Dude probably has no idea how to properly handle a gun, AND he has a permanent secret service detail.
This has zero impact on his life, other than politically.
Not permanent. He will lose his security at some point. Obama changed the direction of how long people keep secret service details.
Personally, I think they should keep them for life. Yes it is a tax payer expense but for their service, I think it is a good expense.
deleted by creator
Oh my God here we go lol
So which one is it? Do you now think they shouldn’t be lifetime or do you agree with Obama? I think I was very clear on the topic. Which part did you find confusing?
Here is what I said
Personally, I think they should keep them for life. Yes it is a tax payer expense but for their service, I think it is a good expense.
deleted by creator
Thanks, Obama!
Boba! Why you so angry dam lol I want y’all to be friends 🧡
deleted by creator
Lol sound a little sassy yea 🤣 but honestly it’s hard to not read lemmy content in that tone if I’m being straight with you lol
Especially in political communities
You’re always really calm in here man that’s good. But idk how you do it lol
👍
Trump was never of any service to the country. He has only ever been a problem, and has only ever served himself.
Are you saying that you reckon an ex-president, who commits any crime (before, during or after serving) should still be protected by the SS?
Including convictions for murder? Extortion? Rape? Child rape?
The protection comes because of the risk of the title. So yes, until they die.
If the SS has to protect Trump in prison so be it.
Jokes aside about the SA, sorry SS, protecting one privileged group of individuals…
At what point should an ex-president lose SS? Is it forever just because they held power? What happens if they start to suffer dementia and start blurting out secrets?
It’s just my opinion but forever. They are at more of risk because of their previous job. As such spending money to protect them isn’t a crazy idea to me.
Obama had Bin Laden killed. I wouldn’t be surprised if some terrorist group wants to kill him in return.
Now this don’t make a damn lick of sense. If we need guns to protect ourselves from gubmint tyranny, and y’all plan to put that feller back in the gubment, then what the hell does he need a gun for?
Here’s what the same gun group said about Hunter Biden using a 2A argument in his case. The judge denied the argument.
that’s right, that Hunter Biden, who, despite his father’s long standing and well known disdain for the second amendment, is now turning to the exercise of his rights to shield him from prosecution. “Rules for thee but not for me” eh Hunter?
This sounds like undigested talking points being regurgitated in a warm mental vomit stew, with lots of little chunks of everything in there.
