Gee, I would have expected them to be much more attractive. They wouldn’t be worth the money or risk to me. Now I think even less of those secret service agents.
[Update a while later]
Mark Steyn has some caustic and appropriately snarky thoughts:
Cartagena’s most famous “escort” costs $800. For purposes of comparison, you can book Eliot Spitzer’s “escort” for $300. Yet, on the cold grey fiscally conservative morning after the wild socially liberal night before, Dania’s Secret Service agent offered her a mere $28.
Twenty-eight bucks! What a remarkably precise sum. Thirty dollars less a federal handling fee? Why isn’t this guy Obama’s treasury secretary or budget director? Or, at the very least, the head honcho of the General Services Administration, whose previous director has sadly had to step down after the agency’s taxpayer-funded public-servants-gone-wild Bacchanal in Vegas.
All over this dying republic, you couldn’t find a single solitary $28 item that doesn’t wind up costing at least 800 bucks by the time it’s been sluiced through the federal budgeting process. Yet, in one plucky little corner of the Secret Service, supervisor David Chaney, dog-handler Greg Stokes, or one of the other nine agents managed to turn the principles of government procurement on their head. If the same fiscal prudence were applied to the 2011 Obama budget, the $3.598 trillion splurge would have cost just shy of $126 billion. The feds’ half a billion to Solyndra would have been a mere $18 million. The 823-grand GSA conference on government efficiency at the M Resort Spa & Casino would have come in at $28,805.
Chaney-Stokes 2012! Grope . . . and Change! Red lights, not red ink.
Go read the whole thing.
I think the working girls lived in the country of Colombia.
Are you sure these picts are of the participants? My first thoughs were NFW…I would need another fifth of mescal first. I hope the SS would choose better.
No, I doubt if they are, but I’m assuming they’re typical. Of course, they’re streetwalkers, and the secret service folks might have found a better class (e.g., escorts).
Picture of the woman wronged, she definitely worth more than the 47$ , probably not her original asking price.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/secret-service-colombian-hooker-scandal-escort-explosive-scandal-article-1.1064287
I don’t know. If you’ve been cooped up guarding Moochelle and Hillary for a few months the Colubian women would look pretty darn hot. Heck, we’re lucky the agents weren’t caught with farm animals.
Most people as-u-me that real life hookers like like hookers on TV (drop dead gorgeous) and think Julia Roberts. But as an old sailor, having been in few houses of ill repute (no I didn’t, I only went because the beer was colder and the food was cheaper, I was a married sailor too) most hookers look about like these in the pictures, and these are Top Shelf to be honest given most I’ve seen.
This, to me, is an issue of numbers.
I want to know how many guys were in the total SS contingent?
(was this 12 guys out of 50? or 100? or 150?)
Other than that Stupidvisor, how many of them are MARRIED?
(if a single is this dumb, it falls in HIS head to catch something, married guys should be thinking better…)
Is there a ‘rule’ that says they CAN’T do this?
(in the U.S. Military, there are rules saying NOT to do this…)
(I don’t condone this action personally, but with respect to the single guys, that’s none of my business, unless OpSec was violated)
“Is there a ‘rule’ that says they CAN’T do this?”
Seriously? Anyone on active guard duty for a high U.S. official would have to steer a mile clear of people like this. The risks are horrendous.
Even if the official isn’t high, the risks are probably pretty big…
BTW, this is a great article:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/296640/grope-and-change-mark-steyn
MfK,
I’m in TOTAL agreement that the risks are through the roof.
But I’m not a SS Agent, so I have zero idea of the rues and regs. This, it seems to me, might be one of those times where what looks like common sense to most any adult, gets overlooked in the written rules.
If that’s the case, one guy figured it out 25 / 50 years ago, then he told his best bud, pretty soon anyone on that crew, who had a ‘want’ for a foreign hooker, was overlooking common sense, and doing what no one had ever said was undoable in the rules and regs.
Those unwritten / untalked about situations are now , perhaps, a pandemic in the SS. It’s not exactly the same situation security wise, but I’ve got a common sense, it’s not in the rules remembrance from the Navy.
It’s not security, but it seems like a possibly huge safety issue after the fact.
In the 60’s and early 70’s, people quit buying Zippo type lighters and many people started using BIC Lighters. Those Bic’s were made of thick plastic that you could drive a truck over without breaking that butane gas cylinder.
