E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNBC's Mike Viqueira reports.
Heavy drinking and bringing foreign nationals back to hotel rooms on trips abroad is now banned by the U.S. Secret Service in the wake of a growing scandal over allegations that agents consorted with prostitutes in Colombia this month.
The new rules of conduct issued on Friday also ban visits to "non-reputable establishments," presumably including strip clubs, and say staff must obey U.S. laws even while abroad. A copy was provided to Reuters by the Secret Service, and a spokesman said they were effective immediately.
The new rules were issued two weeks after the scandal erupted over allegations that Secret Service agents and military personnel brought prostitutes to their hotels during a night of drinking and carousing in the Colombian city of Cartagena, just before President Barack Obama arrived for a summit.
The Secret Service this week began looking into allegations of similar misbehavior before a 2011 presidential trip to El Salvador, a report that would appear to contradict official government arguments that the Colombian episode must have been an aberration.
The rules were issued as the agency sought to close a chapter in its worst case of alleged misconduct in decades, which embarrassed the United States and overshadowed Obama's participation in the Summit of the Americas.
The new rules issued on Friday say that "foreign nationals, excluding hotel staff and official counterparts, are prohibited in your hotel room."
Alcohol limits
"Alcohol may only be consumed in moderate amounts while off-duty on a TDY (temporary duty) assignment, and alcohol use is prohibited within 10 hours of reporting or duty," the rules say.
Furthermore, alcohol may not be consumed at all at the hotel where the person being protected by the Secret Service is staying once that person has arrived.
From now on, a member of the agency's professional responsibility section will accompany staff who travel on "car planes," and give staff ethics briefings before they leave, the rules say. The employees in Cartagena were support personnel who came over on the plane to Colombia that brought the president's armored vehicles.
Secret Service investigates new report of debauchery
Twelve Secret Service employees were implicated in the Colombia matter. Eight have left the agency, three were cleared of serious misconduct and one is being stripped of his security clearance. Twelve members of the military were also implicated and that investigation is ongoing.
House may send investigators to Colombia
Earlier, a senior lawmaker said his committee is considering sending investigators to Colombia in the coming weeks to gather information in an expanded probe of the misconduct.
Representative Peter King, the Republican chairman of the House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee, said his staff will move to a "full-scale" investigation after it receives answers to 50 questions the panel posed to Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan about this month's incident.
Neither King nor another senior House lawmaker, Democratic Representative Elijah Cummings, said they saw a weakening of support for Sullivan in Congress despite reports of other Secret Service misbehavior.
"In my estimation, he is doing all he can do. ... Rumors are coming in and he's following each one of them. He's looking into every single rumor that comes in," Cummings told Reuters.
Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which also is looking into the matter, said Sullivan plans to have 100 top Secret Service employees participate in a "very intense" ethics course next week.
'Morality cop'
"I'm not into being a morality cop, but what happened in Colombia was clearly wrong because it put security at risk," King said outside the House chamber, adding that his committee "probably in the next few weeks" would send investigators to Colombia as part of the probe.
The Secret Service so far has not been able to validate the allegations about El Salvador made in a report Thursday by KIRO-TV news in Seattle, King said. The station is part of the CBS-Cox media group.
"They have gone through the trip file, and spoke with some of the people who were on the trip, the supervisors, and so far it's nothing," King said. "And they are talking to the reporter and trying to find out who his sources are."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Lawyer: Autistic boy's teacher didn't call him 'bastard'
- World record holder for 'longest time to live with a bullet in the head' dies
- Guess who's coming to dinner? Navy family starts unique deployment ritual
- Attorney: Zimmerman's website raised more than $200,000
- Which dress will get you barred from this prom?
Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook
Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.
Leave a Comment:
tax money..yea.....whats next???
I agree. The Agency seems to be on top of it and doing all the housecleaning necessary. I don't see why Congress has to waste time, money and effort on whipping a dead horse when there is clearly many other things theey need to be focusing on. Just anothor excuse to make political hay.
