More Secret Service sexcapades coming to light

posted at 12:41 pm on April 27, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

So much for the sex scandal involving Secret Service agents and supervisors in Cartagena, Colombia being an “isolated incident.” Just days after administration officials told Congress that they have no indications of a pattern of misbehavior, CBS News now says that there are at least four incidents over 12 years involving Secret Service details and sex workers — including two Bill Clinton trips:

The Secret Service is looking into that report and some others, including accusations that Secret Service personnel traveling in 2009 with former President Clinton partied at strip clubs on a visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina, and that agents and White House staffers went to a Moscow night club known for its sexually charged atmosphere prior to Mr. Clinton’s trip to Russia in 2000.

The new allegations come soon after a hearing Wednesday in which senators were assured that the Colombia scandal was an isolated incident.

“That’s why we need thorough investigation not just by the White House, not just by DHS (Department of Homeland Security), but by Congress; that’s part of our oversight responsibilities,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. “It’s an obligation we owe the American people.

Secret Service spokesman Edwin Donovan said the agency was taking a preliminary look into the new reports. “Any information brought to our attention that can be assessed as credible will be followed up on in an appropriate manner,” he said in a statement.

This is now getting to the point of becoming a competence crisis for the White House.  The first reports of the Cartagena scandal didn’t reach that level, as few would have blamed Barack Obama for the misdeeds of a few agents.  However, the White House rushed to give Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan a public vote of confidence, and then rushed to Capitol Hill to insist that they had no evidence of further scandals in the agency.  It took CBS and other media outlets just days to prove them wrong, and now it looks as though the problems go back for twelve years and possibly more.  How could the people in charge have vouched for the agency’s performance so publicly and be so wrong?

It looks very much like the White House did an incompetent job of investigating the Secret Service, and that raises questions about its investigation of White House staff.  They gave themselves the same clean bill of health they gave the Secret Service, after all.  Congress will now have to put its own investigators into this scandal, and it may well end up blowing up in Obama’s face after all.  They will probably regret the “heckuva job, Sully” moment.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Bush is at fault!

KOOLAID2 on April 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

JugEars never hired these guys!

KOOLAID2 on April 27, 2012 at 12:44 PM

that there are at least four incidents over 12 years involving Secret Service details and sex workers — including two Bill Clinton trips:

Imagine that……

ted c on April 27, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Harry Reid wants more women!

KOOLAID2 on April 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Not surprising. When one’s boss is more or less a screw-off, there’s a lot of temptation to go do some monkey business of one’s own.

MelonCollie on April 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

The last thing the administration wants right now is to fire political appointees -obviously. So the rush to defend them is naturally, politically motivated.

It also displays a distinct lack of honor and integrity.

BKeyser on April 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM

I’m guessing that SS Agents behaved themselves during the Bush years?
:O

burrata on April 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Sheeesh..what part of Secret (as in Secret Service) do these officers not understand?

Then…what ever happened to unimpeachable standards of personal conduct as a requirement to enter the Secret Service and more importantly to become part, any part, of the Presidential Protection Detail?

Then…trying to expand this “probe” back to the early days of the Bush Administration, perchance to the days of the Clinton Administration, does anyone other than I get the idea that at some point we are going to be told that is is unfortunate, reprehensible conduct, but Bush and Clinton’s secret service details did it too…so what’s the big deal, anyway?

coldwarrior on April 27, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Distract and blame everyone.

upinak on April 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

You know where this is going to go, right?

“Former Secret Service Agent outs former President Clinton in 8-year sexfest; SS tasked to provide ‘silence, sex and security..in that order’”

BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Who would have thought that slick-Willy would leave some prostitutes for his entourage?