But as cheaper models came out, they weren’t as robust.
While I was on the U.S.S. Elliot, the HT’s (welders) got a Directive saying they needed to make sure no one had a Bic type lighter, or knock off, in their shirt or pants pockets while welding or grinding. The reason for that was that number of guys had been seriously burned when slag and metal shards had gotten next the the lighters, burned through the cylinder and set fire to the butane.
If they had even one instance where someone was seriously injured it’s too many IMO. But that was a period of time where the majority of adults smoked, so it was potentially a TON of accidents waiting to happen. But until the now obvious situation DID in fact happen no one ever gave it a thought.
Again, no loss of security from the welding thing, and not on the same level as protecting the POTUS, but at the largest end of the welding rules not being thought out, there was the possibility of a fire getting started on a ship.
Both situations seem like common sense NOW, but I’ve not heard anyone say, the SS Agents violated,
.
.
Rule 13.9, Section 4, Paragraph 1…Agents Shall Not seek or or accept the favors of Prostitutes either ON Duty or OFF Duty.
.
.
And I think if that rule existed, we’d be hearing it from some talking head on one of the 10,917 Political Shows on TV, Cable, and Radio, or from the Blogs.
Oh, look over there! It’s Obama eating a hot dog. Oh, look over there! It’s some Democrat saying Mrs. Romney didn’t “work” because she stayed home to raise five boys. Oh, look over there, a butterfly!
This election is about the economy and adherence to the Constitution. Everything else is an intentional distraction from those two issues.
Keep the state of the economy the focus and the Republicans win.
Point out the overreach of the Constitution by the Dem congressmen who passed Obamacare and by unaccountable bureaucrats in various federal agencies and you get out the vote.
I think it’s going to cost a great many of Dems their seats next time around because they voted FOR Obamacare then, and NOW they’re talking it down. Even if there’s a vote to kill it, and they do kill it, those people are dog meat at the polls net time at bat.
Especially guys / women who followed and supported Nancy P.s idea of voting for it so they could read it later.
And this is one time no one in his right mind wants to be dog meat…
Yes, it’s very easy to let the media distractions work. But dammit, he ate dog!
There wasn’t a lot of common sense anywhere in this affair.
Even where it’s legal and you can call the cps for ‘theft of services,’ what hooker negotiates price *after* the fact?
And what Secret Service agent (or anyone of comparably sensitive position) wasn’t trained, or hasn’t learned in their own travels, that Facebook has slightly better than zero security (created by a man who says ‘privacy is dead.’ and is a major accessory to that death…I use it, but like a blog, nothing goes there that I *don’t* want absolutely everyone to know), and questionable pictures or comments about the physical desirability of those whose safety is your responsibility, are insane to post there? (I’ll avoid commenting on his tastes, however…)
‘Loose lips’ (and the potential for extorting same) still means something. Morality, they can take up with their spouses (and the spouses’ divorce lawyers). But these guys deserve to be shown the door, just for common garden stupidity…
Quite a few of the Buzzfeed commenters are skeptical of the claim that the women in the photos are indeed prostitutes – the women are dressed just like average female American nightclub-goers, after all. I would trust that a Reuters photographer named Joaquin Sarmiento knows more about Colombia than a commenter named Hurshey Bar does.
And I don’t assume that non-prostitute Colombian gals wear the same party attire that non-prostitute American gals do.
AKH said,
.
“And I don’t assume that non-prostitute Colombian gals wear the same party attire that non-prostitute American gals do.”
.
But there’s a real good chance that we can no longer tell the non-prostitutes from the prostitutes, based soley on clothing. I used to live near a university, and what some of those girls wore on weekend nights, to go out to the clubs, brought to mind working girls almost anywhere.
And I’m not going with any kind of ‘nice girls don’t dress that way’ theme either.
I’m just saying that these 18 to 2? women, were wearing about as little, made up as much as any hooker I’ve ever had approach me in a hotel bar or bar near a metropolitan center back when I traveled for work.
And it seems to me, I saw the pros dressing that way, years before I saw the college females dressing that way.
hmm ok embedding a youtube video didn’t work.
Try http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBPaenkxdg
There seems to be more to the SS scandal. 11 SS and 21 hookers: Bill Maher says, “You do the math.” Apparently Grassley has.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, is questioning the U.S. Secret Service about possible involvement of White House staff in the Colombian prostitution scandal.