Secret Service perspectives relayed by Gary Aldrich, author of Unlimited Access. Aldrich was an FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House.
Note: This email was forwarded to us from one of our regulars. It was not on hoaxbusters or snopes and the comments were linked to the book as allegedly coming from SS agents.
JFK and LBJ = Philanderers of the highest order.both kept a lot of women in White House for affairs. Both set up “early warning” systems for if and when their wives were nearby. Total immoral men. In addition, LBJ was as crude as the day is long.
Nixon = Weird, moral man but very odd and weird. Paranoid etc. Horrible relationship with his family, almost a recluse.
Agnew = nice, decent man, everyone was surprised at his downfall.
Ford = A true gentlemen who treated them with respect and dignity
Jimmy Carter = A complete phony who would portray one picture of himself to public and very different in private. I.E. Would be shown carrying his own luggage, suit cases were always empty, he kept empty ones just for photo ops. Wanted the people to see him as pious and a non drinker, he and family drank alcohol a lot. Had disdain for the Secret Service, and was very irresponsible with the “football” nuclear codes. Didn’t think it was a big deal and would keep military aides at a great distance. Would never acknowledge military or Secret service they were there to serve him.
Ronald Reagan = The real deal. Moral, Honest, respectful and dignified. Treated Secret Service and everyone else with respect and honor. Would always thank everyone all the time. He took the time to know everyone on a personal level. One story was early on in Presidency the President came out of his room with a side arm attached to his hip. The Agent in charge said “Why the pistol Mr. President.” Ronald Reagan replied, “In case you boys can’t get the job done, I can help.” It was common for him to carry a pistol. People do not know that when he met with Gorbachev, he had a pistol in his briefcase. Upon learning that Gary Hart was caught with Donna Rice during the election Ronald Reagan said, “Boys will be boys, but boys will not be President.”
Nancy Reagan = Very nice but very protective of the President..the Secret Service was always caught in the middle. Nancy would try to control what the President ate all the time (healthy) and he would say to the Agents “come on you gotta help me out.” The Reagans rarely drank alcohol. Secret Service said they could count on one hand the times the Reagans were served alcohol other than wine during dinner. They made the comment for all the fake bluster of the Carters it was the Reagans who lived life as genuinely moral people.
George and Barbara Bush = Extremely kind and considerate. Always respectful. Took great care in making sure the agents comforts were taken care of. They would bring them meals etc. One time Barbara Bush brought warm clothes to agents standing outside a Kennebunkport. One agent who was given a warm hat tried to nicely say no thanks when he was obviously freezing and President Bush said “Son, don’t argue with the first lady, put the hat on.”
Bill Clinton = Presidency was one giant party. Not trustworthy, he was nice because he wanted everyone to like him but life is just one big game and party to him.
Hillary Clinton = Another phony. Personality would change the instant cameras were near. She hated with open disdain the military and Secret Service. Again another one who felt people are there to serve her. She was always trying to keep tabs on Bill Clinton..
Al Gore = An egotistical ass who was once overheard by his Secret Service detail when he told his son he needed to do better in school or he “would end up like these guys” and pointed to the agents.
G W Bush = They loved him and Laura Bush. They said no one is a nicer person than Laura Bush who never has a harsh word to say about anyone. The Bush’s went out of their way to take care of the Secret Service and made sure they were well cared for with meals and other comforts. GW was the most prompt of the Presidents. He ran like a well oiled machine. He was also the most in shape who had a very strict work out regimen. The Bush’s made sure their entire administration understood to respect and be considerate of the Secret Service.
Karl Rove was the one who was the most caring of the Secret Service in the administration.
Barack Obama – Clintons over again – hates the military and looks down on the Secret Service.
You’re gonna laugh, but I found this book on Amazon with the exact same title written by a guy with the exact same name, except that it was written fifteen years ago–even before Dumya took office! AND the guy is NOT a Secret Service agent.
Here’s the link
http://www.amazon.com/Unlimited-Access-Agent-Inside-Clinton/dp/0895264064/ref=tmm_pap_title_0
I’m laughing, too!
I take it you recently read the book, so it must be right there, so why didn’t you spell the name right?
I had to read all about some deceased evangelical with a rubber fetish, etcetera.
And then I’m reading Quentin’s post … and … have you been reposting without checking up again?
You know, it’s not fair. Just because your obnoxious boss was the President, you get to write a “tell-all” and retire in comfort. The rest of us just have to endure the obnoxious boss.
You’re on a roll today, Quentin. I found the same thing.
