Secret Service Scandal
Options
fbmandy55
Posts: 5,263 Member
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/secret-service-scandal-broadens-more-military-personnel-might-have-been-involved-in-misconduct/2012/04/17/gIQA9EouNT_story.html
11 Secret Service members and at least 10 members of the Armed Forces (ranging from a team of Army Special OPs, Marines, Navy and Airforce) are believed to have been involved with up to 21 women from this "club". I watched the news with my dad last night, who is as right-wing as they get, and was pleasantly surprised to hear him say, "who cares, they were off the clock.The president wasn't even there yet!" Personally, I have no issue with prostitution. If both parties are willing it shouldn't be any other person's business. As my dad said, "let their wives deal with them."
Do you believe this is a legit scandal or just another attention getter from the media? Do you approve of the actions of these men or not?
11 Secret Service members and at least 10 members of the Armed Forces (ranging from a team of Army Special OPs, Marines, Navy and Airforce) are believed to have been involved with up to 21 women from this "club". I watched the news with my dad last night, who is as right-wing as they get, and was pleasantly surprised to hear him say, "who cares, they were off the clock.The president wasn't even there yet!" Personally, I have no issue with prostitution. If both parties are willing it shouldn't be any other person's business. As my dad said, "let their wives deal with them."
Do you believe this is a legit scandal or just another attention getter from the media? Do you approve of the actions of these men or not?
0
Replies
-
I don't have an issue with what they did, if they were off the clock. But one news report said they were all in the club flashing credentials, bragging they were protecting the president etc. When you are representing our country you should have behave appropriately. All service members know this and they should abide by it. If they were off the clock and they were the "advance"team - the president wasn't there yet - have fun. But to be blatant and obnoxious about what they were doing and what their job is was wrong. from what I understand presidential secret service agents are not supposed to put theirselves in a position that might compromise security of the country and of the president.0
-
I have an issue with it. These were'nt Shriners attending a conference in Podunk, Iowa. These were Secret Service hired to protect the President. They are, and should be, held to a higher standard.
I do dissaprove and, whether or not it is just another attention getter for the media, these guys, I assure you, were breaking the law and guidelines associated with there jobs.
I have another newsflash, too; chances are not all of these men were single.0 -
i'm not making a moral judgement on the men, that is a whole 'nother subject. I agree they used poor judgement and that why I said they put themselves in a position that could compromise security and the president. If they just went to the strip club and behaved as normal people then again, I don't have an issue. From what I understand they were obnoxious and flaunted their position and who they are, putting security and the president at risk. that is what is wrong.0
-
i'm not making a moral judgement on the men, that is a whole 'nother subject. I agree they used poor judgement and that why I said they put themselves in a position that could compromise security and the president. If they just went to the strip club and behaved as normal people then again, I don't have an issue. From what I understand they were obnoxious and flaunted their position and who they are, putting security and the president at risk. that is what is wrong.
I would be wiling to bet that, as members of the Secret Service in a Foreign country, hanging out in Strip Clubs and/or soliciting prostitutes is against policy. And...when they signed on they signed a contract/policy acknowledging that they were aware of these policies/guidelines. I am not addressing their morality either.0 -
i'm not making a moral judgement on the men, that is a whole 'nother subject. I agree they used poor judgement and that why I said they put themselves in a position that could compromise security and the president. If they just went to the strip club and behaved as normal people then again, I don't have an issue. From what I understand they were obnoxious and flaunted their position and who they are, putting security and the president at risk. that is what is wrong.
I would be wiling to bet that, as members of the Secret Service in a Foreign country, hanging out in Strip Clubs and/or soliciting prostitutes is against policy. And...when they signed on they signed a contract/policy acknowledging that they were aware of these policies/guidelines. I am not addressing their morality either.
Ok, besides the Secret Service. What is your opinion on the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force men involved. I personally know a few men who got something on the side while deployed or found love/wives while deployed? This may be different as I know the Army men were a special Ops team but still....0 -
They have an oath they needed to take upon being hired. I do not know what that oath states but I am sure that these actions have violated that oath. When I worked for the US Senate, due to the office I worked in the only active form of citizenship I could participate in was voting. I was not allowed to express my opinions on anything that the Senate could address at work, I could not peacefully assemble in a protest anywhere, and I couldn't contact any elected official about my view on any issue. I had to keep a zipped lip at work and could not be a part of any protests, picketing, etc. That is what I signed up for and at times it sucked having to zip my lip (like with the Patriot Act or the expansion of O'Hare Airport) but that's what I did. The same with the secret service, they are always on duty, even when they aren't.0
-
Ok, besides the Secret Service. What is your opinion on the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force men involved. I personally know a few men who got something on the side while deployed or found love/wives while deployed? This may be different as I know the Army men were a special Ops team but still....
