• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Secret Service Director Julia Pierson Resigns After Breaches

He had no choice after invading Iraq. To leave prematurely would be an admission of incompetence, which would also have been politically unpopular.

So bush was backed into a corner--damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

I wasn't referring to Iraq - the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was actually favoured by Americans at the time, if I'm not mistaken. I was speaking more about his decision on stem cell research and his nominations for the Supreme Court, among others.
 
The only screwup the SS made was lying about the incident initially, which is a major problem and grounds for termination.

The SS should've just told the truth from the beginning, and said that additional security measures were unnecessary given the events that transpired.
 
The quality of the Secret Service doesn't seem to be what it once was. I remember that the agents around President Reagan did a superb job when Hinckley shot him--they very quickly shielded Reagan and neutralized Hinckley, and it very well may have saved Reagan's life. Or maybe the fact they genuinely liked and respected Ronald Reagan made them especially sharp about protecting him.
 
The SS did not make any mistakes. Hello?! The job of the SS is to keep the Pres unharmed, which they succeeded at, because

1) Obama was never shot

2) The SS didn't harass/harm/beat/shoot anyone for merely entering the WH grounds

The WH is supposed to be our house. Hello?!

So if an American enters w/out any clear intent of hurting anyone inside, the SS should not go overboard and start firing away.

The right wing nuts are just upset because they believe guns are the best answer to everything; they believe the SS screwed up because it didn't act Nazi guards, i. e. the right wing ideal of a perfect govt.



Where is there any evidence that "right wing nuts" are responsible for her resignation?

By reading the attached article one quickly learns that one, there were several lapses, one in which a man with a record for assault got into an elevator with the president.....

I don't see anywhere that she was pressured, if you do have evidence "right wing nuts' forced this resignation, please post it as we would all like to see who it is that has that much power in Washington right now...likely the next president if its true.



Why do I not think we will ever see said links....?
 
Where is there any evidence that "right wing nuts" are responsible for her resignation?

I never said they did. No govt. official in the last 40 years has ever resigned due to pressure from Congress, which has always been purely political.

Congress doesn't give rat's ass about WH security; if it did, it would certainly allocate more funds for the SS to ensure that its director gets paid significantly more than a measly $150K. That's a joke for someone in charge of security detail for a major head of state/VIP. Oracle Corp. shells out $1.5 million/yr. for Ellison's security detail at his personal residence alone, so one should expect a higher salary for someone in charge of the President's security.

The so-called "pressure" from Congress isn't actual intimidation; it's just mindless political fluff put out by these Congresscritters to score cheap political points, and what's pathetic is the right wing masses that buy into it.

By reading the attached article one quickly learns that one, there were several lapses, one in which a man with a record for assault got into an elevator with the president.....

That man was a private security contractor.
 
The quality of the Secret Service doesn't seem to be what it once was. I remember that the agents around President Reagan did a superb job when Hinckley shot him

That doesn't make any sense at all.
 
Wonder if it's occurred to anyone yet that if the intruder actually had malicious intent, he would've used his knife to hurt someone since had clearly had the opportunity to do so.
 
They did not; if they did, O would either be dead or in a hospital now. The results speak for themselves.



WRONG. The results are the only relevant performance metric when they're exemplary.

And the results are exemplary, since the SS has kept all Presidents perfectly safe in the last 30 years.

No sensible employer questions the actions of an employee that delivers perfect results consistently. To do otherwise amounts to unnecessary micromanagement.

Again I explained it, if they didn't follow proper policy, which isn't letting an intruder in the White House, they FAILED. Plain and simple.
 
He had no choice after invading Iraq. To leave prematurely would be an admission of incompetence, which would also have been politically unpopular.

So bush was backed into a corner--damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

But isn't this somewhat the same thing where the SS is concerned?

To be clear, Pres. Obama said he had confidence in the SS, not that he had confidence in who was running it. So, what I gathered from that is the President is trying to reassure the country that he still firmly believes that the agency whose job it is to protect himself and his family is still very capable of doing that job. To say otherwise would not only enlarge the shadow of doubt that already looms large of the department but may also invite others to try to breech SS security because they just heard the POTUS say he no longer felt the agency capable of doing its job. That's certainly not an impression you want to give.

So, but him saying he still had confidence in the SS but accepting the Director's resignation is sorta the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type of scenario. If he had said anything to suggest he didn't feel safe with this agency guarding him, can you imagine the fallout? We're talking a complete overhaul of the SS, not just replacing a Department Head or changing some security procedures/protocols.
 
I'm glad that she held herself accountable for the problems.
Too bad more of the screw-ups don't do the same !!!

She had no choice. The Libbos would have lynched her for endangering The Messiah's safety.
 
Again I explained it, if they didn't follow proper policy, which isn't letting an intruder in the White House, they FAILED. Plain and simple.