Valkyriepundit on April 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

What kind of idiot would believe the incident in Colombia was isolated?

forest on April 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

I bet they were squeaky clean when W was in office…

WH has got to be covering for their folks, we do need an outside investigation into their house as well…

cmsinaz on April 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Is there any truth to the rumor that Sandra Fluke is trying to get a job with the secret service now?

wildcat72 on April 27, 2012 at 12:51 PM

It was Woodrow Wilson’s Secret Service detail that got the ball rolling on using international hookers.

portlandon on April 27, 2012 at 12:52 PM

portlandon on April 27, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Very progressive…very progressive, indeed.

coldwarrior on April 27, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Was anyone at the White House involved?

THAT is the question.

PappyD61 on April 27, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Shocking.

A group of men, away from home, going to strip clubs and hiring escorts.

I am sure this is the first time in the history of the world this has ever happened.

Who could have seen this coming? Er, except for any healthy hetero male.

HeatSeeker2011 on April 27, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Harry Reid wants more women!

KOOLAID2 on April 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Harry likes his women members hot.

Drained Brain on April 27, 2012 at 12:54 PM

April 26th, SHINY OBJECT re-elect machine orders to Media.

…..focus on the Secret Service not the GDP numbers or Europe or Iran or the Muslim Brotherhood ties to the White House.

wait, there’s an email coming for April 27th so we can see that days’ “shiny object”.

PappyD61 on April 27, 2012 at 12:55 PM

…..oh wait on the dates..

..oh, nevermind the stories change but they are all still shiny objects.

just change the date on the email to the media.

PappyD61 on April 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM

The LSM is really hoping people are going to be distracted by sex scandals.

How does this effect the average American?

Dr Evil on April 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM

They will probably regret the “heckuva job, Sully” moment.

Um.. Wouldn’t that be a “heckuva job, Brownie” moment?

Harbingeing on April 27, 2012 at 1:00 PM

CBS News: Just as long as it stops Obama from looking bad. That’s what matters.

Moesart on April 27, 2012 at 1:01 PM

We need more gay men and female SS agents. Throw in a couple of Trannies and I think we’ve got potentially the most ethical SS detail in history.

rickyricardo on April 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM

How could the people in charge have vouched for the agency’s performance so publicly and be so wrong?

Because, the agency keeps the lid on “the people in charge” and their escapades only if the people in charge keep the lid on the agency’s escapades, no?

ted c on April 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM

CBS News: Just as long as it stops Obama from looking bad. That’s what matters.

Moesart on April 27, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Bingo, CBS won’t stop digging until they can say “everybody does it”.

rickyricardo on April 27, 2012 at 1:03 PM

The question is this, was Bill Clinton with the agents at the time? :)

michaelo on April 27, 2012 at 1:03 PM

I’m finding it very hard to get worked up over this. Unlike the Cartagena incident, these newer reports seem to involve just going to strip clubs. It’s hardly shocking that a bunch of guys on an overseas trip would do that.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 1:04 PM

An agent’s personal sexual habits have NOTHING to do with his job.

If this so-called “scandal” goes back 12 years, as Ed postulates – then that is PROOF enough that I’m right on this since, NO President has been killed or harm in the last 12 years.

But – I’ll tell ya this – this “witch hunt” over people’s personal sexual habits WILL distract the USSS enough from its mission of protecting the President and that, could lead to his safety being compromised.

Of course – when that happens – Ed won’t blame his own “voyeuristic” tendencies in hyping this story – he’ll blame sex for the problem.

Good Show!

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM

“Former Secret Service Agent outs former President Clinton in 8-year sexfest; SS tasked to provide ‘silence, sex and security..in that order’”

So 3 out of 4 incidents were during a Dem’s watch. What about the 4th?
I believe if any of these incidents were during W’s watch, those are the only others we would hear about.

askwhatif on April 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM

We need more gay men and female SS agents. Throw in a couple of Trannies and I think we’ve got potentially the most ethical SS detail in history.

rickyricardo on April 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Qaddafi’s team may still be available.

BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 1:08 PM

What kind of idiot would believe the incident in Colombia was isolated?

forest on April 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

The same idiots who put credibility in the idea that the White House can launch a full investigation of its own staff and exonerate everybody within 72 hours.

