Posted on 07/16/2024 7:45:30 AM PDT by george76
If you ask most people about the role of the Secret Service, they would say it protects the president and presidential candidates. However, the Secret Service now has various other functions unrelated to presidential protection, raising the question of whether guarding the president should be an “also.”
Additionally, the president used to be guarded by big, strong men. Why is it wrong to consider that men and women have different skills and sizes, and perhaps guarding the president should remain the domain of big, strong men?
The “Our Protective Mission” section of the Secret Service website explains that its original mission of presidential protection was approved by Congress in 1906. However, the current mission is much broader, stating: “One Integrated Mission, Protect our nation’s leaders and financial infrastructure.” It outlines four mission areas:
National Security: Protect world leaders, major events, and key locations.
Public Safety: Share threat assessment expertise for public safety.
Economic Safeguard: Protect the integrity of U.S. currency.
Cyber Investigations: Fight cybercrime to safeguard America’s financial infrastructure.
Mission creep could be one reason the Secret Service has struggled with its original mission, leading to numerous failures. This includes two dead presidents, one dead presidential candidate, and attempted assassinations on six U.S. presidents, two of whom were shot.
Additionally, attempted assassinations on presidential candidates have resulted in three being shot. Guarding the president and presidential candidates should be a priority, not a brief mention in the mission statement.
Following the failed assassination attempt on President Trump, widely circulated videos demonstrated the apparent ineptitude of female Secret Service agents.
This prompted Valentina Gomez, who is seeking the GOP nomination for Missouri Secretary of State, to comment on X, “My security detail is all men. Tier 1 operators and SEAL Team Six are all men. These women are diversity hires by the SS.”
The United States Secret Service has an Affirmative Action and a Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Program, which covers, among other things, “sex (including pregnancy).”
This means a pregnant woman theoretically cannot be barred from being hired or from guarding the president. Currently, nearly 25% of agents are female.
However, Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle, a former employee of PepsiCo, has expressed her goal to increase the percentage of female agents to 30% by the end of the decade.
They claim that affirmative action does not mean passing over qualified candidates to meet quotas, but that is a mathematical fallacy. If agents were hired based on quality and qualifications alone, no specific diversity goal could be set or reached.
Moreover, physical standards for women are lower than for men, making female agents generally weaker and smaller. For example, the U.S. Army’s physical fitness standards for men aged 22-26 require 71 pushups, 80 sit-ups, and a 2-mile run in 13 minutes for a maximum score.
Women in the same age bracket need only 46 pushups, 80 sit-ups, and a 2-mile run in 15:36. For an excellent rating on the Secret Service fitness test, men aged 20-29 must complete 11 chin-ups, while women need only four.
In 2021, the 387th class of agents graduated, marking the first-time women trainees outnumbered men. It seems statistically unlikely that in 2021, the average man became weaker.
Until 1971, all Secret Service agents were male and had to meet height and weight standards. Today, there are no such requirements. The height requirement ensured that agents were the same height or taller than most presidents, making them more effective shields.
In photos from the attempted assassination of President Trump, a female agent, about five foot five, is shown trying to protect Trump with her smaller body.
These female agents were much shorter than Trump, who is reported to be six foot three, and smaller than the male agents, who were closer to Trump’s height. The female agents only reached Trump’s chest, effectively protecting his abdomen, which was already covered by a bulletproof vest.
Some of the video footage shows a female Secret Service agent awkwardly attempting to holster her weapon and then giving up. This is likely due to a combination of a lack of training and the interference of a protective vest.
Bulletproof vests are the same thickness for both women and men, but women’s shorter arms make it harder for them to draw or holster their weapons as easily as men with longer arms.
Mobility issues with female agents are another concern. The weight of a protective vest, weapon, ammunition, communication equipment, and other gear is essentially the same for both men and women.
However, this weight represents a larger percentage of a woman’s body weight, making it harder for her to move quickly or maintain stamina. Combined with lower physical fitness and strength requirements, this seems to create a prescription for ineffectiveness.
Conservatives are criticizing DEI and blaming female agents, arguing that big, strong men should be guarding the president. However, under the rules of woke, has anyone considered if any of these women identify as a big, strong man? That would be a loophole.
