Are you asking if it’s a written policy? That’s a different question.
Well, let’s start with their web page:
[Sterling Archer]Then why be one?[/Sterling Archer]
This and your previous post are right on the mark. I can vouch for the rules about reporting foreign contacts. More than one diplomat has been brought down by sex scandal. Get him in bed, in comes the accomplice with a camera, and he’s in the position of disclosing what he’s done and taking the marital consequences, or forking over information to keep them at bay. Felix Bloch was a prime example of this in Vienna. He now drives a bus somewhere, but not after giving away classified information to the Soviets after being caught with a Soviet-planted prostitute. Then there was that whole scandal with the Marine in Moscow (also tied to Mr. Bloch).
These SS guys and the previous guys who have done this have taken serious risks, exposing themselves to compromise and blackmail. Many tourist rooms in the third world have electronic eavesdropping equipment installed. Those rooms are routinely given to visitors from foreign governments to monitor their activities. The only mystery is how this sort of behavior has not gone public way before this.
As others have mentioned, traveling on a Secret Service security detail is hardly a 9-to-5 job. And as a matter of fact, it’s VERY common for companies to have a paragraph in their employees contract that says something to the effect of “While traveling on company business, you’re representing us. Doing something that will make us look like assholes will get you fired.” When the Secret Service is in a foreign country, part of their official role is to represent the United States.
Even if your employer encourages you to hire prostitutes, “Give me X/do X for me or I’ll tell your WIFE about those Colombian hookers” will do just fine for blackmail. So will “children,” “your ex-wife’s lawyer,” “girlfriend,” etc. As it turns out, threatening to tear apart one’s family is an excellent way to blackmail someone.
And it doesn’t matter if the agents in question were single at the time. Odds are they’ll be married eventually, and I doubt discussing your hooker and blow night in Colombia is really a conversation most men want to have with their new brides.
Don’t take my word for it. This article by bloomberg says an investigation is underway “to determine whether any classified information was lost or compromised as well as the identities of the women involved and whether they may have been recruited by a foreign intelligence service or a group with hostile intentions toward Obama.”
The article also has quotes from Senator Collins, the ranking Republican on the Homeland Security committee (and others in Congress) espressing concern about the security issues.
So will almost anything. “Give me state secrets, or I will tell your mother about your father’s affair.” “Give me state secrets, or I’ll tell the press that you’re a nudist.” “Give me state secrets, or I’ll reveal how you downloaded Horny Grandmas IV.” “Give me state secrets, or I’ll reveal that your fancy house you’re so proud of is of shoddy construction and underwater on two mortgages.” “Give me state secrets, or I’ll reveal you’re impotent.”
At a certain point, we have to acknowledge that we all lead private lives that contain components we don’t want publicized. And that the best innoculation against this sort of blackmail is society’s kindness to overlook these none-of-our-business revelations when they are made. See generally Jack McGeorge.
The difference between a private employer and these guys is that Secret Service members have security clearances and are thus vulnerable to the information they have being compromised through blackmail. I have to argue your logic above: if someone is a “closeted homosexual”, how would the agency know to relieve him of his position? Frequenting a brothel is a secondary issue. The ‘honey traps’ that frequent bars are even worse than hookers, as they may be professional agents of the host country. It’s knowingly placing yourself in a compromising situation and not reporting the contact that is the issue.
Losing one’s clearance is a seriously big deal. It means you will likely never be able to hold another government job (or private sector job that deals with national security) that requires anything higher than a ‘confidential’ rating (if that). I worked for twelve years with a ‘secret’ clearance, and guarded it vigorously. After that, I worked for a two DOD contractors which also required government background checks. If I had lost my clearance because I was to stupid to safeguard it, it would have seriously hampered my earning ability.
And the capital of South Carolina.
Some of you seem to be arguing “it shouldn’t be that way.” Well, that’s sort of a different argument from whether it is that way or not.
You know, there shouldn’t be consequences if you fart. But if you fart at a formal dinner to which the President invited you, while he’s speaking, you’re not going to be invited back.
Doesn’t what has happened qualify as a conniption?
Yes, it does. And I dare say not one predicated on the diminished stature of American diplomacy but seeing a tawdry story that will sell newspapers and furnish the opportunity to score political points.
Oh for Christs sake.:rolleyes:
“Leading a private life” has nothing to do with having a Colombian hooker and blow party while on duty as a US Secret Service Agent. Do you think that behavior is befitting a law enforcement office who is representing the highest office of the most powerful country on Earth?
“Yeah honey, you should just overlook this none-of-your-business revelation that I cheated on you with a Colombian prostitute.” :rolleyes:
It doesn’t matter what society thinks. If someone was blackmailing me in this way, I’d be much more worried about losing my wife, my kids, my house, half of everything I own, many of my friends, etc. than about someone reading about it in the paper.
A blackmailer in this case wouldn’t threaten to go to the newspaper, they’d threaten to go to the person’s spouse.
This is exactly how it works. An employer may overlook your indiscretion; a spouse in unlikely to. So the extortionist says, ‘tell you what, give me a copy of the proposed itinerary and we’ll call it all good.’ Agent thinks, ‘ah, easy way out’ and does so. Now they have him by the balls because he’s given up classified information, which can mean prison time. Now the demands get increasingly higher and the stakes go up.
Groupthinky? I gotta use that from now on! 
Also, I think these guys need some off-time recreation. They have a very stressful job. Just not where security is kept. Blackmail? I don’t think so.
I’m not even a secret service agent, but every year I have to take a basic refresher web course on ethics, the explicitly stated underlying principal of which is don’t do anything that will embarrass the government.
I don’t believe that you think downloading pornography is of equivalent blackmail value to cheating on your spouse with a prostitute. If you don’t believe that, then what’s your point here?
It’s a real phenomenon; see here.
Could be to someone else though and with blackmail that’s all that matters. Say, conversely, the agents at issue were swingers and their wives don’t care. Does that mean I win?
Do you have a stronger argument other than “They’re just different!”?