Happy Nomad on April 27, 2012 at 1:10 PM

The question is this, was Bill Clinton with the agents at the time? :)

michaelo on April 27, 2012 at 1:03 PM

He was the guy with the folded dollar bill perched on his forehead.

Aviator on April 27, 2012 at 1:12 PM

It’s hardly shocking that a bunch of guys on an overseas trip would do that.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Except that this isn’t a bunch of guys on a business trip. It is Secret Service agents who are expected to be able to be back on duty very quickly. How do you do your job as an agent when you are hung over and tired from a night of partying with prostitutes?

Happy Nomad on April 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

An agent’s personal sexual habits have NOTHING to do with his job.

Actually it does. Those agents hold security clearances. Moral inturpitude is cause for revoking that clearance, specifically for reasons of blackmail or “pillow-talk”.

BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM

It was Woodrow Wilson’s Secret Service detail that got the ball rolling on using international hookers.

portlandon on April 27, 2012 at 12:52 PM

It is only a matter of time before faux historian Doris Kerns Godwin is out on MSNBC discussing the Secret Service orgies that took place when Jefferson was in office.

Happy Nomad on April 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Stop it stop it stop it.

Dr. Manhattan on April 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Quick . . . to the fainting couch!

brak on April 27, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I’m guessing that SS Agents behaved themselves during the Bush years?
:O

burrata on April 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Maybe … maybe not

But I am willing to bet they were a LOT more circumspect in their behavior during the Bush years.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 1:17 PM

How do you do your job as an agent when you are hung over and tired from a night of partying with prostitutes?

Happy Nomad on April 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Probably poorly.

I recall when Gdub had that reporter chuck his size 10′s at his head during that presser about 6 years back. Do you remember seeing the SS agent come in through the door? Dude looked like he was dragging, if you ask me. Now, that’s one example, but I thought that as soon as some dude stood up in front of the POTUS and even looked crosseyed, let alone reached for his shoes, that the SS was supposed to be stomping the bejeebus out of him before he cocked his arm.

ted c on April 27, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Are people just naive or is this all feigned?

Dr. Manhattan on April 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM

The question is this, was Bill Clinton with the agents at the time? :)

my exact thoughts. He was probably leading the group

gerrym51 on April 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM

A comment to the folks who think this is a “distraction”.

Bad media coverage is ALWAYS bad news for the folks under the microscope. It makes the media school of piranhas hungry for MORE!

So suddenly, Sharyl Atkinson may have competition from other networks looking into ‘Fast and Furious’ …

And some Secret Service agents may want some sympathetic coverage of their side of the story … in return for blowing the whistle on White House staffers who were engaged in the SAME hijinks …

Never complain about the opponent getting bad (from their point of view) coverage. 99% of the time, it works to your advantage.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 1:21 PM

“Get my back” subliminal Obama 2012 slogan.

However, watch your backs.

Schadenfreude on April 27, 2012 at 1:23 PM

It looks very much like the White House did an incompetent job of investigating the Secret Service, and that raises questions about its investigation of White House staff.

Exactly.

Was anyone at the White House involved?

THAT is the question.

PappyD61 on April 27, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Even if they only witnessed the antics in Colombia, they are involved. Failure to report. Who was there? When were they there?

I have lost faith in congress to do anything about this. They have an even more despicable crime to pursue in Fast and Furious, yet they sit on their fat asses and leave Eric Holder in place.

One of Holder’s cronies is leaving to take a nice cushy teaching job. He’s just walking away scott free. IT IS DISGUSTING!

Our government is out of control and refuses to police itself.

dogsoldier on April 27, 2012 at 1:23 PM

But I am willing to bet they were a LOT more circumspect in their behavior during the Bush years.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 1:17 PM

True,
if it happened during 41′s and 43′s years,
the media would have told us about it by now !

burrata on April 27, 2012 at 1:26 PM

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 1:21 PM

In the meanwhile Boehner opposes Issa.

Schadenfreude on April 27, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Are people just naive or is this all feigned?