Democrats introduced Bill To Strip Trump’s Secret Service Protection
Biden tells donors: “Its time to put Trump in the Bullseye”
Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle focuses on “diversity hires”
NY Times’ John McWhorter declares “it’s a good thing” if somebody assassinated Trump
Cong Dan Goldman said “Trump must be eliminated”
Singer Bette Midler Suggested Biden’s FBI Use Deadly Force
The Federalist ^ | 7/13/2024 | MONROE HARLESS
FR Posted on 7/14/2024, 1:08:44 AM by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
Democrat Bennie Thompson, ranking member, House Committee on Homeland Security, introduced the absurdly named “Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act (HR 8081)” on April 19, 2024.
Democrat co-sponsors include Reps:
<><>Yvette D. Clarke,
<><>Troy A. Carter Sr.,
<><>Frederica Wilson,
<><>Bonnie Watson Coleman,
<><>Jasmine Crockett,
<><>Joyce Beatty,
<><>Barbara Lee,
<><>Steve Cohen.
Question: who put these Democraps up to facilitating a Trump assassination?
Cong Bennie Thompson
<>headed the infamous Jan. 6th Commission
<>crafted the bill w/ eight co-sponsors to strip Trump of S/S detail.
<>was a black separatist early on (his resume enhancer?)
Thompson aide and field director, tax paid “civil rights” activist,
Jacqueline Marsaw tweeted she wished the assassin had “better aim.”
Call Congress: (202) 224-3121
U.S. House switchboard operator.
Message: Subpoena these lawmakers. Taxpayers demand to know who organized this heinous assault on democracy-——exposing candidates to harm and assassination——and the number of tax dollars and tax-subsidized aides and office supplies that were used in this legislative atrocity.
If I was the head of the SS I would make “Mission Creep” FJB’s secret handle.
The Deep State needs useful idiots as agency heads to be our pinatas.
Then they can plot the next assassination attempt away from prying eyes.
BTTT
Biden S/S Director Kimberly Cheatle won’t resign
Gives Bizarre Reason Why An Agent Was AWOL
When Gunman Crooks Opened Fire On Trump
DAILY MAIL ^ | 07/16/24 | Geoff Earl
Posted on 7/16/2024, 8:04:02 AM by Enlightened1
Embattled Biden appointee, Secret Service head Kimberly Cheatle, has revealed the fateful reason why her agency failed to position an agent on top of the building that a gunman used to carry out an assassination attempt on Donald Trump. Democrat appointee Cheatle, who is already facing calls to resign over what some lawmakers are calling a massive security failure, said Secret Service officials planning security for Trump’s rally in Butler, Pennsylvania considered the warehouse about 150 yards away from where Trump spoke to be a risky position for stationing an agent.
‘That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,’ she told ABC News in an interview Tuesday. ‘And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.’
What transpired instead was a security nightmare: Thomas Matthew Crooks was able to scale the building and secure his own position, while law enforcement struggled to locate him even amid pressing warnings from members of the Trump crowd. But there wasn’t sufficient time to act on the tips, she explalined. ‘The shooter was actually identified as a potential person of suspicion,’ Cheatle said. ‘Unfortunately, with the rapid succession of how things unfolded, by the time that individual was eventually located, they were on the rooftop and were able to fire off at the former president.’
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
What a bunch of BS.
If the crowd could clearly see him and know what he was up to, then any SS and LEOs could.
Bump!
No flame, but you need some females for SS protection when the protectee is female. A female protectee shouldn’t have all female protection, but should have some available.
You might want some female line police officers available to for interaction with female offenders, victims, and young children.
Cheatle makes a very poor appearance on TV. She looks disheveled and hung over. Hopefully a whistle blower will come forward.
Good descriptions.
If the first lady wants all male security, of course that's what she should have. But sure, if for some really bizarre reason she's willing to risk her life with an all woman security staff, then who are we to say no?
so what you are saying, if I get this straight, is that men and women are different?
so its not just being male that brings protection...
I can see female SS officers in hidden roles....
but overall, for outright physical protection, wouldn't we all want a huge man standing in front of us?....
Yes, I am not a Sith Lord and don’t deal in absolutes. There are exceptions for female protect clients, prisoners, and sexual assault victims.
You make a good point, but I haven’t seen any 5’4” buck 10 females be able to dead weight carry of a 6’ plus, 200+ unconscious person to safety.
There should never be double standards or lowered standards for jobs that require strength and endurance. The same goes for weaker males as well.
===================================================
Brought to you direct from Biden's Tokenland.
The girlie DEI hire has amazing gravitas.
image from floppingaces.net
Yes
She can not.. that is why the democrats put short women there.
Their plan / idea was to kill .. not protect.
A post turtle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.