NOPE.

FAILURE is defined as not achieving the desired results, which, in this case, is keeping O alive and well without violating anyone else's civil rights/freedoms.

The SS succeeded at that, and therefore, it did not fail.
 
She had no choice. The Libbos would have lynched her for endangering The Messiah's safety.
This conservative was about ready for a lynching too.

Where do YOU stand? AOK for people to fire live rounds at the WH? AOK for an armed stranger to sashay into an elevator with the president? AOK for an intruder to break into the WH and run amock? AOK to make distorted incident reports, or pretty well cover them up as in the case of the elevator episode?

Just a straight answer this time, please, no wisecracks, and I hope you can show that you actually possess a sense of appreciation for how serious it us for the President to be in constant danger due to the incompetence of his security detail.
 
NOPE.

FAILURE is defined as not achieving the desired results, which, in this case, is keeping O alive and well without violating anyone else's civil rights/freedoms.

The SS succeeded at that, and therefore, it did not fail.
It looks like this troll can't be shut up so may we please ignore the bastard? Please?
 
But isn't this somewhat the same thing where the SS is concerned?

To be clear, Pres. Obama said he had confidence in the SS, not that he had confidence in who was running it.

O's press secretary said that "new leadership is needed", which clearly means that O did not have confidence in his agency.

So he already screwed up by giving the public the wrong idea.

I'm not defending O. He's just a stupid, cowardly pol like those before him. I'm only defending the SS's recent actions--since O is still alive and well, they did their job.
 
That's grossly inadequate for a serious security job. Decent security personnel should expect to take nothing less than $2 million/yr.

But the US is supposed to be a free country, where the people are ideally in charge, and hence, we don't want super gung-ho security guards at the WH.

Yeah, it's not as though Presidents have ever been murdered. People should just chill out and let whoever the hell wants to go into the white house go into the white house! It's America's house, by God!:lamo
 
She really had no choice.

She did have a choice: she could've told the truth about what happened at the WH right away. Regardless of whether she felt the SS's actions were justifiable, telling the truth was the first appropriate step in the aftermath.
 
Yeah, it's not as though Presidents have ever been murdered. People should just chill out and let whoever the hell wants to go into the white house go into the white house! It's America's house, by God!:lamo

Looks like the SS is doing just and it's worked for them for over 30 years. Apparently, you don't trust results :rolleyes:
 
This conservative was about ready for a lynching too.

Where do YOU stand? AOK for people to fire live rounds at the WH? AOK for an armed stranger to sashay into an elevator with the president? AOK for an intruder to break into the WH and run amock? AOK to make distorted incident reports, or pretty well cover them up as in the case of the elevator episode?

Just a straight answer this time, please, no wisecracks, and I hope you can show that you actually possess a sense of appreciation for how serious it us for the President to be in constant danger due to the incompetence of his security detail.

You don't understand this poster. He actually has no problem with people who might kill the President getting close to him.
 
One down .... the rest of the most corrupt administration in history to go.

58585e4.jpg

and-then-said-not-even-smidgen-corruption-because-there-hasn-politics-1391748507.jpg
 
You don't understand this poster. He actually has no problem with people who might kill the President getting close to him.

Oh, and who would that be ? ?

The intruder clearly had no intention of harming anyone, because if he did, he would've done so since he had ample opportunity to do it. Hello, logic :rolleyes:

But please entertain us as to when/where someone who "might kill the President" ever got close to him.
 
If there was no evidence he had any intention of hurting anyone, what difference does it make if he had a knife or gun? Explain.

The SS has a job which is to vet, in advance, those that wish to enter the spaces under their control. If folks can simply hop the fence, run accross the lawn, enter an unlocked entrance and "overpower" the posted guards then why even have the SS at all? If you wish to allow unannounced visitors into "your house" then you don't pay dearly for a security force. That is not the case here - the SS have a specific job to do that does not include waiting to see what a loon rushing into the WH may eventually decide to do.
 
The SS has a job which is to vet, in advance, those that wish to enter the spaces under their control. If folks can simply hop the fence, run accross the lawn, enter an unlocked entrance and "overpower" the posted guards then why even have the SS at all? If you wish to allow unannounced visitors into "your house" then you don't pay dearly for a security force. That is not the case here - the SS have a specific job to do that does not include waiting to see what a loon rushing into the WH may eventually decide to do.

The SS's job, among other tasks, is to protect the President without endangering anyone else's rights.

And the SS has succeeded because O is alive and well, as are the other Presidents before him for over 30 years.

Results are the only thing that matters in job performance. If people in the WH were being shot and/or harrassed by outsiders every day, then there would be an issue.

But since that hasn't happened, it doesn't matter. If someone succeeds at a job by fulfilling the desired objectives, no one should care how that job is done. I don't believe in micromanagement.
 
Back
Top Bottom