Jack or Tina–whoever posted this article–you were clearly misled by whatever website you copied and pasted this from, but your own actions weren’t exactly honest either. You didn’t cite the actual source you took this false information from, and instead implied that you got it from a book that you’ve neither read nor done any research on. Very bad form, and for your mistake you must face the wrath of internet embarrassment.
Gary Aldrich:
http://www.nndb.com/people/283/000109953/
University: Dade College
FBI employee (1969-95)
Friends of George Allen
National Conservative Campaign Fund National Advisory Board
Patrick Henry Center Founder
Southeastern Legal Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Aldrich
Gary Aldrich (born May 22, 1945) is a former FBI agent and author from Amsterdam, New York. His wife Nina is also an ex-FBI agent, and they have 3 children. He graduated from Miami Dade College. He founded the Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty, whose aim is, “promoting the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights and supporting the right of citizens to engage in ethical dissent.”[1] Aldrich was an FBI agent assigned to the White House under both Bush and Clinton. He was with the FBI for 26 years (196995), the last five years (’90-’95) he was the agent responsible for background checks on White House staff.
http://www.aeispeakers.com/speakerbio.php?SpeakerID=8
Gary Aldrich founded The Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty in 1997. The Fairfax, Virginia based center is a nonprofit group dedicated to the Constitution and Bill of Rights in memory of Patrick Henry. The Center is universally recognized as an effective supporter of the right of ethical dissent. Mr. Aldrich is known as a champion of free speech.
Before founding The Patrick Henry Center, Mr. Aldrich served as an FBI agent for 26 years, specializing in political corruption and assigned to major cities throughout the U.S. Over a period of 10 years. Mr. Aldrich worked with the Reagan, Bush and Clinton administrations and was the senior FBI Senate and House liaison responsible for the maintenance of national security.
Oh, that Gary Aldrich!
Score:
Tina = 1
Q/Chris = 0
I have the book,
Gary Adrich was an FBI Agent, his job was to do backround checks on White house personnel, amongst other things.
His book describes how the Whitehouse was basically “for sale” It is astonishing what is revealed in the book .
I am not sure why Quentin says Aldrich not an FBI Agent he certainly was.
Peggy, you’re a biased ref, not that I consider this a contest. Quentin and I have shown that at least part of this information does not come from Aldrich’s book, which was published in 1998–before W. or Obama ever served in the White House. Tina’s reply doesn’t address this, but it does confirm that the last time Aldrich played a part in the White House was ’95.
It was good of Tina or Jack to add a note at the top of the post saying that they got this from a chain e-mail, and not from reading the book, as the original opening implied…but the e-mail itself still contains false claims, and the note should mention that as well. That’s why you should never believe a chain e-mail.
Ok, now I’m really confused.
The opening bold text now says “From….Secret Service Perspectives as written by Gary Aldrich, author of Unlimited Access.”
I’m pretty sure that’s a change from yesterday’s opening, which if I remember correctly said the details were directly from the book “Unlimited Access.”
But the weird part is that I can’t find any reference online to a text called “Secret Service Perspectives” that’s written by Gary Aldrich. There is one website that has this as the title of a blog post, but it’s not by Gary Aldrich; it simply links to the same chain e-mail claiming to originate from his book, which is impossible.
There’s no evidence that Gary Aldrich had any part in the construction of this chain e-mail; whoever invented it may have taken some info from Aldrich’s book, but given the inconsistencies of mentioning W. and Obama, it’s clear the true author added in stuff that couldn’t have possibly been in the book.
It appears that Aldrich never wrote anything called “Secret Service Perspectives,” so I think another edit to the original post is in order.
I’ve heard some of these statements before, although the Carter description is new to me. I do remember the story about him smoking pot with Willie Nelson, but I didn’t know about his empty suitcases. Sounds like his foreign policy.
In general though, I don’t feel comfortable with the idea of Secret Service agents writing books and telling their stories like this. Any President has to trust their life in the hands of the agents, it is the highest of duties for them. If our President, regardless of party, feels they can’t trust their protectors not to tell all later, they might be tempted to put distance between them and their protection and endanger themselves.
It may be fun to point out how rude and obnoxious leftist leaders are, but I’d rather our SS agents just keep their eyes out for threats and not gossip.
Chris I have done my best to keep this email as accurate as possible. We received it with a few minor errors. The Aldrich name was misspelled and we noted that Aldrich collected information from Secret Service agents, there is not a book called Secret Service Perspectives. I apologize if it sounded that way. My correction was meant to show these were comments collected by Aldrich (some second hand – some not), that’s all. Based on what I’ve read the comments about the presidents are real comments.
Harriet: “I am not sure why Quentin says Aldrich not an FBI Agent he certainly was.”
