The Hill Asks About RFK2 Security

[Benjamin Cole]

A question for EF-JFKA'ers:

Given the performance of the Secret Service on 11/22/63, and the imperatives of the Deep State...would RFK2 be safer, or less safe, under Secret Service protection? 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Michael Griffith]

I think RFK Jr. would be safer if he had Secret Service protection. I think the Secret Service is better than it was in 1963. Obviously, RFK Jr. himself thinks he'd be safer with Secret Service protection, or else he would not have asked for it.

Ronald Reagan's Secret Service detail saved his life when John Hinckley tried to kill him in March 1982.

I happen to know a Secret Service agent and two former agents from other agencies who did presidential protection work. They are all men of good character who would never take part in any illicit operation to allow someone to be harmed.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

I think RFK Jr. would be safer if he had Secret Service protection. I think the Secret Service is better than it was in 1963. Obviously, RFK Jr. himself thinks he'd be safer with Secret Service protection, or else he would not have asked for it.

Ronald Reagan's Secret Service detail saved his life when John Hinckley tried to kill him in March 1982.

I happen to know a Secret Service agent and two former agents from other agencies who did presidential protection work. They are all men of good character who would never take part in any illicit operation to allow someone to be harmed.

MG--

Thanks for your civil and collegial reply. 

One reason I ask the question is after Jan. 6, the Secret Service said it had "washed" all of its cellphones, and so had no cellphone records (texts) to turn over to the Jan. 6 committee. 

So...we see the usual, that is an executive branch security agency operating without oversight, beyond the purview of even the elected Congress, and sometimes even the elected President. Even the Congress or President can request records from the security state, and get the middle finger. 

Remember when the CIA-Richard Helms gave President Nixon the middle finger when he said he wanted to see the "Bay of Pigs" files? 

Who believes all the Secret Service cellphones were routinely washed after Jan. 6? 

James Murray, a 27-year veteran of the service, was director in 2020. 

Now, partisan sentiments run rife, and color narratives, but I am a non-partisan talking about the Deep State. 

Now, I happen to believe Jan. 6 committee was a show trial, not unlike many, perhaps like most high-profile Congressional hearings/investigations, run by either party. There was no counsel for the defense, the witnesses are curated and not cross-examined,, the statements culled, the evidence and experts presented only by the "prosecution." The media, at best, reports from ringside, and at worst is complicit. The Warren Committee comes to mind. Same format. Highly politicized and expedient. 

So what is the Secret Service really hiding in its texts leading up to, and including, Jan. 6? 

Some have posited the Secret Service was coopted by Trump, but I find that implausible, especially as they were run by 27-year vet Murray. Almost without exception, everyone who worked from Trump found him unbearable on a personal level.  

Some have posited Jan. 6 was a false flag op (such as JFKA expert Mark Groubert). Could the Secret Service have been clued into the unfolding events, and told where to put Trump---and those revealing texts have been washed?  

Interesting questions...for RFK2 also. 

That said, I think the way the Deep State deposes Presidents or ruins candidates anymore is not by gunfire. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

One thread on this topic, on the main forum, is enough.

Ben, move your video to the main thread if you want.

 

[Karl Kinaski]

@Michael Griffith said, quote:

Quote

I happen to know a Secret Service agent and two former agents from other agencies who did presidential protection work. They are all men of good character who would never take part in any illicit operation to allow someone to be harmed.

Abraham Bolden told a different story.

RFK is paying 100 000 to 200 000 bucks a month out o his own pocket for his personal security.  I think he is better off with that arrangement.  That is not much compared to Zuck, quote:

Quote

According to a filing by the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI) in February 2023, the company increased its spending on Mark Zuckerberg's personal security by $4 million. This means that Zuckerberg's personal security costs $14 million in 2023, up from $10 million in previous years.

Now ask me if something is wrong with mankind.