1d ago

Trump says he's ending Secret Service protection for Biden's adult children

apnews.com Trump says he's ending Secret Service protection for Biden's adult children

President Donald Trump said Monday he was ending “immediately” the Secret Service protection details assigned to Joe Biden’s adult children, which the former president had extended for six months shortly before leaving office in January.

The Republican president on social media objected to what he said were 18 agents assigned to Hunter Biden’s protective detail while in South Africa this week. He said Ashley Biden has 13 agents assigned to her detail and that she too “will be taken off the list.”

There was no immediate reaction from the former president’s office.

Former presidents and their spouses receive life-long Secret Service protection under federal law, but the protection afforded to their immediate families over the age of 16 ends when they leave office. But outgoing presidents can extend protection for those who might otherwise not be eligible for up to six months after they leave office, something Biden did for his children and Trump did for his family after leaving office in 2021. Former Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush also extended protection for their families for a period.

You're viewing a single thread.

52 comments

OK so this is actually pretty normal?
Edit: For all the Lemmings out there having trouble understanding, you don't have to read the article, but at least read the summary. Their USSS protection would end in a few months anyway. Trump is a colossal asshole, yes, but they're only getting a few months less of USSS protection. The length of time they get protection is fairly normal.
- Posting about it on social media seems to be thinly veiled stochastic terrorism
  
  That is pretty fucked up indeed. I still doubt anyone attacks them or anything.
  
  Maybe not, but maybe they will.
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_turbulent_priest%3F
  
  Maybe, maybe. But the way stochastic terrorism works is you just roll the dice against long odds over and over and eventually someone does what you're suggesting.
  
  Paul Pelosi is a pretty solid example here
  
  If their USSS protection would have ended in like July anyway, couldn't a potential attacker have just waited until then to do whatever they're gonna do? I get that by calling attention to it, Trump increases the odds of an attack though.
  
  I get that by calling attention to it, Trump increases the odds of an attack though.
  Yeah that's really the whole of it. They're not trying to get smart professional people to shoot their enemies. They want to get impulsive people. That person isn't likely to go look up these things but if they get the idea put in front of them they might act
- Trump did for his family after leaving office in 2021.
  It's normal to extend it. It's not normal for the next President to end it. Especially when that hypocrite did it for his own offspring just 4 years earlier.
  
  Right, I'm talking about the time length. 6 months normally versus 2 months here. In the grand scheme of things, not that big of a deal. It's not like they would have had lifetime protection and now he's cancelling that.
  
  It's the cancelling that's the unusual part. There's no reason to other than to be an asshole. And calling attention to the fact that these people (some who are violently hated by MAGA) are now "unprotected" is... you get it.
  
  Dude you just said 2 months was 'normal' now youre literally saying the opposite (6 months normal)
- No. How the fuck would you think that's normal?
  
  This is how the fuck:
  "But outgoing presidents can extend protection for those who might otherwise not be eligible for up to six months after they leave office"
  It would end in a few months anyway. Yeah he's being petty and he's a dickhead, but it's not that big of a difference.
  
  Thank you for proving my point. I think you need to look up the definition of normal, because you obviously don't have a fucking clue what normal is.
  
  How did I prove your point at all? I'm talking about the time range of protection ending. There's like a three month difference. In the realm of terrible things Trump has done so far, this is barely noticeable.
  
  Lmao 🤣 your initial comment said this was pretty normal. It's literally never happened. As for your other argument, maybe look up some dates or something.
  
  Hello? Are we even having a conversation or are you just ecstatic that you got a chance to be smug on the internet? What dates am I supposed to look up? The summary said they usually get six months of protection after the former president's term ends. So they'll be missing out on 4 months of protection that they would normally get. Please save your smug energy for the actual Trump supporters.
  
  You just literally used the word 'normal' again for the opposite of your point. They would 'normally' get 6 months, how could 2 months be normal then?
  Please just admit you used the word normal wrong, theres no need to keep up this charade to save face.
  
  So, 2 months versus 6 months means nothing. It's totally normal for Trump to vindictively take away 66% of their protection? And, I said look up some dates because you originally said 3 months. Keep it up, my smugness intensifies.
  
  You are right about one thing. I said 3 months because I can't count. Inauguration is late January, so then until now is 2 months. I am horribly sorry not to have met your expectations, O Lord of Righteousness. Since you're till having trouble understanding what I'm saying, it wasn't 66% of their total protection. Assuming they were protected for the entirety of Biden's term, Trump is taking away (since you love numbers so much) 7.4% (4 out of 54 [4 years is 48 months, plus the 6 month extension period] total months of their overall protection.
  
  This just keeps getting more entertaining. How exactly would Trump have taken away their protection before he was president? Their protection while Biden was president is not in any way related to this argument. Again, my only argument is that this is not normal as your first comment suggested, but by all means, keep trying to talk yourself into it being normal. Either way, I'm done here. Enjoy your down votes as I'm sure you will.
  
  Hello, Elesevenenseven. You seem to have trouble understanding that them losing less than 10% of the total protection time means that they have almost the normal amount of protection time. I'm not saying that Trump would have taken away their protection before he was president. At this point, I'm not sure if your reading comprehension is actually that poor or if you're just really desperate to keep up the nitpicky smug internet argument act.
  I agree that taking away the protection is not normal. I get that. Their protection ending is normal. It's not like he ended what would normally be lifetime protection. I could have worded my original comment better, but I didn't expect someone to get so invested in being an asshole in response to a comment I wrote in 10 seconds while multitasking.
- Forcefully ending the protection early despite it being established by the previous president? Hell no.
- normal? for the diaper-in-chief to be a petty whiny little baby? yup.
- Everything Trump does is normal. For a dumb rapist conman.
- abby something
- Petty, but not unprecedented. It’s pretty normal.
  
  Has any other president canceled their predecessors USSS protection for offspring early?

52 comments