Spent 18 months in Okinawa in 1974 and 1975. Frequented many "houses" in those days. I was single, young and that was all there was available. It didn't make it right, though. If I knew then, what I know now, I would found something else to keep me busy. Those girls were exploited. I'm not proud of myself.0 -
I have an issue with them flaunting their position as SS agents. I have no issue with te prostitution part at all. It's legal where they were. The media, however, is focused solely on the prostitution part and not a bit on whether or not they compromised security. If they didn't compromise security then there's nothing wrong with it.
I saw some woman on the news this morning saying that those women could have been spies or part of a drug cartel. Yea? So could the bartender or waitress or hotel maid. But she's not at all upset that they chatted with a waitress only that they paid for sex. If these women were a bunch of school teachers they met and hung out with and no sex was involved it wouldn't have been an issue at all. But Americans are extremely uptight about sex so now it becomes a problem.0 -
My main concern is how much their actions could have compromised the safety of sensitive information, or the life of the president itself. As much as I dislike his policies, I would not want to see him assassinated in a foreign country because his security force wanted some hot action.
The females who were hired weren't screened, security cleared, background checked or anything else. When those buffoons were in the club flaunting their credentials, anyone could have seen that opportunity and seized it, sent in anyone to see what they could see.
I know their behavior violates the code of conduct that their profession demands. For that, they ought to lose their jobs.
As to the media response, I'm surprised they are covering this information in an election year. Usually they do everything and anything they can to ignore democrat-damaging information.0 -
I have an issue with them flaunting their position as SS agents. I have no issue with te prostitution part at all. It's legal where they were. The media, however, is focused solely on the prostitution part and not a bit on whether or not they compromised security. If they didn't compromise security then there's nothing wrong with it.
I saw some woman on the news this morning saying that those women could have been spies or part of a drug cartel. Yea? So could the bartender or waitress or hotel maid. But she's not at all upset that they chatted with a waitress only that they paid for sex. If these women were a bunch of school teachers they met and hung out with and no sex was involved it wouldn't have been an issue at all. But Americans are extremely uptight about sex so now it becomes a problem.
:drinker:0 -
As to the media response, I'm surprised they are covering this information in an election year. Usually they do everything and anything they can to ignore democrat-damaging information.
Well most of the coverage I have seen, involved Republicans ccommenting against it. So this apparently is their golden ticket! gotta love that 2 party system.0 -
I do not care what a person does with their own time. But you cannot jeopordize national security like that! FFS, you figured Secret Service and Special Ops guys would know how to be a little more discreet if they wanted some poon.0
-
As to the media response, I'm surprised they are covering this information in an election year. Usually they do everything and anything they can to ignore democrat-damaging information.
Well most of the coverage I have seen, involved Republicans ccommenting against it. So this apparently is their golden ticket! gotta love that 2 party system.
I would have expected that. And Fox News is surely covering it the most. But where I live, (So Cal) all the network news are also all over it. And they are definitely left-leaning. They don't even feign balanced coverage.
I was also surprised at how much attention they are giving to "Swillary". For the record, I do NOT like Hillary. But when I heard she got "caught" drinking a beer in a bar, I thought........and...........so what? That one seems dumb to me. If not for the secret service thing happeneing simultaneously, I doubt that would've gotten much play.0 -
The secret service and military special ops aren't Dem/Rep. It's only "damaging" because that's the way Fox is portraying it. I haven't seen any other news organization try to make it into Obama's fault.0
-
The secret service and military special ops aren't Dem/Rep. It's only "damaging" because that's the way Fox is portraying it. I haven't seen any other news organization try to make it into Obama's fault.
I haven't seen anyone, including Fox try to pin in on Obama, I just think Republicans are in such an upraor about it BECAUSE it is an election year.
The Hilary thing was great too. I dislike her but seeing pics of her dancing and downing beer gave her more of a human appeal to me.0