Dr. Manhattan on April 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Hard to tell

Are you just looking to peddle more moral equivalence or do you have a vested interest in downplaying these stories?

Here is a change up for you since you say you know Secret Service personnel.

Do they have a code of ethical behavior as part of the terms of employment?

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 1:27 PM

The Motto of the Secret Service “Worthy of Trust and Confidence.”

These extra-curricular activities invoke neither.

coldwarrior on April 27, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Schadenfreude on April 27, 2012 at 1:27 PM

That one has always been bothersome.

a capella on April 27, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Schadenfreude on April 27, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Benefit of a doubt outlook – Boehner wants everything coordinated through Romney’s campaign, including timing of making Holder a headline.

Cynical view – Boehner does not have the stones to be Speaker of the House. In which case, if Romney wins big and the Republicans hold the House and win the Senate – don’t be surprised by new leaders in both houses.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 1:35 PM

The Motto of the Secret Service “Worthy of Trust and Confidence.”

coldwarrior on April 27, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Perhaps they should adopt Marion Barry’s signature line- Bitch set me up!

Happy Nomad on April 27, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Independent investigation called for.

Benefit of a doubt outlook – Boehner wants everything coordinated through Romney’s campaign, including timing of making Holder a headline.

Cynical view – Boehner does not have the stones to be Speaker of the House. In which case, if Romney wins big and the Republicans hold the House and win the Senate – don’t be surprised by new leaders in both houses.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 1:35 PM

I disagree with the coordination. They should do what is right, not what is politically expedient – this is what the left’s purvue is.

On the latter I agree. Throw most all the Congress bums out, from the left to the right. They are excrement, all around.

Schadenfreude on April 27, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Are people just naive or is this all feigned?

Dr. Manhattan on April 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Are dems just as naive or are they feigning the following?

War on Women!

Ryan wants to throw grannie off the cliff.

And anything Debbie Downer has ever said.

BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 1:46 PM

An agent’s personal sexual habits have NOTHING to do with his job.
Actually it does. Those agents hold security clearances.
BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM

If the agents are leaving classified information-such as itineraries-lying around where people without clearance-such as prostitutes- can see it, they are violating their security clearances and failing at their jobs.

talkingpoints on April 27, 2012 at 1:58 PM

It is Secret Service agents who are expected to be able to be back on duty very quickly. How do you do your job as an agent when you are hung over and tired from a night of partying with prostitutes?

Happy Nomad on April 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

These incidents had nothing to do with the president’s physical safety. They occurred when the president was not even in the country. Assuming, as it appears, that the men were off duty and that drinking alcohol and attending a strip club are legal in these countries, I don’t see a problem.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Perhaps they should adopt Marion Barry’s signature line- Bitch set me up!

Happy Nomad on April 27, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Barry’s team is working to modify this phrase. I expect to see video of the new version sometime in the near future.

“[Asian/Philipino] bitch set me up”

BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 2:02 PM

I think we’re better off letting the MSM run with this ball. Obviously, there aren’t that many incidents if you need to go all the way back to Clinton’s trips.

blink on April 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Just to point out, the Clinton trips exposed in the report were not from his time in office. They were from trips when he was ex-President (note one from 2009).

That said, I have no doubts that if you go back to Clinton’s years in office, you will find numerous such incidents also.

First thing I thought when I saw these were trips with Clinton was that he was probably the one leading the party complete with lamp shade on his head and a dollar bill sticking out of his waistband.

I also doubt these escapades stopped during GWB’s tenure. The SS may have been keeping the trips a bit more on the down-low, but I doubt they stopped altogether.

gravityman on April 27, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Well if they FIRE a boat-load of Secret Service it will make many in the military happy !!

Guaranteed…there is plenty of people soon to be leaving the downsized military looking for jobs. Many will apply to enroll in the “Secret Service ” academy to fill the new vacancies…

BigSven on April 27, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Assuming, as it appears, that the men were off duty and that drinking alcohol and attending a strip club are legal in these countries, I don’t see a problem.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Those lacking experience with modern LEO and senior corporate positions never do.

