Jump to content

Us secret service leader resigned


riclag

Recommended Posts

Incompetent Director resigned !

Something tells me she hasn’t seen the rest of the storyline! Many more investigations to come . Democracy at its best!

 

https://nypost.com/2024/07/23/us-news/secret-service-head-kimberly-cheatle-resigns-after-shocking-failures-led-to-trump-assassination-attempt/

 

 

Edited by riclag
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GypsyT said:

I followed hearing on CNN and could not believe how incompetent, stupid and arrogant she was!!!

 

No wonder 90% of Secret Security officers were unhappy and quitting.

 

Ol' Joe was gone long time ago:

 

"She protected President Joe Biden during his time as vice president and was assistant director of the Office of Protective Operation before retiring, for a short time, to run global security for PepsiCo. Biden appointed her to head the Secret Service in 2022."
 
- Better she goes back to see Pepsi bottles are not being mishandled...

 

People got killed because of her incompetence!

I could be wrong but I think you’re in opposition to Trump! All the more the haters of Trump should be angry !


Because of her incompetence Trump took a bullet ! Watching people on the street interviews , some have changed their mind about voting for him , because of the Events of July 13

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So strange that everyone thinks she should have resigned when Trump got a clip around the ear. Assassination and assassination attempts have never before been seen as the fault of the director, all of whom rely on their subordinates to actually carry out the work. I do understand that she took responsibility for the people who were on the scene, which is noble, but historically, she would never have been seen as incompetent.

Director James Brooks never had to resign when James Garfield was assassinated in 1881. 

Director John Wilkie never had to resign when William McKinley was assassinated in 1901.

Director James Joseph Rowley never had to resign when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Why?

Even in cases where the president was not killed, like Ronald Reagan in 1981, the director was never pushed to resign.

I am not saying there should not be an inquiry. Of course there should.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So strange that everyone thinks she should have resigned when Trump got a clip around the ear. Assassination and assassination attempts have never before been seen as the fault of the director, all of whom rely on their subordinates to actually carry out the work. I do understand that she took responsibility for the people who were on the scene, which is noble, but historically, she would never have been seen as incompetent.

Director James Brooks never had to resign when James Garfield was assassinated in 1881. 

Director John Wilkie never had to resign when William McKinley was assassinated in 1901.

Director James Joseph Rowley never had to resign when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Why?

Even in cases where the president was not killed, like Ronald Reagan in 1981, the director was never pushed to resign.

I am not saying there should not be an inquiry. Of course there should. But resignation? I doubt it based on precedent.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Purdey said:

So strange that everyone thinks she should have resigned when Trump got a clip around the ear.

 

You've missed the point, according to (truly) fake news:

 

Secret Service Director Resigns In Disgrace For Failing To Assassinate Trump

 

At publishing time, the DHS announced they were looking for a new director with experience in handling ricin and cyanide.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Purdey said:

So strange that everyone thinks she should have resigned when Trump got a clip around the ear. Assassination and assassination attempts have never before been seen as the fault of the director, all of whom rely on their subordinates to actually carry out the work. I do understand that she took responsibility for the people who were on the scene, which is noble, but historically, she would never have been seen as incompetent.

Director James Brooks never had to resign when James Garfield was assassinated in 1881. 

Director John Wilkie never had to resign when William McKinley was assassinated in 1901.

Director James Joseph Rowley never had to resign when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Why?

Even in cases where the president was not killed, like Ronald Reagan in 1981, the director was never pushed to resign.

I am not saying there should not be an inquiry. Of course there should.

 

 

Good grief are you kidding!?! It’s all about culture in any agency, it starts from the top down. In case you don’t know this is known as management, poor management equals poor quality control. And to add to this insult, filtering politically correct ancillaries not only distracts from the main objective of an institution, it fractures the moral of the system.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, novacova said:

Good grief are you kidding!?! It’s all about culture in any agency, it starts from the top down. In case you don’t know this is known as management, poor management equals poor quality control. And to add to this insult, filtering politically correct ancillaries not only distracts from the main objective of an institution, it fractures the moral of the system.

So why wasn't Rowley sacked after Kennedy's assassination? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of Trump probably actually not having been hit by a bullet, the chain of events at that rally point to glaring holes in the security plan for that event, and also at a lack of overwatch, together with inadequate alarm procedure.

The director had no choice IMO but to resign.

 

In detail, from my armchair :

- access to elevated positions directly around the venue was not properly controlled

- elevated positions were not under constant observation

- alarm of an armed man was raised several minutes before shots fell, yet the spotters failed to assess the threat and the protective detail did not shield Trump - such an alarm should only take a few seconds to reach overwatch !

- apparently there was also confusion over whether a man on a roof, armed with a rifle, could be part of security himself. leads me to think about personnel control procedures in defined sectors and color of the day procedures

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Purdey said:

So why wasn't Rowley sacked after Kennedy's assassination? 

 

I have a theory...

 

Actually, a 2 parter. But it flies in the face of "the narrative".

 

Edit: Both parts involve LBJ. 

 

Edited by impulse
  • Love It 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, jesimps said:

"Clip around the ear"!!!??? I put that in the same category as Lineker's "The Hamas thing". Disgusting.

As you have guessed, I don't categorize a flesh wound together with a bullet hole. Even Reagan was actually shot. Trump boasting he "took a bullet to the face" is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Purdey said:

So strange that everyone thinks she should have resigned when Trump got a clip around the ear. Assassination and assassination attempts have never before been seen as the fault of the director, all of whom rely on their subordinates to actually carry out the work. I do understand that she took responsibility for the people who were on the scene, which is noble, but historically, she would never have been seen as incompetent.

Director James Brooks never had to resign when James Garfield was assassinated in 1881. 

Director John Wilkie never had to resign when William McKinley was assassinated in 1901.

Director James Joseph Rowley never had to resign when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Why?

Even in cases where the president was not killed, like Ronald Reagan in 1981, the director was never pushed to resign.

I am not saying there should not be an inquiry. Of course there should. But resignation? I doubt it based on precedent.

 

 

Overwhelming evidence of too many blunders.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Purdey said:

So strange that everyone thinks she should have resigned when Trump got a clip around the ear. Assassination and assassination attempts have never before been seen as the fault of the director, all of whom rely on their subordinates to actually carry out the work. I do understand that she took responsibility for the people who were on the scene, which is noble, but historically, she would never have been seen as incompetent.

Director James Brooks never had to resign when James Garfield was assassinated in 1881. 

Director John Wilkie never had to resign when William McKinley was assassinated in 1901.

Director James Joseph Rowley never had to resign when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Why?

Even in cases where the president was not killed, like Ronald Reagan in 1981, the director was never pushed to resign.

I am not saying there should not be an inquiry. Of course there should.

 

 

I am thinking that many would be surprised if the bothered to look up the total USA list of assassination attempts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, impulse said:

So why wasn't Rowley sacked after Kennedy's assassination? 

This, bad security, has been going for a long time.... Abe's case;

 

"Parker remained on the police force until 1868 when he was fired for sleeping on duty. He later went back to work as a carpenter. He died of pneumonia complicated by asthma and exhaustion in Washington, D.C., on June 28, 1890. He was buried in an unmarked grave at Glenwood Cemetery."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, novacova said:

Typical reverberations of a disappointed leftist, I’m sorry you experienced despaired hopes as opposed to celebrating having an annoyance out of the way. You would be singing a completely different tune if one of your dear leftist leaders got shot in the ear by a built missing a kill by a few millimeters. You’d be crying and yelling and rioting in the streets and tearing things up.

Correct, divide intervention used mm to make  a miracle .


I think the conspiracy theories perpetrated by the far left media 

never miss a chance to take advantage of a crisis , In the link Roll on 1:57 Joy Read  Msnbc  performance.
 

 

https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/rita-panahi/lefties-losing-it-weapongrade-crazy-msnbc-host-conspiracy-theories/video/6eb1d34429360e608a4e6754c57d520d


 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

Overwhelming evidence of too many blunders.

Still under investigation by the FBI , no worries!

Come August 5 the Fbi’s ,DOJ goes 

silent using their 90 day rule on elections.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Purdey said:

Trump boasting he "took a bullet to the face" is ridiculous.

 

Trump tends to speak in hyperboles; occasionally he even misstates a fact. He's been around a while, so by now your panties shouldn't be getting into a wad over this aspect of his charm.

 

That was a real bullet, a real wound, and a near-assassination, however. But for luck (or God, or "the thing," Biden might say), an incredible, historic, tragedy would have occurred that day.

 

Worry more about the outright lies fake news and leftists are telling you and you believe. In her very first campaign speech, for example, Kamala lied that Trump wants to "ban" abortion.  He's denied that several times. Far as he's concerned, the SCOTUS settled the matter, left it up to the States. "Ban" isn't in the Republican Party platform, which he helped write and he approved. She knows that.

Edited by BigStar
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

Overwhelming evidence of too many blunders.

Name one secret service director who was forced to resign because of a presidential assassination or failed attempt. Clearly this was a political witch-hunt. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Name one secret service director who was forced to resign because of a presidential assassination or failed attempt. Clearly this was a political witch-hunt. 

 

Witch hunt or not, she failed to defend herself.  What exactly what were the failures for JFK and RR.  These mistakes should never have occurred with today's advanced technology and lessons learned from the past.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Purdey said:

Clearly this was a political witch-hunt. 

 

When BOTH parties on the Committee unanimously agreed?🤣

 

You've been given the valid reasons above. Move on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Purdey said:

So strange that everyone thinks she should have resigned when Trump got a clip around the ear. Assassination and assassination attempts have never before been seen as the fault of the director, all of whom rely on their subordinates to actually carry out the work. I do understand that she took responsibility for the people who were on the scene, which is noble, but historically, she would never have been seen as incompetent.

Director James Brooks never had to resign when James Garfield was assassinated in 1881. 

Director John Wilkie never had to resign when William McKinley was assassinated in 1901.

Director James Joseph Rowley never had to resign when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963.

Why?

Even in cases where the president was not killed, like Ronald Reagan in 1981, the director was never pushed to resign.

I am not saying there should not be an inquiry. Of course there should. But resignation? I doubt it based on precedent.

 

 

Are you being willfully ignorant? A couple of inches and his head would be hit.

I suppose Trump hatred occupies so much of your thinking you didn't think it through.

 

Perhaps she is gone because so many obvious mistakes were made, it reeks of incompetence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Purdey said:

Name one secret service director who was forced to resign because of a presidential assassination or failed attempt. Clearly this was a political witch-hunt. 

 

If so it was a bipartisan witch hunt. You do know that both the GOP and the Dems castigated her in the committee meeting, don't you?

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...
""