What Happens in Cartagena …

Posted on | April 15, 2012 | 38 Comments

Most of the Secret Service agents embroiled in a prostitution scandal brought women back to their Colombia hotel rooms before President Obama arrived in town for an international summit, Rep. Pete King said Saturday.
King said the raunchy rendezvous involved 11 agents and went sour when an agent refused to pay one of the women, who were presumed to be hookers.
“The agent said, ‘I don’t owe you anything,’ but gave the woman some money,” said King (R-L.I.),the head of the House Homeland Security Committee, who was briefed on the matter. “I don’t know how much, and it was settled right there.”
As it turned out, the agents’ troubles were just beginning. Local cops were called to the hotel in Cartagena and, because the matter involved foreigners, a report was written up and sent to the U.S. Embassy, King said.

Five U.S. military personnel were also involved in the scandal.

Category: Scandal, Sex

Comments

38 Responses to “What Happens in Cartagena …”

CPAguy
April 15th, 2012 @ 3:52 am

Just a bit of clarification. It wasn’t that they didn’t want to pay the pro her money….it was that they weren’t aware (evidently) of the policy of most south of the border hotels requiring a fee for bringing a woman (who didn’t register with you) to your room.

This is a bizarre policy that reflects the society’s acceptance of prostitution and a means for establishments to profit from it.

This policy sucks because if you go out and meet a girl/friend/cousin/whatever (of the non-pro variety) you can’t bring her to you room for any reason without paying a fee.
Charles
April 15th, 2012 @ 4:09 am

Hmm … John Edwards to Afghan embassy to Al Gore to DSK to Anthony Weiner to Cartagena.
Adjoran
April 15th, 2012 @ 4:36 am

Look, there’s a right way and a wrong way to do everything, including stiffing a hooker.
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 8:43 am

I sense the hand of Hugo Chavez in this. This is obviously a sinister plot to infect our brave men of the Secret Service with a venereal disease which they might then give to our President.
Jim22
April 15th, 2012 @ 10:27 am

In the immortal word of Andrew Breitbart, “So?” What business is it of anyone’s?
Evi L. Bloggerlady
April 15th, 2012 @ 10:27 am

Pagan: If that was the goal, they would have to infect Axelrod and Carney, and don’t forget Reggie Love.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
April 15th, 2012 @ 10:29 am

Words of advice: Never stiff a hooker (especially when you are on duty).
Easy to Fool the Tools | Daily Pundit
April 15th, 2012 @ 10:30 am

[…] to Fool the Tools Posted on April 15, 2012 7:30 am by Bill Quick What Happens in Cartagena … : The Other McCain . . . doesn’t stay in […]
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 10:35 am

Are you fucking kidding? They were on duty, its all of our business. If they want to do shit like that they need to do it on their private off-duty time, and on their own dime.
JeffS
April 15th, 2012 @ 10:57 am

I’ll put it this way:

1. Duty first, dick second, first, last and always. I say that as a retired soldier.

2. Columbia is an active battleground. FARC is running an aggressive terrorist campaign in support of their “revolution”, including inside the city of Cartagena.

3. Prostitutes, regardless of the local social and legal conditions, are generally very low on the pecking order. They are vulnerable to pressure from anyone with the ability to influence a police officer (see #2, above). As such, they are very useful in espionage, terrorism, and other covert activities, as sources of leverage (e.g., blackmail), intelligence, and so on. This is a standard element of any operational security briefing.

(Feminists, please note that this applies to prostitutes of any gender. Contain your outrage, please.)

Ergo, the members of the Secret Service and military contingents let their guard down when they dropped their pants in an area with a high security risk and known terrorist threat.

That’s dereliction of duty, among other things. It bespeaks of really bad leadership (not surprising, given who they’re protecting), poor morale, and incredibly bad judgment.

Yeah, yeah, it’s a free country, blah blah blah. Not for these people. They signed up for this duty, and have an obligation to a higher level of behavior, especially when on duty. They’re human, and the urge to get laid will always be there. I know that. But they were both professionals sent on a specific and high priority mission, and gringos in a country filled with terrorists and their sympathizers. They screwed the pooch in a big way.

TPT senses the hand of Hugo Chavez, and he could be right. But it could have been set up by FARC.

But the real problem here is that a security detail that is supposed to be comprised of the best of the best wasn’t. It’s an embarrassment to the country. Obama will likely shrug this off, because in Chicago, this is business as usual. So you can write this down as yet another institution damaged and/or destroyed by President Zero.
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 11:53 am

I was joking about Chavez (especially the part about Secret Service Agents giving Obama an STD), but you never can tell. There has long been a rumored connection between FARC and Chavez, one I think he generally denies, though he has also played at mediating in others disputes with the group.

I would like to think the agents used all deliberate caution and professional skill in picking up these women and there wasn’t any real danger. After all, these are people trained to spot potential danger within huge crowds amidst constant noise and mayhem.

Still, it was a stupid move on their part, and at the very least, dereliction of duty.
Adobe_Walls
April 15th, 2012 @ 12:33 pm

It’s not right to stiff a hooker unless she/he/it failed to provide the agreed upon service.
richard mcenroe
April 15th, 2012 @ 12:37 pm

Shows how far the Obama rot has spread in the WH. These guys used to be elite, now they’re acting like a bunch of Chicago cops or 70’s NYPD.

Even Clinton didn’t hurt the Service’s morale this badly.
Adobe_Walls
April 15th, 2012 @ 12:38 pm

Leadership, sense of duty, propriety all come from the top right?
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 1:23 pm

As tempting as it is to lay this off on Obama, he was not around at the time, and even if he was, they are supposed to be professionals, highly trained with sharpened senses and heightened instincts. Obama is not an excuse. Whenever danger looms, they are supposed to take charge, whether the President is or is not present.
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 1:24 pm

They are supposed to be prepared for any eventuality. Obama is not an excuse.
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 1:43 pm

On the other hand, there is another possibility, especially knowing Obama. I’d say there is a better than average chance he has gone out of his way to make sure there is more “diversity” (read-black) within his Secret Service detail. As such, there is always the possibility that this might have resulted in some individuals being promoted to a higher security level than their own level of training and accomplishment qualified them for, and this kind of thing might have been the result of that. Not that they were black, just that they were bumped up too soon, causing the Peter Principle to kick in.
Peter Davis
April 15th, 2012 @ 1:44 pm

I’m wondering where the “on duty” comes from. These SS guys and the five military guys were clearly off duty, unless of course you can be on duty while in your hoter room. I guess my being from a different era shows. To me it’s a big whoop, of no interest of anyone but wives and fiances. Ask any Viet Nam vet about the LBFMs of, say, Thailand. Just not in front of the small children.
JeffS
April 15th, 2012 @ 1:53 pm

Indeed they are, TPT. But you fail to understand that this particular security detail takes their orders directly from the President and his staff. It can’t be any other way. That’s what “Commander-in-Chief” means.

Unless you’re telling me that the Treasury Department
or Department of Homeland Security gives orders to the
President, rather than the other way around.

So, yes, I do lay this off on Obama. He runs a sloppy ship, and it shows in the details. Literally.
Adobe_Walls
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:01 pm

He sets the tone whether he’s there or not. The reason the press got this (apparently) is because the Colombians wrote a report and sent it to our embassy. I’d guess that there’s a high probability this would have been found out at some point by those within the administration (people do talk). However small that chance apparently 11 agents weren’t worried about that possibility and didn’t fear repercussions. They got the idea that no one would care from somewhere.
Pathfinder's wife
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:02 pm

Nonetheless, even when the boss is bad the dogs need to remember to do their work well.
The procuring of services is a tempest in a teapot, but the opening up for a breach in security etc. is a big no-no and the real issue.

It isn’t easy when the bosses aren’t worth a damn, but it still has to happen; what a mess.
I think the rot has always been lurking around; it has just gotten a favorable climate to come out in the open now; what a mess.
JeffS
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:02 pm

When you are in Indian territory, you are always on duty. They were better off staying celibate until returning to the USA, and picking up some female Columbian ex-pats in compensation.

In any theater of war, there will be sex. Even in Iraq and Afghanistan, in spite of that asinine General Order Number One issued back in 2003. It’s human nature. But even the young and horny learn when to keep it in their pants, and when to play. It’s called “discretion”.

As for Vietnam……I don’t know if there was an equivalent to GO#1 (I’m an old fart, but not THAT old),but I do know that, at the very least, the commanders winked at it. That generation remembered full well George Patton’s axiom, “A soldier who won’t fuck, won’t fight”, unlike today’s politically correct flag officers. So it’s not a good example for this situation.
JeffS
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:07 pm

That’s possible, but all 11 Secret Service agents, and 5 military personnel? Occam’s Razor suggests that this is, at best, a partial explanation.

Now, if the detail supervisor falls into the category of “Promoted to their first level of incompetence”, your point moves to #1.

Even then, SOME of the others should have protested. And maybe they did, but were ignored. I really don’t know.

But when an organization starts to fall apart, you look at the chain of command. Which is pretty short in this case.
JeffS
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:19 pm

Agreed, Obama is not an excuse. But he’s not THEIR excuse. He can be (and probably is) the root cause here.
John David Galt
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:30 pm

Sex work is legal there. Therefore there is no issue. Who cares what the bigots think?
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:38 pm

Heroin is legal in Amsterdam, so I take it if a Secret Service detail went there ahead of the President to prepare for a visit and in the meantime decided to shoot up, you’d have no problem with that either.
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:46 pm

Anytime the Secret Service goes to prepare for a presidential trip, they are on duty, and are never off duty. They have to be ready to respond at a moment’s notice. There is no room or time for whores.

They are not off duty until the trip is concluded and they return home. Even then they are on duty until they are officially off the clock and leave official premises.
Tennwriter
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:49 pm

From what I hear, there was a danger in Viet Nam of the prostitute deciding to knife you on behalf of the Commies. One suspects a similar danger here….the drug cartels could easy-peasy get to a prostitute, and tell her to do something.

This is worse than a sin, its a blunder….Talleyrand.
Tennwriter
April 15th, 2012 @ 2:51 pm

Someone’s thinking with his little ah, partner, and not his brain.
odysseus
April 15th, 2012 @ 5:05 pm

The fish toys from the head.
Philaver
April 15th, 2012 @ 5:07 pm

“rots”, damm spellcheck!
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 6:06 pm

You have Democrat leftist idiots who will defend Obama over anything, even shit like this that might even be putting his safety and life at risk. In-Fucking-Credible!
Bob Belvedere
April 15th, 2012 @ 6:34 pm

Well put and spot-on.
Bob Belvedere
April 15th, 2012 @ 6:40 pm

Exactly. Pros have been known to rifle through jackets, wallets, and luggage. What if one got a hold of the security diagrams?
Wombat_socho
April 15th, 2012 @ 7:29 pm

“Hats back on, gentlemen; a moron.”
ThePaganTemple
April 15th, 2012 @ 7:46 pm

They might not even have to do that. A high quality wireless transmitter that would fit in seamlessly with the threads of an undergarment or suit jacket, wholly undetectable to the naked eye, might enable someone to track their movements at any given time, and if they are so unprofessional as to do something like this, there’s a good chance they wouldn’t think to check for something like that.
JeffS
April 15th, 2012 @ 9:09 pm

I’m sure that he has his little partner well in hand.
Pathfinder's wife
April 16th, 2012 @ 12:35 am

Or say something offhand. It’s actually the simplest of errors — and one which can be highly profitable for an enemy.
Far easier to accomplish and oftentimes more productive than any super dooper secret squirrel stuff (although planting something would be easily accomplished as well, but also easier to detect). In fact, just getting a person to talk about anything is a primary interrogation method — they get comfortable, they don’t guard their words as well as they should; it’s amazing what little things can lead to big breaks.

Not only that, but this also gives others encouragement to try something, as a breach has been found.

This was a pretty major slip up, not “no big deal”.