You're saying the loyalty of the Secret Service to the First Family has to be bought, either way. If that's the case, then it shouldn't be hard to figure a former agent could be bought to be *disloyal*.
IOW, if you're going to paint the Secret Service, current and former, as unethically mercenary, you can't assume the book author is pure and righteous. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Actually, they both work. Nobody said anything about *nobility*. They are paid to do a job. Secret Service takes their job seriously. They protect the first family. They've even been known to make people apologies for disparaging remarks by threats and intimidation. Now, if agents are *former agents*, that would be a different situation. May require some greasing of the palm. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The Known Unknown You don't even realize how you've contradicted yourself. First, the agents are denouncing the book because they're nobly doing their duty to protect Hillary. When that turns out not to work, all of a sudden they're denouncing the book because she's bribed them. You can't have it both ways, sorry. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Being former agents doesn't mean anything. The Clinton foundation is very very rich. Money can buy silence and it can also buy a supportive statement. Agents aren't exactly rich. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 12:17 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The Known Unknown These are *former agents*. They aren't assigned to anybody. Also, what they're pissed about is the author having falsely inflated his status in the White House. They say he was low-ranking and wouldn't have been in a position to see what he claims to have seen. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : I think the second paragraph says it all. It's their duty to *protect* the people they are assigned to. From: "authfriend@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] The Known Unknown Secret Service veterans denounce anti-Clinton tell-all book http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-bill-clinton-secret-service-224578 http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-bill-clinton-secret-service-224578 Secret Service veterans denounce anti-Clinton tell-al... http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-bill-clinton-secret-service-224578 Former agents blasted writer Gary Byrne for having "underlying motives." View on www.politico.com http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-bill-clinton-secret-service-224578 Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <hondosavgae2@...> wrote : "A blockbuster book set for release on Monday paints Hillary Clinton as a shrewish and paranoid monster during her time as America's first lady – so mercurial and antagonistic that some U.S. Secret Service personnel protecting her 'literally went mad'." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3656919/Paranoid-Hillary-drove-demoralized-Secret-Service-drink-drugs-hookers-fostered-f-mentality-says-author-protected-Bridezilla-Clinton-White-House.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3656919/Paranoid-Hillary-drove-demoralized-Secret-Service-drink-drugs-hookers-fostered-f-mentality-says-author-protected-Bridezilla-Clinton-White-House.html