This tells me, the SS didnt have anything on this, since they just implemented it. So why were those agents forced out? When they weren't breaking any rules?
It's a sad day in this country when we have to legislate morality... so many people with no respect for themselves or anyone else. And we wonder what is wrong with this country???
They had to have known some agents at least did horizontal surveillance when on field assignments -- what else did they think "wheels up, rings off" meant?
The Secret Service is getting off easy with these new rules. American military pilots have a "12 hour bottle-to-brief" alcohol cut-off point, which in practice means that they can't drink any alcohol 13-14 hours before taking off. This rule applies to the aircrew too.
The military can also specify off-limit establishments, discipline poor conduct, and charge "conduct unbecoming an officer" for officers who screw around or act unprofessionally, whether on duty or off.
This is a great idea. Now the SS can look in churches for threats to POTUS. After all - we all know that the bad guys don't hang out in bars and houses of ill repute.
This is a typical knee jerk over-reaction to a 'non-problem'. So the SS will be able to say that they researched all the churches prior to POTUS arrival, but they are banned from checking bars, dark alleys, or threat areas where undesirables hang out. For those who criticize this post - what do you think the purpose of the advance team is?
And the bozos posting here defend this stupidity... Perhaps we should also restrict the CIA and other intelligence agencies from talking with criminals and prostitutes. After all - bad guys are all squeeky clean...
Now no one will want the job working for the Secret Service. Way to go ! Government Cub Scouts.
Interested....they already have restricted the CIA, I think the Clintons did that.
And, in Afghanistan, our troops can't fire until fired on...so, if they shoot at you and miss, you can shoot.
Liberalism is truly a mental disorder.
will these new rules be broadened to include include embassy officials and military personnel working in a presidential detail overseas and if not how is this fair to the secret service personnel?
Texas - please don't post unless you know what you are talking about. The CIA is not restricted from meeting with undesirables - the Church Act was repealed under Reagan (and it was imposed under Ford in 1975 - a Republican).
Or do you think that the local church members helped find Bin Ladin?
And the military is not restricted from shooting first - or do you think that the stories about drones and aircraft launched kills are just lies? Or are the bad guys shooting at the sky randomly now?
From now on, these Secret Service men will obtain prostitutes in secret and enjoy their service.
This is Pigotry - government by pigs.
Limit drinking and visits of what, sex and whores. My taxes at work at its best. I want back my taxes and representation in a situati0on that does not represent me. Why should I continue to fund such prostitution of everything I believe to be Sacred. I have been lied to and want my money back.
Is there any reason why these rules were'nt already in effect?
Because Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II didn't think to do it?!
Obama's on the campaign trail with his secret service now ....
Girls get ready ....
You may not get paid ....
But get ready anyway .... "LOL"
This strory has run its course.... but I have to wonder why the much juicier story of the fall of Johnny Edwards, the liberals former poster boy, is getting little play! Maybe because it is about the liberal's poster boy and the old liberal media would like to see it just go away! Hmmm?
Aren't there a couple of much cheaper solutions to this problem?
1. More female agents assigned to these teams. While yes, women can get drunk and into trouble as well, as a rule we tend not to go seeking prostitutes and such, whether home or on foreign trips.
2. Better leadership on field assignments: Can't a Special Agent in Charge or whatever the correct title is know the disposition of his/her team even when they are off duty? Even sober agents, just going out to dinner near their hotel, in a dangerous country like Columbia, could be kidnapped for ransom or killed by drug cartels.
3. A 'battle buddy' system, partners, like the Army/Marines use, and police forces. Where you go, your partner does, and they know where you are and what you're doing at all times. Especially per my suggestion 1, coed teams can be assigned.
Let's use the current TV federal agent show, NCIS, as an example: Agent Gibbs sends Tony DiNozzo and Ziva David to Columbia on assignment. (A recent episode actually did this, by the way) Gibbs knows where Tony and Ziva are at all times. As well, Tony, were he so inclined, which he's not, would not 'go get his freak on' with Ziva as his partner.
If a TV show, and our military and police forces in real life can solve this easily and cheaply, why can't the Secret Service?
We do not need Congress wasting millions to micromanage this for politics, we just need some common sense changes
Tigers don't change their stripes.. A bunch of them were involved and it's the modus operanda and the culture of the Secret Service Agents that has shocked naive Americans. The same Americans who think Marijuana is a DANGEROUS DRUG. Eww, Aahhhhh, scary drug and it leads to being a drug addict... ewww, aahhh. It's time Americans actually did grow up and quit being so naive, especially the bible belt.
The Secret Service is aloof and cutting edge. If you don't think the agents have tried every drug, sampled prostitutes and broken numerous laws already, you're fooling yourself and YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT ALOOF AND YOU ARE NAIVE BY AMERICAN STANDARDS.
People can be with a prostitute and still be gentlemanly. People can drink and do drugs and still be President of the USA or Gold medalists at the Olympics. Grow up America, get a clue.
What is being done is to curb Secret Service behavior so it doesn't conflict with duty and give the country a black eye so to speak.
Our Congress are the kings of buying Prostitutes, what else is new.
We liberals now know that John Edwards is a poor excuse of a man that betrayed his country, party, wife and family. He will never again rise to become a future Democratic candidate for President of the United States.
We would like to say the same of our Republican friends that recently allowed the same kind of worm (make that a creepy lizard) to not only run, but hold first place, as their preferred candidate for the Presidency long after he committed far worse sins against his country, party, wife and family.
John Edwards, unlike the Newt, is not likely to be forgiven because of any religious conversion. That's between him and his God. John Edwards, unlike the Newt, is not only facing certain expulsion from his party, he is facing time in prison.
Democratic liberals, unlike Republican conservatives, make no apologies or excuses for the occasional scum that infiltrate our ranks. We will never welcome him back or push him as a reformed candidate worthy of becoming the next leader of the free world. We will never presume that the American electorate will be foolish enough to elect a known lizard or worm because we say so. Remember that the Newt is still the last man standing in your party against the the Corporate Vulture that even you can't stand. Yet, you expect the American people to embrace a candidate that you have publicly tried so hard to remove from from your ranks.
Good luck with that strategy. President Obama may have faced a battle with one of the early moderate candidates that you so eagerly dismissed. Instead, you forced this accomplished slippery and slimy corporate vulture (that disguised himself for so long as a sensible moderate) into a corner where he could no longer cloak himself. Your efforts have not only taken your party's Presidential hopes out of contention, but the very slim hope of retaining control of the House with your great pretenders of 2010.
Many of you may be too young to remember the Democratic landslide of 1964. Your party made the same mistake of pushing a right leaning Republican candidate to the far right. I expect some condemnation of fellow Democrats of that era for the following; Barry Goldwater's successful political career as the conservative Senior Senator of Arizona (well known for sensible compromise and sound reasoning) was transformed by the extreme right as a an uncompromising and hard nosed far right wing Presidential candidate that sacrificed his soul in hopes of becoming President. I sympathized with his ill health and lack of respect following his tremendous election loss. This patriotic American leader was seriously short-changed by his own party and his own aspirations.
I honestly feel the same about election 2000 candidate John McCain. His transformation since then has been nothing but shame for a senile and prideful old man that is a disgrace to the former hero of his country as both a brave warrior and congressional maverick
I have never had such illusions concerning Mitt Romney. The man has thrived on his natural good looks, wealthy family and strong political connections. He reminds me of a much more polished "Shrub" with a much more cynical purpose. I think that dim-witted G.W. actually believed some of the spiel he was ordered to recite.The many times he resorted to Bushisms were most likely the times when even he doubted the sincerity of the words placed in his mouth by his puppet masters.