They are traveling on the taxpayer’s money and they are very likely to have a code of ethical behavior making this a dismissable offense – this is a problem.

Of course, an unwavering committment to moral equivalence also blinds some people on ethical issues as well.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 2:08 PM

When does Fast and Furious get the attention that it deserves..?

d1carter on April 27, 2012 at 2:08 PM

These incidents had nothing to do with the president’s physical safety. They occurred when the president was not even in the country. Assuming, as it appears, that the men were off duty and that drinking alcohol and attending a strip club are legal in these countries, I don’t see a problem.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Of course they do. Bodyguards, with access to schedule and timing information putting themselves in a compromising position? You fail to see a problem?

a capella on April 27, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Ok! When are they going to just look for what goes on on 14th st in DC. No need to go over seas. I remember back in the 1980′s I was a car salesman for a GM Dealer and went for training in VA. I was also in the National Guard. Government officials were so common that I could just use my National Guard ID to get in any where. Some one should check into it.

jpcpt03 on April 27, 2012 at 2:12 PM

When does Fast and Furious get the attention that it deserves..?

d1carter on April 27, 2012 at 2:08 PM

As I said above (partial excerpt below)

A comment to the folks who think this is a “distraction”.

Bad media coverage is ALWAYS bad news for the folks under the microscope. It makes the media school of piranhas hungry for MORE!

So suddenly, Sharyl Atkinson may have competition from other networks looking into ‘Fast and Furious’ …

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Um, if the President goes into a strip club, don’t his bodyguards pretty much HAVE to go in with him?

logis on April 27, 2012 at 2:17 PM

If the agents are leaving classified information-such as itineraries-lying around where people without clearance-such as prostitutes- can see it, they are violating their security clearances and failing at their jobs.

talkingpoints on April 27, 2012 at 1:58 PM

If they are leaving classified information lying around their rooms, they are breaching security and should be fired even if they are not with a prostitute — a hotel maid could see it. That is separate from the question of whether just drinking and going to a strip club while off duty is beyond the pale.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 2:17 PM

The question is “Did they do this stuff when Bush was Pres?”

Otherwise it may be that they were just checking out the goods for Clinton or Obama.

KenInIL on April 27, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Actually it does. Those agents hold security clearances. Moral inturpitude is cause for revoking that clearance, specifically for reasons of blackmail or “pillow-talk”.

BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Right – because everyone knows that USSS agents don’t “pillow-talk” their wives. They don’t “pillow-talk” their girlfriends. And – they don’t “pillow-talk” their same sex boyfriends!

They only PILLOW TALK Hookers! LOL at your foolishness.

I was attached to the White House from ’92 to ’95. I made many of these trips. On many occasions – I saw secret service agents “pick up” straight (non-hooker) girls and take them back to their rooms. LEGAL. I saw agents fly their wives, and girlfriends out to the tripsite to visit them – LEGAL.

All of this is legal – but if it’s with a prostitute – it’s suddenly some grave crime? What crime’s been committed? These are third-world women, working for a paycheck and these dudes have some cash to blow – sounds like a great transfer of wealth from rich USSS guys to poor Colombian hookers. Where’s the crime there? Unless, you refuse to pay your bill – and that might be the only crime here.

The POTUS was endangered? It’s been said over and over again that he wasn’t. If you have a different opinion – even though you’re really not close enough to KNOW what the hell is really going on – you should prove your statements.

This is only an issue because up-tight Americans who can’t get themselves off want to make sure no one else can either.

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Um, if the President goes into a strip club, don’t his bodyguards pretty much HAVE to go in with him?

logis on April 27, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Yeah they do but the prudes on this board don’t care – they want USSS agents that are either castrated – or sworn to celibacy like the Catholic priests.

Sex with a hooker is no different than sex with your girlfriend. Only difference is – you have fun with the hooker by lying to her about your background and telling her you were a member of “3 Commando” in the Rhodesian Light Infantry. If you tell anything truthful about your job – you’ll tell it to your girlfriend – not your hooker.

