Biden Administration denies Secret Service protection for Robert F. Kennedy Jr

submitted by arnott from (twitter.com)

sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]sdl5 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Much as I TRULY DESPISE siding with MSM or the WH, this was a reach by nearly a year, and then only if:

Literally only Obama, and that was an effort by Durbin and the HHS Secretary authorized it.

Yeah yeah, his Dad and Uncle etc- I should know far better than most here about the first- but he is a MINOR candidate still at this point no matter what your own personal opinion is, and no other family member who has ran for any office has gotten similar.

By highlighting this NOW it IS creating a vulnerability for an attack from the impulse types, and those like who engaged in the past K family ones would not even be slowed if it was granted.

Which I have no doubt both Jr and his private security know full well.

And begs the question WHY ask THEM in the first place?????

Also- Does NO ONE HERE REMEMBER IN 2020? OR 2016????

We should all be more than familiar with this info:

"...in 1968, Congress changed the law to authorize Secret Service protection for major presidential and vice presidential candidates and their spouses within 120 days of the general presidential election.

The term "major presidential and vice presidential candidates" means those identified as such by the secretary of Homeland Security after consultation with an advisory committee consisting of the speaker of the House of Representatives, the minority leader of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate and one additional member selected by the other members of the committee.

A candidate has to hit several markers to show they are a "major presidential candidate." "

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/presidential-candidate-secret-service-protection-factors-analysis/story?id=62513154

[–]MartiniPlease send olives! 🍸 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

And begs the question WHY ask THEM in the first place?????

If they knew it would be denied, and asked anyway, then maybe the denial is valuable in their public OPSEC plan.

Doesn't do much to reveal their covert OPSEC plans.

Trying to channel my inner u/netweasel here.

[–]NetweaselContinuing the struggle 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

maybe the denial is valuable

Did you ever ask your parents for something for which you knew the answer would be "no" just to have that "no" on record?

If you know the answer is going to be "no" either there would be a reason to actually receive the "no" or there is no point in asking.

Alternate question: If the answer had been "yes" would it have messed up their nefarious plans? Or was this an example of the Xanatos Gambit (warning: TVTropes link)?

[–]MartiniPlease send olives! 🍸 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Precisely! I guess I did an ok job channeling my inner netweasel :)