Sex Work

Secret Service Agents Should be Allowed to Rent Hookers

|

Not all the benefits are deferred.

The dust-up over 11 Secret Service agents who were patronizing Cartagena prostitutes has given some much-needed news value to another pointless multi-nation summit. The scandal broke, according to Rep. Peter King (R-New York), after police were called over some spirited hotel-room haggling about a $47 fee between a local hooker and an agent in town as part of the U.S. security detail.

This was a rare and laudable example of a Department of Homeland Security employee trying to save the taxpayers some money. It was also a demonstration of the truism that you don't pay a hooker to have sex with you; you pay her to go away afterward. (The sex pro apparently refused to leave until she was paid, thus overstaying a 7 a.m. curfew for overnight visitors.) 

The story may entail some actual issues with security: The agents in question reportedly spent much of their deployment drinking. 

And of course, a dispute that ends with a police report being filed and sent to the U.S. embassy pretty clearly meets the definition of unprofessional behavior that is unbecoming of the department's…that besmirches the good reputation of an agency that…that puts in jeopardy the sterling reputation of… Oh, all right: It's completely in keeping with the history of the DHS, which has in the past few years generated scandals involving contracting scams, bribery, attempted statutory rape and even diploma fraud

Ronald Kessler, tireless author of books about government agencies, tells CBS This Morning the scandal threatens the very fabric of our nation: 

Kessler called this latest incident in Colombia "a very shocking scandal."

He added the situation may be a sign of a trend because it involved supervisors. Kessler called it "just unbelievable" and a "tremendous embarrassment to the U.S."

He said that the Secret Service personnel's liaising with prostitutes could expose them blackmail to acquire access to secure areas. "They could have led to an assassination. And if you have an assassination, you nullify democracy. That's how important the Secret Service is."

Great use of the irritating verb "liaising" there. But that blackmail stuff seems like a stretch. The value-add of prostitution is that it replaces the tiresome negotiations, performance and cajoling of a hookup with a business transaction that is relatively straightforward. At 47 bucks, it's a good bet Agent Tightwad was getting a better deal financially than he would have gotten from a sexual liaison purchased with dinner and movie, drinks, dancing, flowers, feigned interest in small talk, and so on. 

In this case, Colombia tolerates prostitution within certain areas, which apparently included the hotel. So where is the opportunity for blackmail? If the idea of Secret Service agents paying hookers is embarrassing, it's because we have chosen to make it so. The scandal here — and the only reason the rest of us have now had to hear all about it — is that the agent didn't want to pay the woman (presuming it was a woman) what she was asking for. 

NEXT: Sheldon Richman on the Bipartisan Corporatism of Obama and Romney

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. In this case, Colombia tolerates prostitution within certain areas, which apparently included the hotel. So where is the opportunity for blackmail?

    You’re not married, are you Cavanaugh? Because I find it hard to believe a guy with a wife would say something so utterly stupid.

    Now, if every one of these Secret Service agents is single, then I agree it’s not all that big a deal, but I highly doubt that’s the case.

    1. If they’re in standard marriages, hooking up with any woman will be a problem. But it will be less likely to cause trouble in the context of an open business transaction where payment has been made for services rendered. But hey, if you can’t believe anybody would say something so utterly stupid, who am I to argue with Margaret Dumont?

      1. So you’re not married then?

          1. Can we call trying, in vain, to start a meme Heroic Mulatto’s folly?

            1. Can we call trying, in vain, to start a meme Heroic Mulatto’s folly?

              Heh. Why not?

            2. But if it works, he will have started a meme (indirectly), thus making your new meme absolutely ludicrous!

              Let’s call it Bee Tagger’s folly.

          2. Unless this is Tim trolling for weekend hits, this seems like another instance of ideology overriding common sense. Yes, libertarians want liberty and open business transactions. So if the agents had been caught strung out on drugs, would his response be to argue for legalization?

            It seems obvious to me that the essence of the job includes being alert for possible threats, being professional, having good judgment, and not embarrassing your boss and your country. Even libertarians who don’t believe in victimless crimes should be able to see that.

            1. ^^^This.

            2. “Common sense” tells me that something is wrong when my prostitute friends are arrested for something in the U.S.A. that government security agents are utilizing in Columbia.

              1. Are your prostitute friends directly charged with the safety and security of PrezBO?

                Which is why the GSA’s shouldn’t be distracted from their job. I may not like the current Pres, but he deserves the highest level of security and safety at all times. If nothing else, to relieve me of hearing the phrase, “Congratulations, President Biden, you have been sworn in as the 45th President of the United States.”

            3. It seems obvious to me that the essence of the job includes being alert for possible threats, being professional, having good judgment, and not embarrassing your boss and your country.

              LOL! Someone over the age of 15 actually believes this>?

          3. I think this law is indeed apt, because the hilarious ideological defense of prostitution by Cavanaugh is hilarious.

            Of course there is risk of blackmail is the agent is married, and even a dude with a girlfriend would be aware of that.

            1. Unless she’s a cool girlfriend.

              1. Why is a girlfriend with an aversion to infidelity and polyamoury uncool?

            2. Not to mention that the guy is losing his job because his dealings with a prostitute got out. Seems like pretty good blackmail material to me.

      2. Tim does have a point here… If the reason the agents are not allowed to hire prostitutes is that there is potential for blackmail, then why are they allowed to go on dates, etc.? Alternately, if it is appropriate for them to go on dates, why not hire prostitutes? Either could have blackmail potential if the agent is married/in a relationship. It seems inconsistent…

        1. So the King’s Guard should take a vow of chastity?

    2. Why isn’t the liberal press complaining about Obama’s police enjoying sex slaves?

    3. The article misses the point, but so do you, IMHO. I don’t know which of these agents is married, I don’t know what agreements they have with their wives about banging hookers when out of country, and in the end I really don’t care if they cheat on their wives. Maybe they are scumbags for having betrayed some sacred oath- why should I care?

      What matters to me is that I employee these guys, even if very indirectly. I am pretty sure that if a security detail has time to haggle with hookers over 47 bucks it is either not doing its job or it is larger than necessary. I don’t think my work would care if I got caught hiring a hooker on my own time and dime (though I would never live it down- I work with some vicious wits, and giving them anything at all to work with is a bad idea,) but I would be in trouble if I were using company resources to facilitate drinking and whoring on the job.

      I’m not sure why public servants tasked with protecting the damned President (much as I dislike him) shouldn’t be at least as accountable as I am.

  2. Should the government discipline an employee for (semi) private legal consensual sexual conduct outside the workplace?

    Also, for $47 do we get an itemized bill? Is the $47 for everybody, and we have to figure out who had what? There is always the guy who has two entrees. You know who you are.

    1. I see what you did there, though 47 bucks in Colombia really ought to get you three.

    2. I’m more offended that some uptight socialcon suggested this would have let to an all-out attack on the executive branch.

    3. it’s all a smokescreen. What are we being distracted from this time? Come on, folks. We’ve all seen the movie before: some make-news story grabs the headline for a day or so and, some weeks later, we find that something far more serious occurred while we were looking the other way.

      1. I love how you think.

    4. they brought prostitutes back to their hotel rooms while preparing for a visit by President Barack Obama

      I think they are saying it was a training session for dealing with a 47 billion dollar prostitute.

  3. If a federal agent can’t spend part of his per diem in Columbia on hookers, it’s probably just going to go for more blow.

    Oh, wait! These weren’t DEA agents?

    Sorry. Never mind.

  4. The scandal here ? and the only reason the rest of us have now had to hear all about it ? is that the agent didn’t want to pay the woman (presuming it was a woman) what she was asking for.

    Oh, the heteronormativity!

    1. Whatever one’s feeling towards homosexuality, you gotta be rooting for a hooker with a penis to show up in this story.

  5. “If the idea of Secret Service agents paying hookers is embarrassing, it’s because we have chosen to make it so.”

    No matter how “we” choose to view prostitution, and no matter whether it is legally proscribed or otherwise forbidden by social convention, married men who consort with prostitutes will always be subject to blackmail. Obviously, there are a few exceptions, but no wife would take kindly to news that her husband consorted with prostitutes, and for good reason. Changes in law and social mores won’t change that.

    1. The same can be said of extramarital sex of a non-professional nature, so what’s your point?

      1. You are correct. Under both circumstances, the agent is subject to blackmail, and would likely lose their security clearance.

    2. Did I miss something? Was the agent married?

      1. Not clear. I’ve seen scuttlebutt that one of them was married. Again, if you’re going to try and engage in sexual blackmail against a Secret Service agent, the means to that end would not be a prostitute whom the agent hires and pays for himself. If there’s a security concern here (and as noted in the post, there may be), it’s that these guys were partying when they were supposed to be setting up security, not that they paid for sex.

        1. There must have been a second spitter.

        2. What about the funds? Was this being payed for out of their pocket or were they dipping into public funds somehow. I don’t care if the SS agents use prostitutes, while off duty, but if they are using funds that are meant for something else then I do certainly care. This extends to per diem, that money is meant for food and ideally the agents would turn over any leftover funds after their assingment.

  6. What kind of idiot douchebag stiffs a hooker out of $47?

    1. They didn’t have to pay first? Idiot hookers.

      1. I have yet to meet the hooker who gave up the honey before she got the money. Bad hooker!

    2. An entitled government employee, that’s who.

  7. All this for 47 dollars? Colombian hookers are the cream of the crop of Latin American whoredom; good lord, c’mon man, pay the puta and move on.

  8. we’re avoiding the real question: what is this faux scandal distracting us from? I hate that this administration has made me so cynical but, time and again, we see one distraction or another that is relatively minor dominate the news for a day or two only to find out much later that something far more important occurred. So, what is going on this time because I could care less about anyone hiring a hooker.

  9. The secret service should be disbanded. If a government employee thinks he needs special protection, let him hire a body guard with money out of his own pocket. But then I would also scrap Air Force One, Marine One, and the entire fleet of presidential limos. Not a one of them is a proper use of tax money. Let the bastards fly coach.

    1. Nixon made that argument at least for former presidents and their families. He had excellent reason to do so though, the agency fucked him over big time in the Watergate scandal.

  10. after police were called over some spirited hotel-room haggling about a $47 fee between a local hooker and an agent in town as part of the U.S. security detail.

    Cheap bastard.

  11. It’s more embarrassing/ shocking that these SS mooks are trying to cheat working girls out of $47 than most of the rest of it. I agree with other commenters, this non-story is an attempt at distraction from something more important. We’ll see tomorrow, I suppose.

  12. the Secret Service personnel’s liaising with prostitutes could expose them blackmail to acquire access to secure areas. “They could have led to an assassination. And if you have an assassination, you nullify democracy.

    “Don’t nullify democracy. Get rid of the Secret Service.”

  13. At 47 bucks, it’s a good bet Agent Tightwad was getting a better deal financially than he would have gotten from a sexual liaison purchased with dinner and movie, drinks, dancing, flowers, feigned interest in small talk, and so on.

    Wow, someone has had his heart broke more than a few times.

    1. It’s always cheaper by the hour.

      1. If it flies, floats, or fucks, it’s cheaper to rent than to buy.

    2. feigned interest in small talk

      That is why you always carry around with you a little blow on dates. That will get them to talk more, but the conversation is guaranteed to be a good deal more interesting.

  14. Goes without saying that this is indicative of the lapse standards of the Obama WH in managing itself.

    shrike in 4 . . 3 . . !

  15. He said that the Secret Service personnel’s liaising with prostitutes could expose them blackmail to acquire access to secure areas. “They could have led to an assassination. And if you have an assassination, you nullify democracy. That’s how important the Secret Service is.”

    Public servants are replaceable. Unless Kessler is arguing some version of the sanctity of royal blood in favor of the TOP MEN.

  16. Not feeling sorry for them, should have just payed.

  17. the Secret Service personnel’s liaising with prostitutes could expose them [to] blackmail to acquire access to secure areas. “They could have led to an assassination. And if you have an assassination, you nullify democracy. That’s how important the Secret Service is.”

    Keesler has been watching to many “24” reruns. Sometimes a blowjob is just a blowjob.

    1. Democracy NULLIFIED!

    2. So the story line is: Kim Jong Jr. or somebody wants to off the US president, and the plan they come up with for doing so is to A) position female agents as Colombian hookers during a multinational summit, for the purpose of B) seducing US SS agents, for the purpose of C) gaining access to otherwise-secure zones, from which to D) carry out their ultimate plan of assassination.

      That’s not a 24 plot. It’s not even a 24 spoof plot.

      1. The long history of “honey traps” in espionage indicates that your plot is not as far-out as you suggest.

        1. Clayton Lonetree agrees.

  18. Sure they should be allowed to rent hookers. But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have to pay them.

  19. Actually it’s NOT that they didn’t want to pay the hooker. They didn’t want to pay the hotel’s fee for hosting the hooker. Slightly different. In Columbia, the hotel assume that whatever other guest you brought back to your room are professional service, and they will charge you for hosting their service.

    1. That’s why experienced agents get their jollies in the taxicab.

  20. Yes, they should be allowed to rent hookers but only if they pay for the hookers anticonception.

    1. *OT: George Washington voted Britain’s greatest enemy commander

      “LONDON (Reuters) – American revolutionary leader George Washington has been voted the greatest enemy commander to face Britain, lauded for his spirit of endurance against the odds and the enormous impact of his victory.

      In a contest organised by the National Army Museum, Washington triumphed over Irish independence hero Michael Collins, France’s Napoleon Bonaparte, German Field Marshal Erwin Rommel and Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey.

      Making the case for Washington, historian Stephen Brumwell said the American War of Independence (1775-83) was “the worst defeat for the British Empire ever.”

      “His personal leadership was crucial,” he said.

      Washington was a courageous and inspirational battlefield commander who led from the front but also had the skills to deal with his political counterparts in Congress and with his French allies, Brumwell said. Above all, he never gave up even when the war was going against him.”

      Damn mother-fucking right. Coming from Britlandia, this is godly praise.

      1. Yeah, I proudly took this as a compliment, too.

  21. How exactly would a Colombian hooker in Cartagena blackmail an American agent? Searching for “The Wife” in his phone contacts? Hijacking his SS agent Facebook account, maybe?

    This puritanical obsession about other people’s sex lives and perceived bad behavior stems from the same root as the maniac urge to ban recreational drug use, which was supposed to be discussed during the summit.

    1. Summits are intended for politicians to get together, fuck some bitches, do some drugs, and go back home pretending something useful came of it all.

  22. I’m looking forward to all those fine ladies (or lads, NTTIAWWT) will give graphic details in the Colombian tabloids that will be translated into ‘merican for our amusement.

    This is also some nice advertisement for Cartagena’s tourist and prostitution business. I’ve been there. Beautiful city, beautiful beaches, and the women – god, the colombian women, pros and amateurs are beyond belief.

    1. I haven’t, but Colombian American chicks I see are all hot.

        1. Does win get any fucking bigger than that? I don’t think so.

          Ten Internets, have them — you’ve earned them.

          1. I would like to thank all the little people who helped me reach to point.

  23. The only people who give a shit about this Columbian hookers “scandal” are american wowsers who think that their countrymen are different to everyone else’s.

  24. I agree with Tim, or think I do. It’s much more likely that an affair or a hookup could lead to a blackmail situation than a one to two hour roll with a hooker. If a hooker thinks she’s paid well for her services, then that’s all she’ll want, especially if the agent just found her number in some yellow pages or newspaper escort ad. But meeting someone in a bar is more of an unknown quantity and even more likely could be a set-up.

  25. Roger Gary 2012

    http://rvgary2012.com/

  26. The main point is that if libertarians might or might not pay for services rendered, we peaceful anarchists would always pay. You can take that to the bank.

  27. Government workers assume they are members of the Free “Grain” Party.

  28. This is pathetic. If there’s a scandal involving hookers and the U.S. Secret Service, it better involve the President using the agents as procurers. If they’re not even letting the President in on the action, what are they paid for? Oh, right. But besides that, I mean?

    1. Good point! Didn’t JFK use the SS to procure young ladies for him in the White House, sneaking them in through the Treasury Bldg tunnel?

  29. What Secret Service agents or military personnel do when they are on US soil on their own time is their business.

    But if they are trying to buy a bit of tail when out of the country on official business, they might be making life easier for spies or even assassins.

  30. They were probably just trying to score Obama some blow.

    1. And that’s probably why he didn’t pay her. After they’d done the deal the hooker wanted to be paid for her time, inaddition to the blow.

  31. The whole thing reminds me of Steve Buscemi in Fargo where he has a suitcase full of cash but doesn’t want to pay for using the parking garage for only a couple minutes.

  32. I think the point you’re all missing here is that the Praetorian Guardsmen, as representatives of the USSA, are supposed to be eunuchs, utterly without a sexual thought or act.
    This is in keeping with the national ethos of Puritanism, where Americans blanch and go hysterical when some sleaze bag, like Bob Beckel, says FUCK on live TV.
    This also explains why the Ministry of Propaganda shies away from mentioning the rugrats in the White House, lest Americans be reminded that Barry and “Stuffin’ Ma Face” Michelle actually had had sex at least twice.

  33. I agree. If they were single (and let’s face it, they’re SS Agents, so they likely are), then where they stick their roosters is none of the public’s business. If they were married (and let’s face it, they’re SS Agents, so they likely don’t see their wives very often), it’s STILL none of our business where they stick their roosters.
    As long as the job they did was not comprimised, and I see no evidence that they were, than they fullfilled their duty and are welcome to spend their free time in any way they please.

  34. Why is everyone quoting Kessler as though he is some expert. He isn’t.

    Read this to get a better idea of the truths of this situation: http://bastiatlives.wordpress……e-scandal/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.