Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 6 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said: Not sure...but also not relevant. No one's a candidate until the party nomination is complete. Trump wasn't a candidate at the time, by USSS regulation. Same basic logic that applies to national security briefings...until someone is officially a candidate, they aren't entitled to them. They are candidate's enough for state ballots that can't be changed. If you prefer... the presumptive nominee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Clavin Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 minute ago, Ann said: With what percent of the vote? 50%? 55%? Because they'll have to get at least 60%, in a district with 110% voter turnout. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Clavin Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 minute ago, Ann said: They are candidate's enough for state ballots that can't be changed. If you prefer... the presumptive nominee. And The Book says the nominee gets protection, not a presumptive nominee. Trump's protection should have been at the level of a former president, not a nominee (note that I do not know the difference, but presume a nominee gets better protection.) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 2 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said: And The Book says the nominee gets protection, not a presumptive nominee. Trump's protection should have been at the level of a former president, not a nominee (note that I do not know the difference, but presume a nominee gets better protection.) Does it? Then why has the presumptive nominee gotten SS sooner? Why has it been such a big scandal that RFK jr did not receive it? (Serious questions, not argumentative) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Clavin Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 12 minutes ago, Ann said: Does it? Then why has the presumptive nominee gotten SS sooner? Why has it been such a big scandal that RFK jr did not receive it? (Serious questions, not argumentative) It's such a big scandal that RFK jr. didn't receive it because people are making it out to be a big scandal. They're going literally by The Book in his case. This election's a little odd, because between a sitting president and an ex-president, both candidates have USSS protection before being officially nominated - in Biden's case, as usually happens with an incumbent (also in Harris' case, as the incumbent VP - and she's probably getting escalated protection now, if Biden's truly critically ill.) In 2016, Trump didn't get protection until after the nomination (again, The Book). Hillary did, because as a former First Lady, she's entitled to some level of protection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 5 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said: In 2016, Trump didn't get protection until after the nomination (again, The Book). That is not correct https://www.cnn.com/2015/11/05/politics/donald-trump-ben-carson-secret-service/index.html 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Clavin Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Ann said: That is not correct https://www.cnn.com/2015/11/05/politics/donald-trump-ben-carson-secret-service/index.html Well THAT'S interesting. Particularly Quote “As prescribed by statute, authorization for Secret Service protection for presidential candidates is determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security after consultation with a congressional advisory committee composed of the speaker of the House, the House minority leader, the Senate majority leader, the Senate minority leader, and an additional member selected by the committee,” Catron said in a statement. I really want to know now if that process was followed. Edited July 22 by Crap Throwing Clavin 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 1 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Clavin Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 4 minutes ago, Ann said: She's right to defer to the FBI for investigative questions. Which means they REALLY need to subpoena the FBI director. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted July 22 Author Share Posted July 22 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 hour ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said: It's such a big scandal that RFK jr. didn't receive it because people are making it out to be a big scandal. They're going literally by The Book in his case. This election's a little odd, because between a sitting president and an ex-president, both candidates have USSS protection before being officially nominated - in Biden's case, as usually happens with an incumbent (also in Harris' case, as the incumbent VP - and she's probably getting escalated protection now, if Biden's truly critically ill.) In 2016, Trump didn't get protection until after the nomination (again, The Book). Hillary did, because as a former First Lady, she's entitled to some level of protection. They should have asked Cheaterly “How many women DEI hires protect Biden, Harris, Barry, Slick Willie?” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 hour ago, Crap Throwing Clavin said: She's right to defer to the FBI for investigative questions. Which means they REALLY need to subpoena the FBI director. I think he’s coming in tomorrow. Don’t expect any new information from him. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Clavin Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 1 minute ago, Nanker said: I think he’s coming in tomorrow. Don’t expect any new information from him. I expect a lot of "can't talk about an ongoing investigation" type of answers. Which is, again, not unreasonable, since it is an ongoing investigation. I'd be more interested in hauling him in front of Congress 60 days from now and seeing what he answers. This should also be going to the DHS OIG, to investigate any malfeasance by the USSS or DHS. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 Just now, Crap Throwing Clavin said: I expect a lot of "can't talk about an ongoing investigation" type of answers. Which is, again, not unreasonable, since it is an ongoing investigation. I'd be more interested in hauling him in front of Congress 60 days from now and seeing what he answers. This should also be going to the DHS OIG, to investigate any malfeasance by the USSS or DHS. I want him to answer why one of his henchmen was up on the assassin’s perch with a firehose destroying a critical crime scene a day or two after the failed order to take out Hitler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 Naw, it's fine! That kind of stuff would never happen! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 The odds that this was a set-up, backed by some elements within the IC/USG, has moved from slim to none to more than likely in 5 days. The machine has been broken. This is a good sign. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.