a frigging Muppet that Cameron is, Jesus I have never come across a more stuck up idiot in my life and believe me I have come across a few idiots when I sign in to Gather each night especially those Muppets that call themselves progressives.
President’s wife, Shhhh the boys will overhear you.
Next day Britain declares war on America for insulting the Prime Minister of the UK.
A bit over the top I know but you get the picture don't you.
And there has been talk of putting them on all vehicles so that the Government can charge so much a mile on our roads.
Thanks for the info Sue. They must be the same ones that our Government were saying that they were going to put in our vehicles in the future. They were thinking of charging every person that owned a car a toll to drive on our roads. At the moment, we have only one toll road in Britain near to where I live and it was designed to take traffic of one of the busiest roads in the UK the M6 motorway that passes through Birmingham.
In other words if you did not mind paying a set fee to save you time when the M6 was gridlocked you could use this toll road, however the charges are extortionate I think it’s around £5 for a car and at least £15 for larger vehicles and not many people will pay this money out. At this point, I will say we pay quite a bit for our petrol (gas) with most of the revenue going in tax to the Government and a set fee every year of £150 called road tax so you can see how the average motorist in the UK balks at paying anything else out.
So one bright spark in the Government came up with the idea of putting these tracking devices into all cars that will be tracked by satellite so that every time a person drives his or her car they are billed each month for the miles they have driven. Governments are rather good at squeezing money out of you, have you noticed this in your country Sue?
The good side to this is that if your car is stolen and is reported immediately the police can respond rather quickly as they know exactly where the car is. The downside to this is that all our civil liberties go out of the window, as Governments know exactly where you are at any one given moment if you use your car and that information can be abused.
Sure, that information can be abused. I also wonder how they will work it out since only the newer cars will have the device. Will others have to have them installed at their own cost? With the insurance, the taxes, the emissions control costs, the gas, and now possibly this, you'll have to ride public transporation to afford a commute. It seems that in Houston, TX they've got Big Bro on you too. They're going to have TSA agents inspecting your purse and pockets.
I read another article that said that people who owed back taxes would be denied passports and that the EDRs are a way to stop people from crossing the borders. They'll let almost anyone in, but they won't let anyone out. The whole Orwell scenario is in full swing here.
I think I might have said it before somewhere on Gather that when I go out even if it is just a mile away static cameras follow me from just down the road from where I live to where I am going an back. If I take a trip down to my local town which is just three miles away from where I live, all around the town I will along with other shoppers will be watched as I walk, shop, sit down outside my local Starbucks to drink my coffee. An then when I go back home again I am followed by static cameras along with no less than seven static speed cameras that will issue me with a speeding ticket two weeks after the incident. Talk about the Orwell scenario? I just wish we had this sort of technology in the 70s when I was in Northern Ireland it would have made my job far more easy an far less dangerous, I could have just sat down behind a screen an watched the bad boys going about their business. However having said that Sue have you noticed that with all this technology crime does not seemed to have gone down and we don't use it as it should be used.
I can't imagine what it would be like to be followed that way and also knowing it. Was it because you're in the military or is this just the way it is for everyone?
Starbucks is a waste of money, though. I hate that place and all the coffee places these days. Their coffee isn't even that good.
http://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/security-relaxed-at-obama-speech-in-dallas/
While I can understand why you might think that the president could be wanting to replace this dozen of SS guys with those he favors--and I agree that Holder is using the office differently than his predecessors (like ignoring the hate crime of the New Black Panthers against George Zimmerman), it still doesn't excuse what those SS men did, which does warrant their dismissal I think.
If they didn't do what they are being accused of I believe they would be speaking out--and telling America that they are being targeted due to Obama wanting his own guys in strategic places. But that isn't happening.
Blows my mind speaking of blow.