Quentin didn’t say that. He said Aldrich was not a Secret Service agent, as the article originally claimed before it was edited.
Steve, I completely agree with you, and I also feel the need to point out that Aldrich’s book has been the subject of much scrutiny and criticism. Some of his claims are simply laughable, such as the charge that the Clintons hung drug paraphernalia and sex toys on the White House Christmas tree! I don’t think his charges are very believable and I frankly don’t see why anyone would.
Chris should be confused, because we still do not have this straight. The FBI and the Secret Service are not the same: they are different agencies. In fact, they barely speak to each other. Which is why Mr. Aldrich is unlikely to have Secret Service perspectives. He is not a Secret Service agent.
‘kay?
Libby: “In fact, they barely speak to each other. Which is why Mr. Aldrich is unlikely to have Secret Service perspectives. He is not a Secret Service agent.”
And Libby would know after all of her years in the FBI.
But lets consider his record:
As liason responsible for the maintenance of National Security is going to “talk to” all kinds of people on staff including secret service charged with protecting the president. After serving through the terms of three presidents he also likely knows some of the people very well.
He didn’t write the book as a “tell all”. He wrote the book as a “whistle blower” deeply concerned with the lack of integrity and dedication to the duties of the office he witnessed…particularly in the Clinton WH.
Tina: “He wrote the book as a “whistle blower” deeply concerned with the lack of integrity and dedication to the duties of the office he witnessed…”
That’s if you believe his ludicrous and unsubstantiated claims, which most serious analysts do not. His book has been widely discredited and he does not appear to be a trustworthy individual.
Chris: “That’s if you believe his ludicrous and unsubstantiated claims, which most serious analysts do not. His book has been widely discredited and he does not appear to be a trustworthy individual.”
According to the left that is totally bin denial about the abuses of power in the Clinton administration. Those are liberal talking points, Chris. You hve no evidence to suggest he is not trustworthy. We do have a mountain of evidence to suggest that Clinton was quite capable of the assertions made by Aldrich.
Aldrich was trusted to do background checks and be in charge of security by both republican and democrat administrations.
Evidence, please, that his character is in question.
Tina, you have in the past revealed yourself to be a believer in crazy conspiracy theories (Obama’s birth certificate, death panels, victory mosques, Vince Foster) no matter how much evidence is presented against them or how unlikely or impossible they seem. You’re wired to believe a certain way about the people you don’t like no matter how extreme the claim. It won’t matter how much damning evidence I present against Aldrich (which you could easily find if you read an account of him and his book that isn’t from a biased right-wing source), you will believe what you want to believe. But the thing is, I shouldn’t even need to present evidence against some of his more ridiculous allegations; if you honestly believe Aldrich when he claims that the Clintons hung sex toys and crackpipes on the White House Christmas tree (despite the fact that this has been denied by others in the Clinton White House and no one else has made these claims), then you simply haven’t developed what most of us call the “smell test.” This is a big problem on the right these days; look at the furor over the false “$200 million on India trip” story, which many clung to even after the story was proven false. The right wing has simply thrown out all common sense in favor of partisan point-scoring, and it’s making you all look like loons.
Chris why do you call me a “believer”? Is it because you cannot countenance a person who is willing to keep an open mind rather than going solid and believing, as you do, what liberals say (or so-called independents who support liberals)?
You are the one tossing around the words “serious analysts” as if you had actually presented some irrefutable evidence delivered by God. All I have done is express reasonable doubt…a rather sane position since I have not been a first hand witness to any of this information.
Clinton denial will continue forever.
As for the “smell test”? I give you two words…Barrack Obama. If the hope and change he sold you doesn’t smell to you by now you haven’t got a nose…it’s turned this once great nation into a (rotting) junkyard.
Tina, you are a nut-job. That is all.
Thank you!
Given the fact that the country re-elected a man who will continue in the same policies that have sustained a a downward spiral that threatens to turn our nation into a third world tragedy…and given the mess this country is in, the continued high unemployment, the massive debt, the total unwillingness by the administration and Senate to address the spending crisis, the taxes that will give business less incentive to hire, and a healthcare “solution” that will ruin the industry and financially stress state governments I take your name-calling as a great compliment!
I notice you are so proud of your opinion of me that you were willing to use my name to disguise your own…could it be you aren’t so sure of your opinion?
I hope in future when you have something to add to our discussions that you will post a comment using your own name…we welcome all opinions at Post Scripts.
That was not very nice or courageous of you; you take a cheap shot at Tina and run away?
Come back here and voice a coherent opinion about any issue…we’ll see who’s the nut-job based on what you really know that is factual. We put our facts out here day after day and have a pretty good track record for accuracy. -jack