Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) ignited controversy with his latest legislative proposal, introduced on Friday. The proposal aims to strip protectees convicted of felonies and sentenced to prison of their Secret Service protection. The”Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act” specifically targets President Donald Trump. The measure has been introduced for maximum effect in the biased corporate media just as Trump’s trial on novel criminal charges in New York state court is getting underway.
In a statement released through the House Homeland Security Committee Democrats, