All I know is that I did the Scooby Doo "WUH???!!"  when one of the female officers said "What are we doing?"  "Where are we going?".

Why didn't she know what the security evacuation protocol was for that particular event?

Did the Secret Service give Donald Trump the Scrape the Bottom of the Barrel Brigade?

Most secret service agents aren't permanently assigned to protection details. They basically do detective work most of their career and get bumped into protection roles once in a while when a dignitary comes to town. I would bet this lady was not assigned regular protection duty.

Most secret service agents aren't permanently assigned to protection details. They basically do detective work most of their career and get bumped into protection roles once in a while when a dignitary comes to town. I would bet this lady was not assigned regular protection duty.

She shouldn't be assigned protection duty at all.

That's the point, not that she ought to do 'other things."

Most secret service agents aren't permanently assigned to protection details. They basically do detective work most of their career and get bumped into protection roles once in a while when a dignitary comes to town. I would bet this lady was not assigned regular protection duty.

That's wonderful.  If I was a high echelon politician needing protection I would feel so secure.

I bet Trump made a note to himself:  "Check if Secret Service needs an overhaul...." once he takes office.

Females have their role, like when protecting other females.  They can go into say the womens restroom and it's not as obvious that they're SS or there's no need to clear the entire restroom because male SS will be entering.

I forgot the YT channel, but there was a female SS agent talking about it.  Business Insider or GQ something like that.

Females have their role, like when protecting other females.  They can go into say the womens restroom and it's not as obvious that they're SS or there's no need to clear the entire restroom because male SS will be entering.

I forgot the YT channel, but there was a female SS agent talking about it.  Business Insider or GQ something like that.

BS.

A man is more than capable of going into a women's restroom.  Just tell anyone there, "I identify as a woman."  It's how it's done now.

But seriously, if a male janitor needs to clean a restroom, they open the door, announce they are coming in, and wait for anyone to respond they need a minute.

Not necessary to provide a government salary and benefits to lots of women just to clear a restroom.

I disagree with the view that you don't need to clear the restroom.  Too many directions for a threat to come at you.  Plus too many places for someone to hide (stalls).  One female agent protecting someone in a busy restroom is a huge risk to take. 

I can think of 4 scenarios off the top of my head, each having to do with a busy restroom vs. an empty one.  Empty is so much easier to manage.  And, yes, there can be a female agent to make it less embarrassing for the protectee to pee as opposed to a man listening.  But a male ought to be stationed right outside telling people to use another restroom or wait.

 

Regardless of the restroom excuse, they still need to provide capable protection agents. 

Consider this:  don't assign protection detail members based on gender.  do it based on what type of threats they might encounter.

Even if the women assigned can physically shield the principle from a gun fired near them, can they take on an assassin via hand-to-hand combat?

21 foot rule should apply to these situations.  You can't rely on a firearm all the time.  Need time to draw, clear line of sight, etc.  In a crowd of people (shaking hands, asking for autographs...) the principle needs someone capable of protecting them from immediate threats within a few feet.  Might need to strong arm a person trying to shove a knife in the protectee's ribs.

Seems like common sense to me.

BS.

A man is more than capable of going into a women's restroom.  Just tell anyone there, "I identify as a woman."  It's how it's done now.

But seriously, if a male janitor needs to clean a restroom, they open the door, announce they are coming in, and wait for anyone to respond they need a minute.

Not necessary to provide a government salary and benefits to lots of women just to clear a restroom.

I disagree with the view that you don't need to clear the restroom.  Too many directions for a threat to come at you.  Plus too many places for someone to hide (stalls).  One female agent protecting someone in a busy restroom is a huge risk to take. 

I can think of 4 scenarios off the top of my head, each having to do with a busy restroom vs. an empty one.  Empty is so much easier to manage.  And, yes, there can be a female agent to make it less embarrassing for the protectee to pee as opposed to a man listening.  But a male ought to be stationed right outside telling people to use another restroom or wait.

 

Regardless of the restroom excuse, they still need to provide capable protection agents. 

Consider this:  don't assign protection detail members based on gender.  do it based on what type of threats they might encounter.

Even if the women assigned can physically shield the principle from a gun fired near them, can they take on an assassin via hand-to-hand combat?

21 foot rule should apply to these situations.  You can't rely on a firearm all the time.  Need time to draw, clear line of sight, etc.  In a crowd of people (shaking hands, asking for autographs...) the principle needs someone capable of protecting them from immediate threats within a few feet.  Might need to strong arm a person trying to shove a knife in the protectee's ribs.

Seems like common sense to me.

The restroom example is one of an "unplanned stop" for the principal. So there's less time to secure it compared to a planned stop where they have the time before hand to secure or at least make a threat assessment.  It's much easier for a female SS to go in and take 20 seconds to make sure there's no wacko in there and then wait in there with her.  All while not bothering the other women who are already there.
 There was minimal way of knowing the principal would stop to use that specific restroom, so threat is low, but still need to secure.

Now a male agent would have to do like you stated, announce they're coming in and wait for all the women to leave.  This takes much more time, which means the principal is outside waiting in the open longer than they need to be.

This doesn't mean that majority of the detail is female, but when the principal needs to pee, they call the female agent who's near. Like how cops do when needing to frisk a female suspect. Sometimes they wait for another female officer to arrive.

In the video, the way the woman was speaking, she sounded much more XP'd and capable than the holster lady.  The vid was years old, so before all this DEI BS.  She got in probably cause she's a badass.

The restroom example is one of an "unplanned stop" for the principal. So there's less time to secure it compared to a planned stop where they have the time before hand to secure or at least make a threat assessment.  It's much easier for a female SS to go in and take 20 seconds to make sure there's no wacko in there and then wait in there with her.  All while not bothering the other women who are already there.
 There was minimal way of knowing the principal would stop to use that specific restroom, so threat is low, but still need to secure.

Now a male agent would have to do like you stated, announce they're coming in and wait for all the women to leave.  This takes much more time, which means the principal is outside waiting in the open longer than they need to be.

This doesn't mean that majority of the detail is female, but when the principal needs to pee, they call the female agent who's near. Like how cops do when needing to frisk a female suspect. Sometimes they wait for another female officer to arrive.

In the video, the way the woman was speaking, she sounded much more XP'd and capable than the holster lady.  The vid was years old, so before all this DEI BS.  She got in probably cause she's a badass.

Two questions:

1.  Why is "easier" even a consideration?  Either it makes more sense to do it that way because it provides better protection, or it doesn't.  If you want "easier", then only assign females to females and males to males -- because going to the bathroom is easier.

2.  In a busy restroom with women coming and going, how can the agent tell if one of them is a wacko?  Do they all look like wackos so they are easy to spot?  Unless she's vetted them all and they all have ID badges showing they've been cleared, an agent has no idea who the people in the restroom are.  A wacko could be pretending to take a dump, reach under the stall wall and inject the protectee with a poison, or shoot over or through the wall, etc.

If the attacker doesn't mind dying in the process (as is the case it seems for wackos), then there's no telling who is being allowed to be within inches of the principle.

Sorry, but I'm not convinced.  And in the same vein as "easier", since when has inconvenience of others been a higher priority than safety of the protectee?  Either the practice makes them safer, or it puts them at potentially higher risk.  Pick the one that helps keep the person alive.

Two questions:

1.  Why is "easier" even a consideration?  Either it makes more sense to do it that way because it provides better protection, or it doesn't.  If you want "easier", then only assign females to females and males to males -- because going to the bathroom is easier.

2.  In a busy restroom with women coming and going, how can the agent tell if one of them is a wacko?  Do they all look like wackos so they are easy to spot?  Unless she's vetted them all and they all have ID badges showing they've been cleared, an agent has no idea who the people in the restroom are.  A wacko could be pretending to take a dump, reach under the stall wall and inject the protectee with a poison, or shoot over or through the wall, etc.

If the attacker doesn't mind dying in the process (as is the case it seems for wackos), then there's no telling who is being allowed to be within inches of the principle.

Sorry, but I'm not convinced.  And in the same vein as "easier", since when has inconvenience of others been a higher priority than safety of the protectee?  Either the practice makes them safer, or it puts them at potentially higher risk.  Pick the one that helps keep the person alive.

I should have used the word quicker instead of easier.  Speed is their best weapon against threats.

Threat indicators are 1 thing that help ID a wacko.  Again, an unplanned stop to a restroom has a lower threat as even the person who plans an attack wouldn't have much time to set up. So a quick look around with a trained eye, regardless if the restroom is full or not.  Hence also the female SS staying in the restroom, with the standard male SS agents right outside if backup is needed as wackos can evade the best trained eyes.  So it's more acceptable to have a fellow woman inside the woman's restroom.

Another example is POTUS children who are girls.  I'm sure it's much easier on them to have a female in the restroom with them, compared to have a male.  And I'm sure threats aren't as high to the children as POTUS, 1st lady or other government positions receive.

I will not try to further convince you that female SS have their place.  As long as they're qualified and not a DEI hire or standards lowered for them to graduate or advance.

Now 1 downfall to having female SS is can they carry their principal or drag them quickly if needed by themselves.  Or do they have the mass to separate a crowd.

I should have used the word quicker instead of easier.  Speed is their best weapon against threats.

Threat indicators are 1 thing that help ID a wacko.  Again, an unplanned stop to a restroom has a lower threat as even the person who plans an attack wouldn't have much time to set up. So a quick look around with a trained eye, regardless if the restroom is full or not.  Hence also the female SS staying in the restroom, with the standard male SS agents right outside if backup is needed as wackos can evade the best trained eyes.  So it's more acceptable to have a fellow woman inside the woman's restroom.

Another example is POTUS children who are girls.  I'm sure it's much easier on them to have a female in the restroom with them, compared to have a male.  And I'm sure threats aren't as high to the children as POTUS, 1st lady or other government positions receive.

I will not try to further convince you that female SS have their place.  As long as they're qualified and not a DEI hire or standards lowered for them to graduate or advance.

Now 1 downfall to having female SS is can they carry their principal or drag them quickly if needed by themselves.  Or do they have the mass to separate a crowd.

I have to disagree again.

Speed is only a factor if there is an active threat.  Move and keep moving.  But it's not their best weapon against threats.

Their best weapons against a threat is training, experience, ability and powers of observation.  You can't stop what you don't see until after it's too late.

Agents do a sweep inside hotel rooms and people's homes their protectees visit.  They don't use speed.  They use careful, deliberate and structured methods to search out and identify possible threats.  If something doesn't look right, they simply pull the plug and avoid the area.

And how much time is needed to "set up" having a weapon on them as they enter the bathroom just ahead of the agent?  Weapons can be a hypodermic needle or anthrax powder -- easy to conceal or stash in fixture.

As for the children, i'm sure the President's team can handle the restroom situation.  Not everywhere they go is low rent shopping malls.  Most high level restaurants and hotels where they speak or have events will have already been cleared.  If it's an unscheduled stop, i'm sure there are more than enough people in the combined security teams to handle a potty break.

She shouldn't be assigned protection duty at all.

That's the point, not that she ought to do 'other things."

After that performance I don't think they will put her in that role again, at least I hope....

After that performance I don't think they will put her in that role again, at least I hope....

Depends on which side she plays for, she would get a promotion.

After that performance I don't think they will put her in that role again, at least I hope....

Really?  Based on what?  Common sense?

If they had any sense, she'd have never been "in that role."

This is not a "role" in a play where you have to "perform."  This is a job - a duty or responsibility - where if you fail, people can die.  People who trusted you with their very lives.

It's not a "role."

And this is what you haven't taken the time to look into:

https://30x30initiative.org/about-30x30/

Really?  Based on what?  Common sense?

If they had any sense, she'd have never been "in that role."

This is not a "role" in a play where you have to "perform."  This is a job - a duty or responsibility - where if you fail, people can die.  People who trusted you with their very lives.

It's not a "role."

And this is what you haven't taken the time to look into:

I figured you would know this but sometimes you don't know how someone will perform until the doo doo actually hits the fan.

I figured you would know this but sometimes you don't know how someone will perform until the doo doo actually hits the fan.

I know how someone who's 5' 6" trying to shield a 6' 4" protectee from gunfire using their body will perform.  There's video of it if you need to see it.

We are talking about someone's physical ability to protect the president/other protectee, not whether they have the intestinal fortitude to take a bullet for someone else.

I figured you would know this.

check the video of JD Vance going up to Kamela's plane yesterday
looks like the chick who couldn't holster is guarding him
and i think she's the one who was in charge of the site too
i posted a video (or someone else did) i think it's in the big assassination thread...

check the video of JD Vance going up to Kamela's plane yesterday
looks like the chick who couldn't holster is guarding him
and i think she's the one who was in charge of the site too
i posted a video (or someone else did) i think it's in the big assassination thread...

Glad I wasn't the only one noticing that. 

JD probably looked at her and when he realized she's attached to his security detail he probably said to himself "Awww sh*t....."

"No A-Team for me....."

There was a joke going around that JD Vance is 5' 7".

From what i can find, he's actually 6' 2".

If the security detail includes significantly shorter agents, they should also include enough agents that are tall enough to shield his body if necessary.

Let the shorter ones work crowd security and look for threats near  the walkway and around the stage, but the ones assigned to form a barrier need to have the physicality to do so.

There was a joke going around that JD Vance is 5' 7".

From what i can find, he's actually 6' 2".

If the security detail includes significantly shorter agents, they should also include enough agents that are tall enough to shield his body if necessary.

Let the shorter ones work crowd security and look for threats near  the walkway and around the stage, but the ones assigned to form a barrier need to have the physicality to do so.

I found the vid I was talking about when I mentioned that some females can do better than holster fumbling lady.



I'd trust her over the current holster fumble lady.