Romney's numerous gaffs are the occasional glimpse of his soul. "Corporations are people too". " I love to fire people". " I'm not worried about poor people or the unemployed". His actions speak even louder than his words. His wealthy off-shore accounts shield him from the very income taxes we lessor folk must all pay to support the United States of America. His tremendous gain from such shenanigans becomes our burden that must be borne with our much weaker shoulders. Capital gains MUST be taxed at a much lower rate than earned income. His 20 million dollar yearly income by using money to make money is to be taxed at a much lower rate than the 50k income earned by the sweat of our brows and many hours of overtime spent away from our family and our children's most precious years. Why?
Because this handsome devil born with a silver spoon in his mouth and powerful political connections says so? I have never been an overtly religious man, but even the Bible tells us that we will know him by his actions and words. What do we know of Mitt Romney except his lifetime of actions and occasional slip of the tongue that betray his true thoughts?
Perhaps you know him personally and support the Liar and Thief. Pardon me when I vote against him in favor of our current Commander-in-Chief. President Obama wears a much darker skin than my family and myself. Yet his struggles and strong desire for the American dream most resemble mine and many everyday Americans in my community. Your man hasn't a clue. He thinks that privileged birthright and resulting wealth are his due.
Alcohol may only be consumed in moderate amounts while off-duty on a TDY (temporary duty) assignment, and alcohol use is prohibited within 10 hours of reporting or duty," the rules say.
That statement implies that perhaps some agents may have been drinking on the job before. Nothing like a drunk agent next to the President to save his life...I thought that those were only sketeches in comedy shows.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. Albert Einstein
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/reality.html#DOjpbyoo6b5sruk3.99
What about the booze guzzlin house and senate members? Shouldn't they be under the same rules.
Commonsense rules now being implemented? So I am assuming these rules were not enforced prior or largely being ignored if they had similar rules. So that tells me that such behavior was accepted within the agency, although may not have been the norm, which we don't know at the moment.
I disagree about Sullivan. He should be replaced. This wasn't one guy going rogue, but many. There is no way a group like that did this for the 1st time, and without notice. Again, no rules, acceptance of such behavior, and now the beginning of transparency.
Sorry, but I don't trust the SS to clean their own house. It wasn't THEM that brought up the second (earlier) incident involving prostitutes, but rather a 3rd party who was there with them. Left to their own devices, they will find as FEW problems as possible.
If nothing else, it's time for new top leadership at the Secret Service because those in charge obviously don't have the attention of the rank and file or haven't clearly communicated expectations.
Commonsense101 - LOL. Yes, the republicans never do anything wrong in this country do they? Nope, they are of the highest moral fiber in this country. They have never been involved in scandals, cheating on their wives, trying to cover it up with taxpayer money, sleeping with male pages (but against homosexuality), demonstrate that marriage is between a man and a woman (and another woman, and another woman), and many others. Get over it. The republicans are no different and it's sad that you can't see it.
Forgive me too, if I vote again for President Obama. I really don't want to see us go to war again over a lie of weapons of mass destruction.
Despite what the article says about his affiliation, any Congressman who claims that he's not a morality copy can't be a Republican.
@Peter Jacobs: Sorry, they can't refund your half a cent share. Will you take a penny?
When on assignment they should not be drinking at all. If they need a drink that badly then they have a lot more problems. Even when they are off duty, on an assignment such as being a presidential guard, they are never really off duty especially when out of the US.
Interesting that they have to follow US laws while abroad.
great Caesars ghost; they must issue rules to use your common sense;no drinking while armed, picking up girls in bars, and best of all no drinking in a hotel where the person you are on guard for is staying, next rule keep well shaved (males only), keep shoes shined and bath as often as necessary, and make sure you wash your hands after using bathroom; common sense must have left Washington .
