danivon wrote:Indeed, Purple, DF quoted that same piece. So, if an Executive Order was signed, it's legal. If it's legal, it would take something substantial to make it unconstitutional.

Sassenach wrote:Who cares ? The President is entitled to give SS protection to whoever the hell he pleases. It's not an important issue.

Come on guys. I know this is an election year but surely there must be something significant we can be talking about ? This is even worse than the Paul Ryan pretending to run a superfast marathon story. Tedious trivia that tells us nothing of any significance.

Purple wrote:DF: I think you're being incredibly silly. Why wouldn't he write an EO (or put her on a list some old EO established)? There's nothing embarrassing here. The protection wasn't hidden from view. What would he gain by not doing things legally? What's his motive?

Archduke Russell John wrote:I gotta agree with Purple and Sass. This is another blah, blah, blah issue.

Sassenach wrote:The first thing the SS would do when asked to protect her is check to make sure they have the legal authority to do so.

If it wasn't there then they'd ask for it to be put in place.

This is a non-story that requires a feverish imagination to seem significant.

Doctor Fate wrote:...you are making assumptions about which you have absolutely no info.

Purple wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:...you are making assumptions about which you have absolutely no info.

no comment should be necessary

Doctor Fate wrote:You may well be right, but you are making assumptions about which you have absolutely no info.

I'm not being a smart aleck. The Homeland Security Department is in charge of the Secret Service. The President (or Ms. Jarrett) call Secretary Napolitano and tell her Ms. Jarrett needs 24/7 security. Does Napolitano say, "Do you have your papers?"

So let’s get this straight: Jarrett gets a security detail from the US Secret Service (USSS). That means 24/7 protection, at a cost of millions of dollars a year. Of course, it also means an air of importance for Jarrett--her own taxpayer-funded entourage. The idea that someone such as Jarrett--who officially plays no role in national security or counter-terrorism--would receive USSS protection would be laughable if it weren’t, in fact, real. It’s like a tale out of the Versailles Court of the Sun King--the sort of anecdote that provokes the peasants, eventually, to revolution. But in the meantime, before the deluge, Jarrett plans to live it up; surrounded by agents with guns, she is queen of her own court. In other words, for pure conspicuous consumption, Jarrett puts her fellow Chicagoan, the laughably self-important Desirée Rogers, to shame.
As an aside, on the issue of who merits government security, we might recall the case of Molly Norris. In 2010, the Seattle-based cartoonist took part in the international “Draw Muhammad” campaign and, after she receiving death threats, the FBI told her that she was on her own. That is, the US government could not--more precisely, would not--protect her. Instead, Norris was advised to leave her job, change her name, and go into hiding. And that’s what she did; what choice did she have?
At the time, some of us wondered how Uncle Sam could let the jihadists win a victory such as this inside the United States. Now we know that government security resources were, in fact, spread thin--because Jarrett was being well taken care of. Bottom line: Norris faced real threats and received no protection, while Jarrett faces no threats--at least no threat that 100 other West Wing aides haven’t also received, and none of them have details--and yet she receives all the insulation from the world that her ego demands.
In the wake of the USSS revelation, the press could be asking all sorts of questions: Who made this decision? How much is this costing? Does Jarrett drive her own car--or do those same Secret Service agents chauffeur her around? Most likely, the MSM will not ask any of these questions. Yes, as was said of Becker’s Times piece, the political world will stop to read it, but most readers will be reading it with an eye towards power calculations in DC, as opposed to cost calculations for the taxpayers, or any concern about the modesty of public officials.