This is so ridiculous.

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Does Vera Baker have to sign the White House visitors log?

crash72 on April 27, 2012 at 2:28 PM

If they are leaving classified information lying around their rooms, they are breaching security and should be fired even if they are not with a prostitute — a hotel maid could see it. That is separate from the question of whether just drinking and going to a strip club while off duty is beyond the pale.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Yeah – but those reports about them leaving classified info laying about are bogus.

The woman who claims she got “stiffed” $800 said the agents were perfectly discreet and she had no idea who they were.

This is a manufactured outrage – plain and simple.

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 2:29 PM

This is a manufactured outrage – plain and simple.

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Agree.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Right – because everyone knows that USSS agents don’t “pillow-talk” their wives. They don’t “pillow-talk” their girlfriends. And – they don’t “pillow-talk” their same sex boyfriends!

They only PILLOW TALK Hookers! LOL at your foolishness.

My point is strictly focused on the security clearances.

“Foolish” is a relative concept. Relative to security clearances, here’s the DIS concept:

The DIS Manual for Personnel Security Investigations establishes operational and investigative policy and procedural guidance for conducting personnel security investigations. The DIS will not ordinarily “investigate allegations of heterosexual conduct between consenting adults.”

HOWEVER! (me)

If circumstances warrant, the DIS will expand the investigation “to determine if the SUBJECT, through his or her activities is susceptible to coercion and blackmail, has committed criminal acts, or engaged in reckless and irresponsible conduct.” Extramarital sexual relations are considered a legitimate concern when the potential for undue influence or duress exists. Other sexual conduct including homosexuality, bestiality, fetishism, exhibitionism, sadism, masochism, transvestism, necrophilia, nymphomania or satyriasis, pedophilia and voyeurism is considered a “relevant consideration in circumstances in which deviant conduct indicates a personality disorder or could result in exposing the individual to direct or indirect blackmail or coercion.”

In other words, people who come into physical contact (or nearly so) on a daily basis certainly qualify under the “susceptible to coercion and blackmail” clause.

BobMbx on April 27, 2012 at 2:41 PM

But… but… Romney put his dog on top of a car!

[/Obamabot]

RebeccaH on April 27, 2012 at 2:42 PM

I was attached to the White House from ’92 to ’95. I made many of these trips. On many occasions – I saw secret service agents “pick up” straight (non-hooker) girls and take them back to their rooms. LEGAL. I saw agents fly their wives, and girlfriends out to the tripsite to visit them – LEGAL.

All of this is legal – but if it’s with a prostitute – it’s suddenly some grave crime? What crime’s been committed?

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Excellent!

Your inside information must include whether there is a code of ethical behavior as a condition of employment in the Secret Service. Since virtually every LEO has had this in place to address moral turpitude incidents for decades, I’ll be amazed if you say they don’t have one.

And the answer is …?

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 2:58 PM

I was attached to the White House from ’92 to ’95. I made many of these trips.

(snip)

This is only an issue because up-tight Americans who can’t get themselves off want to make sure no one else can either.

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Well, these two statements clear up an awful lot.

kim roy on April 27, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Stop it stop it stop it.

Dr. Manhattan on April 27, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Why?

Why?

WHY?

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 3:00 PM

This is a manufactured outrage – plain and simple.

HondaV65 on April 27, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Agree.

cam2 on April 27, 2012 at 2:35 PM

and I agree …

The outrage the two of you are expressing is plain and simply manufactured.

The outrage in the American populace at another example of HOW FAR OUT OF TOUCH the Obambi administration is … wait for November, even you two will be able to feel it then

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Well, these two statements clear up an awful lot.

kim roy on April 27, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Hey, it’s the internet. Everyone is an expert.

a capella on April 27, 2012 at 3:09 PM

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Be kind. Honda has worked long and hard to create a HA image of himself. Don’t be cruel.

a capella on April 27, 2012 at 3:12 PM

and sex workers

So demeaning.

