Secret Service Agent Says......."I would rather take jail time than a bullet for President Trump.....

[DSK]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Send her, unaccompanied, to the farthest areas of northern Alaska to " investigate " counterfeiting. And investigate her actions and statements to see if it doesn't violate any Secret Service / Treasury Department standards on personal behavior and responsibility. If a similar comment had been made by an agent towards BOOrock Insane odummer or shrilLIARy, you can bet that the lyin libs in Congress and the media would be demanding that the agent be immediately fired AND drawn and quartered.

Additionally, he would be executed for treason, at which point the liberals could remember they oppose capital punishment, and express their dismay that he was so bad of an agent they had to do it.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by Danielle Reid

Welcome to the world of freedom of speech. You can say what you want as long as it's against Trump

Sounds like many people feel that way.

However, the agent's responsibility seems to fall under the category of duty to intervene concerning the scenario mentioned by the OP. I would imagine somewhere there is wording in the job description for the Presidential security detail about their responsibilities and duties.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by DSK

I would imagine somewhere there is wording in the job description for the Presidential security detail about their responsibilities and duties.

She wasn't with the POTUS security detail....was an office chief stationed in Colorado, but .... if Trump visits Colorado she could well be called upon to coordinate and/or be present. A PROBLEM is one of her duties would be to identify and monitor KNOWN RISKS and with her attitude her due diligence would be suspect at best.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

She wasn't with the POTUS security detail....was an office chief stationed in Colorado, but .... if Trump visits Colorado she could well be called upon to coordinate and/or be present. A PROBLEM is one of her duties would be to identify and monitor KNOWN RISKS and with her attitude her due diligence would be suspect at best.

The due diligence would indeed be suspect. Liberals support not firing people like this, for reasons that probably get down to who they vote for, I imagine.

[Sistine Chapel]

I wouldn't take a bullet for that low life sexual assaulter wanting to fuck his own daughter either.

and all you fucking hypocrites complaining sure wasn't complaining when soldiers said they'd refuse to fight in combat as long as Obama was in office. Where were you mentally degenerate clowns then? Ohh let me remind you....you were cheering them on. haha all you fucking losers.

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

I wouldn't take a bullet for that low life sexual assaulter wanting to fuck his own daughter either.

and all you fucking hypocrites complaining sure wasn't complaining when soldiers said they'd refuse to fight in combat as long as Obama was in office. Where were you mentally degenerate clowns then? Ohh let me remind you....you were cheering them on. haha all you fucking losers.

Links ? PROVE that ANY service member is on tape or print saying that they wouldn't vote for YOUR muzzie loving fraud of a bath house boy ! PROVE IT, ya lyin liberal POS !

[Sistine Chapel]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Links ? PROVE that ANY service member is on tape or print saying that they wouldn't vote for YOUR muzzie loving fraud of a bath house boy ! PROVE IT, ya lyin liberal POS !

calm down did you take your meds this morning?

I didn't say anything about voting but I did say something about not deploying; and well here is your proof. Ok seweethart?

Right off the Fox News press:

http://radio.foxnews.com/2009/07/14/...99t-president/


ohh and more to come since you clearly think this is an isolated incident. lol

[DSK]

Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel

I wouldn't take a bullet for that low life sexual assaulter wanting to fuck his own daughter either.

and all you fucking hypocrites complaining sure wasn't complaining when soldiers said they'd refuse to fight in combat as long as Obama was in office. Where were you mentally degenerate clowns then? Ohh let me remind you....you were cheering them on. haha all you fucking losers.

How are you not a mental generate with a post like that?

What do you base your morality on these days?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Links ? PROVE that ....

.. he's confused with the traitors Obaminable just "forgave" as Obaminable walked out the door .... one was "transgender" so that was reason enough according to SissyLips!

He called someone a "sexual predator" and he voted for the wife of one? That's rich!

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by SisterTwister

Good for her.

I wouldn't take a shit for his nasty ass, let alone a bullet.

But a gloryhole operating lib like YOU prolly took lotsa cum shots to the face for " donations " for shrilLIARy's election fund ! How much did YOU " upcharge " for the " donation " if they wanted to " go around the world " on YOU ???

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by DSK

How are you not a mental generate with a post like that?

What do you base your morality on these days?

fistingchappedass never had any morality. Lyin libs are that way. That's why the Clinton's are their heroes and " role models " .

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Did you really understand my post? I don't think you did.


Jim

I thought I understood it.

"He has a point. I wouldn't take a bullet for anyone either.
I agreed with this part--you are the only one who can say whether you are willing to take a bullet for anyone else

You would have to be an idiot to do that. Nobody is that dam important."
Here is where I disagree with you--you clearly say anyone who IS willing to is an idiot. Since soldiers, and often police/firemen are willing to put their lives at severe risk for others, you are calling them idiots.

If that is not what you mean by your statement, then please explain what it does mean.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

I thought I understood it.

"He has a point. I wouldn't take a bullet for anyone either.
I agreed with this part--you are the only one who can say whether you are willing to take a bullet for anyone else

You would have to be an idiot to do that. Nobody is that dam important."
Here is where I disagree with you--you clearly say anyone who IS willing to is an idiot. Since soldiers, and often police/firemen are willing to put their lives at severe risk for others, you are calling them idiots.

If that is not what you mean by your statement, then please explain what it does mean.

Yes!

That is what created a question in my mind ... as to whether or not he said what he wanted to say ... but he repeated it. As for the Agent who confessed her political motivation for not doing her job (if the circumstance arose), she made that decision when she volunteered for the job!

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Yes!

That is what created a question in my mind ... as to whether or not he said what he wanted to say ... but he repeated it. As for the Agent who confessed her political motivation for not doing her job (if the circumstance arose), she made that decision when she volunteered for the job!

Completely agree. Those kind of jobs SHOULD allow for prompt removal when a person is no longer able to or unwilling to do the job. However that is not always the case because of legal, labor, political games.

Some jobs that fall into a similar category have some non-standard wording in their position descriptions that does allow that, but many others are poorly/sloppily written and that kind of prompt removal gets seriously bogged down.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Those kind of jobs SHOULD allow for prompt removal when a person is no longer able to or unwilling to do the job.

They can be disarmed and placed on a desk....with security clearances removed and access codes changed. That is an administrative decision that can be made with written notice only and for the most part without any review, except by a supervisor of the one providing the notice.... up the chain of command. No cut in pay; no reduction in benefits; and no "title" change. A demotion clearly in this particular case. "Early retirement" could be negotiated, if justified.

Just "on the bench" with no responsibilities. I doubt any "rep" would have much sympathy for her given the implications of her stupid statement. It would more than likely be a "pro forma" representation. Her career is over!