Lady cat - They have on-duty time and off-duty time whether they are in the US or not. If they want to drink when they are off-duty that's none of our damn business. It they want to hire prostitutes while they are off-duty, that's none of our damn business. This IS nothing but Congress acting as the morality police - a masterpiece of irony if there ever was one. The president wasn't in the country, wasn't anywhere near the country. National security was never at risk. This has got to be one of the most overblown "scandels" in history - except maybe that principle and secretary getting fired over a kiss. The prude police are out in force.
It's my business when I paid for the ticket and the per diem. Swagger is what constantly gets the US in trouble.
What I find so funny in all this is, we are looking at the fallout of this scandal from the American point of view. I feel more sorry for the woman who started it all. I bet she's in hiding right now. She thought she was going to be cute and rat out the guy(s) who did this and not pay her. She didn't realize she would be cutting off the hand that feeds hundreds, if not thousands of other women, that do this, not only as a profession, but those who do this to put food in the mouths of their children. I bet this woman is hated (or hunted) by everyone of those women. And all you who talk about about this stuff like you know what it's like, you don't. Unless you've "been there, done that". Our morals and ethics in the US are high, yes... but, when your in places outside the US, South and Central America, Italy, Spain, Africa, and many more, the people prey on Americans because they know they have money. They know they want to get those American Dollars because they are worth much more to them than their own currency. I hate to say it but men are men, no matter where they are in the world. Those who take off their wedding bands in a foreign country, are doing the same things at home, just probably a bit more secretive. There is just a certain percentage of men who think from below the belt, then above. But, in the military I served, I saw women out looking for the same thing, from a male prostitute, so it's not just a "male" issue.
I've been out of the military for a long time now, so I would think things have changed. For the most part, it appears the change is in the US, not the nations around the world, where it seems it's still the same old song and dance. They will be able to enforce the laws about drinking before service, because there are ways we check for it. But, I doubt very seriously they will be able to do anything about sexual prowessness. They've been trying to do that for hundreds of years and even in the U.S... we still have ho houses.
Why is our government always only reactionary? I would think we'd have smarter people at the top.
Sad when you have to treat grown men like children. It seems to be a systemic problem inside the Secret Service, if not also the rest of the Dept. Homeland Security. An outside investigation and house cleaning seems reasonable. They may work for the president but we pay them.
You can't legislate "morality". You either are a scum bag or not a scum bag!
All this is for 'show' and they will be doing the party thing on our dime next week....nothing changes in BIG GOV'T except more laws for us...........
I @!$%#in hate people......and I put my life on the line.....go figure
If you hate people so much, maybe you should consider institutionalizing yourself. You might be doing yourself and all of us a favor.
Sounds to me if you @!$%#in hate people, then maybe the time for you to take matters into your own hands and find the bright light at the end of the tunnel... You do have that choice you know.
So we can kidnap people and send them to black site prisons outside the US so we can torture them and avoid US law but sleeping with a prostitiute outside the US is a no-no. Makes perfect sense.
Does everyone think this is new ,it has been going on for years.
JFK is probably turning cartwheels over at Arlington...hahaha
Of course it has been going on for years. As long as you have "macho" organizations like the military and paramilitary secret service, you will get this kind of behavior. There is nothing new, or surprising, in it. So torture so more folks and claim this is an "aberration". Not likely.
No, it's not new. We've had a bunch of whoring men around for a long time. Why do you think there is such a problem with STDs in this country? And then they come home and want to share with their wives. Such a bunch of nice guys...
Pardon me sweetheart, but there is no shortage of honey's spreading their nectar in neighboring hives. For every John, there must be a collection of hookers. They don't call it the world's oldest profession out of sympathy for prostitutes. I seem to remember my earliest best chance of a sexual experience with the fairer sex involved the minimum of PAYING for dinner and a night on the town. Can't ever remember a time when my male friends bragged of an attractive female spending a week's wages to get in his pants. Seems the biggest difference between high priced prostitutes and their much more innocent little sisters is only the price of admission.