$2500 for a schtup in a 3rd world country buys you a sex PROFESSIONAL.

/Keeping my pimp hand strong

CorporatePiggy on April 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Here’s what I posted

Excellent!

Your inside information must include whether there is a code of ethical behavior as a condition of employment in the Secret Service. Since virtually every LEO has had this in place to address moral turpitude incidents for decades, I’ll be amazed if you say they don’t have one.

And the answer is …?

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 2:58 PM

and you replied

Be kind. Honda has worked long and hard to create a HA image of himself. Don’t be cruel.

a capella on April 27, 2012 at 3:12 PM

How, in any sense, is that cruel?

It may be direct, pointed and impossible for him to answer but I don’t follow the cruel inference.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 3:24 PM

How, in any sense, is that cruel?

It may be direct, pointed and impossible for him to answer but I don’t follow the cruel inference.

PolAgnostic on April 27, 2012 at 3:24 PM

I’m teasing. My point was that he has carefully cultivated a HA personna and your questions may threaten it if he tells the truth.

a capella on April 27, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Told you so.

Sincerely,

John Dean

Portia46 on April 27, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Just to point out, the Clinton trips exposed in the report were not from his time in office. They were from trips when he was ex-President (note one from 2009).

gravityman on April 27, 2012 at 2:03 PM

You must have missed this:

President Clinton partied at strip clubs on a visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina, and that agents and White House staffers went to a Moscow night club known for its sexually charged atmosphere prior to Mr. Clinton’s trip to Russia in 2000

RickB on April 27, 2012 at 6:10 PM

If this idiocy helps us get rid of Obama, good.

Otherwise, who the hell cares?

profitsbeard on April 27, 2012 at 7:43 PM

President Obama announced today that he is appointing a Blue Ribbon Commission to investigate the Secret Service scandal in Columbia . “I am very concerned about this conduct and intend to get answers regarding this matter as soon as possible. In that regard I am today appointing a 5 person commission to investigate this situation, to report to me on their findings and to suggest corrective measures to be taken to prevent this from occurring in the future. I have selected 5 individuals in whom I have the greatest confidence knowing that their backgrounds and experiences will provide the investigation with tremendous insight.”

“The individuals I have named to the Commission are former Democrat Presidential Candidates John Edwards and Gary Hart, former New York Governor Democrat Eliot Spitzer, and former New York Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner. To Chair the Commission I am appointing former President Democrat William Jefferson Clinton. I have also named Democrat Congressman Barney Frank as Special Advisor to the Commission in case the investigation goes in a different direction.”

The Commission has been named the Kennedy Commission but it is unclear which of the numerous Kennedys was being honored by having the Commission named for him.

Media reaction was immediate and positive. Said one commentator, “if any group can get to the bottom (so to speak) of this scandal it is this group of intrepid and experienced investigators.”

Schadenfreude on April 27, 2012 at 7:49 PM

If I had only known they have this much fun, I’d have joined the secret service long ago.

NNtrancer on April 28, 2012 at 12:09 AM

On the night before President John F. Kennedy was killed, 10 members of his Secret Service detail were partying at a Fort Worth club called The Cellar.

Farris Rookstool is a former FBI analyst, who served as custodian of the John F. Kennedy assassination files.

“Nine out of the 10 had consumed alcohol, [of] which four of those agents were also assigned PPD, or presidential protection detail, in the follow up car behind President Kennedy’s motorcade,” Rookstool said.

In sworn statements, the agents admit to drinking on the night before the death of President Kennedy. The documents state that some the agents left their post at the Texas Hotel to party with waitresses at The Cellar, who served drinks wearing only their underwear.

Some of agents didn’t get back to their rooms until five the next morning.

“Some of these agents that were out until five in the morning, that were supposed to be guarding the president’s suite, bragged to the owner of The Cellar, Pat Kirkswood, that they were out having a few cocktails while they got the Fort Worth Fire Department guarding the presidential suite,” Rookstool said.

gordo on April 28, 2012 at 4:36 PM