PDA

View Full Version : Security Failure - Secret Service KNOWS the cause



12-04-2009, 09:28 PM
The Secret Service has suspended three UD Officers for the checkpoint failure and security breach at the State Dinner. This means they KNOW WHERE the breach occurred and WHO compelled the Officers to let the uninvited couple past the check point.

However you can bet they are not going to disclose who the staffer was who got the couple through the checkpoint for fear of reprisals from the staff. The Director will let the blame fall on the three UD Officers, covering up the complicity of the staffer. Job security.

Is it possible that a Director appointed from the outside would be any more likely to have the courage to stand up to the staff in such circumstances? Perhaps if the appointee were independently wealthy (as many political appointees are) and not a career agent who was afraid of being forced out, we would see more courage.

If author Ron Kessler is to be believed, as quoted in his recent book, many currently employed agents say that it is time for the Director to be appointed from outside the agency.

12-09-2009, 03:09 AM
The time has come to break up the nepotism that has plagued the USSS for years. That nepotism has brought us several Directors, Deputy Directors, and AD's who I'm sure are "good guys," but are train-wrecks as managers and supervisors. A retired general or admiral who has no ties to anyone in the agency and does not owe any one favors would be a good pick. I'm sure they would easily spot the lack of efficiency and resources that the agency has.

While I'm sure it would not make some people happy, the future of the agency would have to outweigh the career aspirations of a few.

12-09-2009, 04:15 AM
The time has come to break up the nepotism that has plagued the USSS for years. That nepotism has brought us several Directors, Deputy Directors, and AD's who I'm sure are "good guys," but are train-wrecks as managers and supervisors. A retired general or admiral who has no ties to anyone in the agency and does not owe any one favors would be a good pick. I'm sure they would easily spot the lack of efficiency and resources that the agency has.

While I'm sure it would not make some people happy, the future of the agency would have to outweigh the career aspirations of a few.


Sounds good to me.