Conservatives Not Pleased With Trump's Labor Secretary Nominee
Mayor of Denver Seems to Walk Back Threat to Use Police to Prevent...
Chief Diversity Officer at the NIH Retiring at the End of the Year...
Mark Cuban Goes Full BlueAnon Accusing Elon Musk of Having Bot Army
Trump's Surgeon General Nominee Praised Facebook for Its Censorship During COVID
Biden Says He Left the Country Better Off Than 4 Years Ago (Which...
WH's 'Building a Better Future' Post With Pic of Kamala Harris Waving Goodbye...
U.N. Secretary-General Seems a Bit Concerned His 'Climate Finance' Is Drying Up
J.K. Rowling Continues to Be Enemy Number One to the Left With Her...
WHAT THE EUGENICS? Academic Writes That We Should Find Someone Better to Bear...
'Full of S**t'! Megyn Kelly Reenacting Phoniness From MSNBC's Joe & Mika Is...
Darrell Issa Asks Why State Dept. Is 'Catering to Federal Employees Personally Devastated'...
'Part of the Problem': Bill Maher DROPS Neil deGrasse Tyson Over Men in...
Report: Yes, Trump 'Plans to Fire the Entire Team' VERY Soon (Brace for...
Never Let The Truth Get In the Way of a Good Story: CBS...
Premium

Watch: Ex-Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino reacts when Robert Kennedy Jr. is denied protection

(AP Photo/Jim Altgens, File)

This morning, I learned that Robert Kennedy Jr. was denied Secret Service protection:

As of this writing, there is a Community Note attached talking about when the obligation kicks in and I will talk about that in a minute. Let me just say for now that I doubt an actual lawyer wrote it. But I will note that there is precedent for giving Secret Service protection to a mere candidate seeking a nomination and giving such protection this long before the election. For instance, Barack Obama received Secret Service protection in May of 2007. At that point, he was not even the nominee for his party and, indeed, most people thought that Hillary Clinton was going to get the nomination. That would be the equivalent to giving a candidate protection in May of this year.

And I mean, he is a Kennedy, after all. That’s like being a teenaged character in the Final Destination movies.

Gallows humor aside, former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino had this to say on the subject and his language gets salty. Please note that he takes about thirty seconds to get to it:

For his part, Mr. Kennedy also Quote Tweeted this thread:

1) In June of 1968, following the assassination of presidential nominee Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, the Secret Service began protecting leading presidential nominees and their spouses. Just days after the assassination the Secret Service became responsible for the safety of five candidates, and by the end of the 1968 campaign twelve candidates were protected by the Secret Service. The new responsibility was undertaken to maintain the integrity of the democratic process.

After all, in 1960 the American people made John Kennedy, Sr., the President of the United States and who decided Lyndon B. Johnson was going to be president, instead? One guy. And in 1968, Robert Kennedy, Sr., might have been able to win the Democratic Party nomination and become president of the United States, but one guy decided that wasn’t going to happen, either. That is an outrage in any republic. Power in a republic is supposed to come from the people, not some random nutball. And, while such assassinations can’t be prevented 100% of the time, it is important to try to prevent as many as reasonably possible.

(And if you believe either Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy, that is still an outrage against republican principles in a similar vein.)

2) The law authorizes Secret Service protection for major presidential and vice presidential candidates and their spouses within 120 days of the general presidential election. However, the evolution of the protective detail is based upon actual threats and acts of aggression against both the highest public office in the land and those who seek the position.

I forgot about that.

"...for Secret Service protection," that's what the rest of the Tweet says.

This Tweeter also makes an excellent point:

This person is correct. He or she cites 18 U.S.C. § 3056. First, that section says:

(a) Under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect the following persons:

Then it lists a bunch of people that the Secret Service is authorized to protect, including:

(7) Major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates and, within 120 days of the general Presidential election, the spouses of such candidates. As used in this paragraph, the term ‘major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates’ means those individuals 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.

So, first the Tweeter is correct to say that the 120-day period only applies to spouses. The commas make that clear. And it makes sense in context because four months before the general election for a candidate is ridiculous. So there is no time limit on when protection is offered. Second, the Secretary of Homeland Security is the one who makes the decision of who counts as a major Presidential or Vice Presidential candidate, not the committee set up in this law. The law only says that the Secretary of Homeland Security is required to consult with them, but the use of the word ‘consult’ implies that if he or she thinks they are wrong, he can ignore them and do what makes sense to him or her.

And the Community Note I mentioned above? Now, you know it is wrong. Here’s what it says:

Secret Service protection must be provided to major candidates within 120 days of the general election. Major candidates are determined by a committee consisting of the House Speaker, House Minority Whip, Senate Majority & Minority Leaders, and another member of their choice.

Well, I didn’t like The Last Jedi very much but this line fits:


Okay, not every word is wrong. They are right about who makes up that committee, but they are wrong about the 120-day period and wrong about the committee making the determination—instead of just consulting.

And it is true that they are citing the Secret Service website. It is frankly poorly written so that, if all you are looking at is the website, one might think that the 120 period applies to candidates and spouses. On the other hand, the website is very clear that the committee only has a consultation role. In any case, if you want to talk about what a statute says, go to the statute itself, first, and not what a mere website has said about it.

Really, we have to ask if anyone checked to make sure that the person who wrote that is a lawyer? Or is Community Notes letting non-lawyers talk about the law, and to do so incompetently?

In any case, the bottom line is this. Every political assassination is an offense against the right of the people to control their government. And the Biden administration has decided it won’t protect probably its most serious primary challenger against such a possibility. If anything should happen to Kennedy, they will have blood on their hands.

And I am not sure that outcome would bother them very much. It seems like this is just the latest example of the political weaponization of the government under Biden.

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement