Secret Service wants Trump’s campaign to not schedule large outdoor rallies and events

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: quintessentone

you are equating the DEI aspect to only dealing with Cheatle being a woman. That has nothing to do with any of this. Even the small little girl trying to protect Trump isn't what this is about. It's about the hiring process.

With DEI, you ONLY select applicants who fit a certain criteria. Female, of color, or whatever characteristic that is needed for the Diversity aspect. In some jobs, that's fine. It's stupid as you eliminate possible qualified applicants by using an idiotic method in the hiring process, but if it's your company, and it's not someone's life on the line, let it fail due to stupidity. But when lives are on the line, like security or military, diversity needs to be ignored. Merit based hiring is the only factor that should be used. Find the best out of ALL the options. And if your entire basketball team is a bunch of 7 foot black kids, then so be it, they showed they were the most qualified to do the job. Or is that racist?

Exactly, so for the position of SS Director she was selected for her decades of experience and her coming up the ranks just like all the other male Directors, is that a reasonable deduction?

it depends. Did she get hired because she was the best of the best, or because she was a prior SS agent who was chummy with Jill? (the truthfulness of your answer will help you with that issue you have)

originally posted by: quintessentone
Exactly, so for the position of SS Director she was selected for her decades of experience and her coming up the ranks just like all the other male Directors, is that a reasonable deduction?

No it's not a reasonable deduction.
She was selected because of her close relationship with Jill Biden.
Try to keep up.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

Why can't you quote where Trump said he agrees ? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

If Trump "plans" to stop holding outdoor rallies does it not stand to reason, to you, that he agrees to stop holding outdoor rallies?

so now, "stands to reason" is equal to "fact"? I had no idea the rules had changed yet again.

So are you saying Trump disagrees with holding large outdoor rallies but is forcing himself to because he has no choice, while also saying that he will still hold small outdoor rallies. Where is the critical thinking?

so you are saying Trump will manage the country way better than someone placed there because of her skin color and gender?

Will anyone placed there manage the country for all the people? Doubtful.

based on what was said, Trump wants to make the US energy dominant, prosperous, and work towards self sufficiency. In doing that, the byproduct is a better, safer, more prosperous nation. A nation we all live in. You can be angry all day every day because he's mean and orange. And you can do it from the security of a better place. Or we can continue down the path we are on. Which is the way Harris will go.

Trump had his chance previously, and the national debt is out of control, so no soap.

But Harris gets a pass? She has been #2 for the last 3.5 years silly.

I am not left. I am not for Trump. I am not for Harris. I am for reasonable and fact based political discussion, where can I find it?

I see the issue now. You have to look for facts, dig into reports. Find corroborating evidence to back up those facts. And most importantly, you have to be willing to accept facts that go counter to your narrative. Discussion is 100% on you and your ability to convey rational thought.

Waiting for others to give you facts is why you have to ask this quesiton.

I ask for others to provide sources to back up their claims, which they rarely do, is the issue here.

then don't believe anything until you verify it. But don't discount the truth because it hurts your feelz. That also applies to everyone else here, myself included.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Why were James Rowley and H. Stuart Knight selected? They failed even more spectacularly at the job than Cheatle.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

Why can't you quote where Trump said he agrees ? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

If Trump "plans" to stop holding outdoor rallies does it not stand to reason, to you, that he agrees to stop holding outdoor rallies?

so now, "stands to reason" is equal to "fact"? I had no idea the rules had changed yet again.

So are you saying Trump disagrees with holding large outdoor rallies but is forcing himself to because he has no choice, while also saying that he will still hold small outdoor rallies. Where is the critical thinking?

so you are saying Trump will manage the country way better than someone placed there because of her skin color and gender?

Will anyone placed there manage the country for all the people? Doubtful.

based on what was said, Trump wants to make the US energy dominant, prosperous, and work towards self sufficiency. In doing that, the byproduct is a better, safer, more prosperous nation. A nation we all live in. You can be angry all day every day because he's mean and orange. And you can do it from the security of a better place. Or we can continue down the path we are on. Which is the way Harris will go.

Trump had his chance previously, and the national debt is out of control, so no soap.

But Harris gets a pass? She has been #2 for the last 3.5 years silly.

I am not left. I am not for Trump. I am not for Harris. I am for reasonable and fact based political discussion, where can I find it?

I see the issue now. You have to look for facts, dig into reports. Find corroborating evidence to back up those facts. And most importantly, you have to be willing to accept facts that go counter to your narrative. Discussion is 100% on you and your ability to convey rational thought.

Waiting for others to give you facts is why you have to ask this quesiton.

I ask for others to provide sources to back up their claims, which they rarely do, is the issue here.

then don't believe anything until you verify it. But don't discount the truth because it hurts your feelz. That also applies to everyone else here, myself included.

BS everyone asks everyone here to back up their claims, so now is everyone just to not believe anybody and move on ? Ridiculous

originally posted by: Threadbarer
Why were James Rowley and H. Stuart Knight selected? They failed even more spectacularly at the job than Cheatle.

Don't know. Don't care. Separate issue. What is happening NOW is Cheatle got the job because she had a vagina and she was friends with Jill Biden. Those are not qualifications for the job. She wasn't competent to hold the position. And we see the end result.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

Why can't you quote where Trump said he agrees ? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

If Trump "plans" to stop holding outdoor rallies does it not stand to reason, to you, that he agrees to stop holding outdoor rallies?

so now, "stands to reason" is equal to "fact"? I had no idea the rules had changed yet again.

So are you saying Trump disagrees with holding large outdoor rallies but is forcing himself to because he has no choice, while also saying that he will still hold small outdoor rallies. Where is the critical thinking?

so you are saying Trump will manage the country way better than someone placed there because of her skin color and gender?

Will anyone placed there manage the country for all the people? Doubtful.

based on what was said, Trump wants to make the US energy dominant, prosperous, and work towards self sufficiency. In doing that, the byproduct is a better, safer, more prosperous nation. A nation we all live in. You can be angry all day every day because he's mean and orange. And you can do it from the security of a better place. Or we can continue down the path we are on. Which is the way Harris will go.

Trump had his chance previously, and the national debt is out of control, so no soap.

But Harris gets a pass? She has been #2 for the last 3.5 years silly.

I am not left. I am not for Trump. I am not for Harris. I am for reasonable and fact based political discussion, where can I find it?

I see the issue now. You have to look for facts, dig into reports. Find corroborating evidence to back up those facts. And most importantly, you have to be willing to accept facts that go counter to your narrative. Discussion is 100% on you and your ability to convey rational thought.

Waiting for others to give you facts is why you have to ask this quesiton.

I ask for others to provide sources to back up their claims, which they rarely do, is the issue here.

then don't believe anything until you verify it. But don't discount the truth because it hurts your feelz. That also applies to everyone else here, myself included.

BS everyone asks everyone here to back up their claims, so now is everyone just to not believe anybody and move on ? Ridiculous

Everyone should always start off from the skeptical position.

I mean, do you know what web site you are currently on?

There's also a matter of credibility and rapport........

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: quintessentone

you are equating the DEI aspect to only dealing with Cheatle being a woman. That has nothing to do with any of this. Even the small little girl trying to protect Trump isn't what this is about. It's about the hiring process.

With DEI, you ONLY select applicants who fit a certain criteria. Female, of color, or whatever characteristic that is needed for the Diversity aspect. In some jobs, that's fine. It's stupid as you eliminate possible qualified applicants by using an idiotic method in the hiring process, but if it's your company, and it's not someone's life on the line, let it fail due to stupidity. But when lives are on the line, like security or military, diversity needs to be ignored. Merit based hiring is the only factor that should be used. Find the best out of ALL the options. And if your entire basketball team is a bunch of 7 foot black kids, then so be it, they showed they were the most qualified to do the job. Or is that racist?

Exactly, so for the position of SS Director she was selected for her decades of experience and her coming up the ranks just like all the other male Directors, is that a reasonable deduction?

it depends. Did she get hired because she was the best of the best, or because she was a prior SS agent who was chummy with Jill? (the truthfulness of your answer will help you with that issue you have)

Exactly, nobody here has the answers.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
Exactly, so for the position of SS Director she was selected for her decades of experience and her coming up the ranks just like all the other male Directors, is that a reasonable deduction?

No it's not a reasonable deduction.
She was selected because of her close relationship with Jill Biden.
Try to keep up.

Where is your source or proof for that claim?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

Why can't you quote where Trump said he agrees ? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

If Trump "plans" to stop holding outdoor rallies does it not stand to reason, to you, that he agrees to stop holding outdoor rallies?

so now, "stands to reason" is equal to "fact"? I had no idea the rules had changed yet again.

So are you saying Trump disagrees with holding large outdoor rallies but is forcing himself to because he has no choice, while also saying that he will still hold small outdoor rallies. Where is the critical thinking?

so you are saying Trump will manage the country way better than someone placed there because of her skin color and gender?

Will anyone placed there manage the country for all the people? Doubtful.

based on what was said, Trump wants to make the US energy dominant, prosperous, and work towards self sufficiency. In doing that, the byproduct is a better, safer, more prosperous nation. A nation we all live in. You can be angry all day every day because he's mean and orange. And you can do it from the security of a better place. Or we can continue down the path we are on. Which is the way Harris will go.

Trump had his chance previously, and the national debt is out of control, so no soap.

But Harris gets a pass? She has been #2 for the last 3.5 years silly.

I am not left. I am not for Trump. I am not for Harris. I am for reasonable and fact based political discussion, where can I find it?

I see the issue now. You have to look for facts, dig into reports. Find corroborating evidence to back up those facts. And most importantly, you have to be willing to accept facts that go counter to your narrative. Discussion is 100% on you and your ability to convey rational thought.

Waiting for others to give you facts is why you have to ask this quesiton.

I ask for others to provide sources to back up their claims, which they rarely do, is the issue here.

then don't believe anything until you verify it. But don't discount the truth because it hurts your feelz. That also applies to everyone else here, myself included.

What is the truth when nobody has any sources or facts?

a reply to: FlyersFan

It's possible she did get the job due to her relationship with Jill. What does that have to do with her gender? Washington is full of people who got where they are because of who they know.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: FlyersFan

Why were James Rowley and H. Stuart Knight selected? They failed even more spectacularly at the job than Cheatle.

Yes and the only other female Director had no issues, apparently.

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

Why can't you quote where Trump said he agrees ? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

If Trump "plans" to stop holding outdoor rallies does it not stand to reason, to you, that he agrees to stop holding outdoor rallies?

so now, "stands to reason" is equal to "fact"? I had no idea the rules had changed yet again.

So are you saying Trump disagrees with holding large outdoor rallies but is forcing himself to because he has no choice, while also saying that he will still hold small outdoor rallies. Where is the critical thinking?

so you are saying Trump will manage the country way better than someone placed there because of her skin color and gender?

Will anyone placed there manage the country for all the people? Doubtful.

based on what was said, Trump wants to make the US energy dominant, prosperous, and work towards self sufficiency. In doing that, the byproduct is a better, safer, more prosperous nation. A nation we all live in. You can be angry all day every day because he's mean and orange. And you can do it from the security of a better place. Or we can continue down the path we are on. Which is the way Harris will go.

Trump had his chance previously, and the national debt is out of control, so no soap.

But Harris gets a pass? She has been #2 for the last 3.5 years silly.

I am not left. I am not for Trump. I am not for Harris. I am for reasonable and fact based political discussion, where can I find it?

I see the issue now. You have to look for facts, dig into reports. Find corroborating evidence to back up those facts. And most importantly, you have to be willing to accept facts that go counter to your narrative. Discussion is 100% on you and your ability to convey rational thought.

Waiting for others to give you facts is why you have to ask this quesiton.

I ask for others to provide sources to back up their claims, which they rarely do, is the issue here.

then don't believe anything until you verify it. But don't discount the truth because it hurts your feelz. That also applies to everyone else here, myself included.

BS everyone asks everyone here to back up their claims, so now is everyone just to not believe anybody and move on ? Ridiculous

Everyone should always start off from the skeptical position.

I mean, do you know what web site you are currently on?

There's also a matter of credibility and rapport........

Preach that to your choir.

originally posted by: quintessentone
Where is your source or proof for that claim?

You really need to turn off CNN and try to keep up.
Google it up. It's all over the place.
One story of many -

Kim Cheatle Landed Job After Push by Jill Biden

Embattled Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle, who is facing congressional outcry and calls to resign over security lapses leading to former President Donald Trump’s near-assassination Saturday, landed her role thanks largely to a close relationship with first lady Jill Biden, The Post has learned.

Four sources close to President Biden’s family, including people who interacted with Cheatle during the Obama-Biden administration, said she was well liked by the future first lady and her most senior aides, including top adviser Anthony Bernal.

“Cheatle served on Dr. Biden’s second lady detail and Anthony pushed for her,” a Democratic insider told The Post. “Anthony has no national security or law enforcement experience. He should have no influence over the selection of the USSS director.”

“Anthony is obsessed with being DEI-compliant,” a third source told The Post, using the acronym for diversity, equity and inclusion — the human resources practice of attempting to ensure diversity in the workforce.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
Where is your source or proof for that claim?

You really need to turn off CNN and try to keep up.
Google it up. It's all over the place.
One story of many -

Kim Cheatle Landed Job After Push by Jill Biden

Embattled Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle, who is facing congressional outcry and calls to resign over security lapses leading to former President Donald Trump’s near-assassination Saturday, landed her role thanks largely to a close relationship with first lady Jill Biden, The Post has learned.

Four sources close to President Biden’s family, including people who interacted with Cheatle during the Obama-Biden administration, said she was well liked by the future first lady and her most senior aides, including top adviser Anthony Bernal.

“Cheatle served on Dr. Biden’s second lady detail and Anthony pushed for her,” a Democratic insider told The Post. “Anthony has no national security or law enforcement experience. He should have no influence over the selection of the USSS director.”

“Anthony is obsessed with being DEI-compliant,” a third source told The Post, using the acronym for diversity, equity and inclusion — the human resources practice of attempting to ensure diversity in the workforce.

As another member chimed in, how does a career push determine that she was not qualified for the job?

a reply to: quintessentone

In the 123 year history of the Secret Service, only one President has been lost. The Director at the time was allowed to remain in that post for another 10 years.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: quintessentone

In the 123 year history of the Secret Service, only one President has been lost. The Director at the time was allowed to remain in that post for another 10 years.

Julia Pierson had the job for 1 year. Do you know why she resigned....

wait for it...

Security Failures.

2 instances. The armed man getting into the White House and...

Approximately one week prior to the White House intrusion, there had been another security breach when it was discovered that an armed security guard, who had not been cleared by the Secret Services' advance team, rode in the same elevator as President Obama during a visit to Atlanta.

So, in the 123 year history of the USSS the only 2 females were both removed for security failures.

DEI is NOT working. She was hired to 'change the image' of the USSS.

a reply to: putnam6

While it sounds like the right thing to do after his assassination attempt and failure of the secret service to keep him safe, this move will limit his live appearance and how many of his followers will be allowed to attend.

a reply to: matafuchs

About 25% of the Secret Service are female and you've only been able to come up with two that have been removed from duty?

Seems like they're doing a kickass job.