Shouldn't those new rules, have already been part of the Secret Service training since they were first started and those members, should just be using, discipline, dedication and pride and honor, that would be common sense and that should be enough, of how to behave.............
They shouldn't have to put "rules" like this in place in a high-level government organization like this. These are "high school" rules and these dick-heads were simply idiots. I hope they enjoyed their wild parties while they lasted... they can think about how much fun they had while they are standing in the unemployment lines! Good riddance!
Not every "no-no" can be in the rules, or they'd spend all their time learning rules and no time doing their job. As descrs mentions, at some point you have to trust in the judgement of people, especially the ones who protect the President of the United States. Too bad that trust isn't always justified.
The real problem is that no takes Obama seriously.
Obama is a F'n Joke
The majority of Americans take President Obama seriously. The minority (those who lost the election in 2008) can't live a day without criticizing.
Get ready to loose again in November.
Obama, bring on brotha SAMUEL L. JACKSON to do the job!
Gladly, of course you were saying the same thing 2010 and see where that got you..
Obama isn't the real problem, its whiners and complainers (such as you) that are the problem.
REALLY? Heavy drinking and foreign guests now prohibited? and why wasn't this in place BEFORE? These people are not on a college field trip, these are SECRET, I say again SECRET agents on a mission, they should be sequestered for the duration of their mission. Am sorry to think these were special people of our government branch.
Just because they're in the Secret Service doesn't mean that they themselves are "secret." They're not black ops.
Am I the only one that realizes that when secret service agents are in a foreign country they're the "foreign nationals"? The other people are just citizens.
Chaperones for the palace guards?
We may as well hire Swiss mercenaries, like Vatican has done for centuries. These SS men have made a laughing stock of themselves, and the USA.
Discipline: the price of having security clearance or doing an important job. I doubt anybody thinks this is especially unreasonable in the secret service.
It is a
"I'm not into being a morality cop......."
I think Representative King's statement pretty much sums it up with what is wrong with our country, and it's leaders". We refuse to take moral positions..only practical ones. If you follow that line of reasoning far enough, then you allow murderers to go free, if they are good at their jobs.
Those officials (secret service and military) represent the U.S. government at the highest levels. They are an embarrassment to us and the world.
"Leaders" taking moral positions is what got us the current crop of tea-publican presidential candidates. I don't care if the Secret Service agents pick up prostitutes or not, as long as there are no security consequences. Since preventing those consequences isn't possible, then the new regulations are quite appropriate.
bbieker - Taking moral positions is NOT the job of the government. Morality is the purview of society, not the government. Morality, by its nature is relativistic and individualistic - we all draw our moral lines in different places. Therefore, it is beyond the legitimate scope of government to define or impose morality. When society, by convention and consensus, defines moral absolutes (such as deeming murder to be an absolute moral wrong) then government codifies those absolutes in law. The society then holds that those among us not abiding by those absolutes (ie. murdering someone) are engaging in aberrant behavior that the government may then control through the imposition of punishment on the behalf of the society. Therefore your line of reasoning that allowing secret service agents to drink and hire prostitutes leads to the freeing of murderers is neither linear nor reasonable.
Secret Service recruiting is going to take a hit after the Feds clamp down on this stuff... Lots of huge egos going to have to find other work...
What a joke this thing is!
Yes Chris, one of the details of having a security clearance is to report ALL foreign contact. Subject to fine and jail time. But the life if the President is not important enough to enforce these laws. Slap on the hand and collect your retirement. This incident is just another state department joke like the protection of classified information,
Do you think the JUVENILES who didn't want to pay the asking price now regret how CHEAP they were and instead, they ruined it for EVERYONE for the years (decades) to come? That'e One Foolish Idea!
At least it didn't have anything to do with President Obama, or ANYONE in his administration.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
So, they still can get hookers since prostitution is not a federal law.
Good, now maybe ICE, BP, CBP, etc will make these changes as well for their agents on tax-payer funded details. Include underage minors on the list too.
The job these guys do and the hours they must spend on watch entitles them to let their hair down once in a while. The new rules sound like overkill to me. They can't even have fun anymore!
@feedotter -
You may not think it's so "fun" if they were guarding your loved ones - hung over and warn out from a full night of mingling with the locals. There's a time and a place . . . and clearly these men couldn't figure that out!
I find it extremely ironic that congress (the same people who party all night when on their junkets) are condemning the SS for this. Why don't they apply the same rules for themselves? But then McCain and all the other party animals would not be able to screw around all night when on the road.
If you're supposed to be protecting the President of ANY country, that's what you're supposed to do when you're sent overseas, not dick around as these guys did.
I'm willing to bet that these guys thought nothing would happen because they thought no one would believe a prostitute.
The new rules are reasonable without being overkill. The restriction on foreign visitors is quite appropriate because many of the agents will have classified materials (deployment plans, for instance) in their rooms. The 10 hour alcohol-free period isn't much different than what we expect commercial pilots to follow.
This whole debacle is a prime example of how government employees view their jobs......as a taxpayer funded vacation any time they have to go somewhere for "business".
Government employees have been spoiled, coddled and allowed to misbehave for too long, without any serious repercusstions or accountability for their actions.
Secret Service Agents are suppose to be held to a higher level of integrity and ethical behavior than others, and here they are taking off their rings and having adulterous relationships while on the taxpayer dime, not to mention the fact that there shouldn't be any consumption of alcoholic beverages by them when they are on these trips.
A truly piss poor representation of our federal government. They and all who enabled this behavior should be fired.
Bans?
Is the problem really with banning certain behaviors which should never had occurred in the first place? Or is it the character of those involved? Do they not mirror their society? And now, there must be bans where there were none before. Interesting.
Good evening.
Silly Secret Service agents. Don't they know that whores drugs and assorted debauchery are for the rank of Senator and above. No peasants allowed to partake. =(
Why is it such a shocker that secret service men committed adultery? Have we not seen bill and monica lewinsky? state senators and the such do the same things? What? secret service men are so elite they cannot do it? Why is this such a surprise? There are Men and women around the world who do this everyday, in the streets even. This type of news is like redundant trash that really is not worth a second look.
we don't actually know if these men are married. I think its less a question of committing adultery as putting national security at risk above personal pleasures. These men are there to protect the President, not to party with strippers or prostitutes. While it may be a sign of poor moral character, its more the fact that it was on the job, on our money. These people are in positions of having quite a bit of secret knowledge (hence the name) and if they are stupid enough to get drunk and hire prostitutes while on the duty of protecting the most important man in our government (no matter who it is), they should not only be fired, but investigated for possible leaks. Adultery (which it may not even be) is really not the point, and people focusing on that need to re-evaluate the story and understand the full consequences of the actions of these men.
J.Edgar Hoover turned over in his grave & started to laugh, common sense rules have to be in writing for these "Secret Service" knuckle heads?
I agree in what they're doing....addressing the rules out in public. As a tax
payer I want to know what measures are being taken. This should be common sense
but, if the rules have to be reiterated (and in public) so be it
Oh good lord............These men and women put their lives on the line every single day for these phony baloney politicians. I say let them go at it, even death row criminals get their choice of last meal!
The Knucklehead Secret Service agents didn't stop a bullet from going into the body of Pres. Ronald Reagan & James Brady's head. Matter of fact the agents allowed an unscreened group to stand within 15 feet of Pres. Reagan at the time of the shooting. Oh, & Pres. Lincoln's Secret Service agents were on break when he was shot in the head. Made me sick to my stomach when I saw Regan & Brady get shot on TV - higher standards, indeed.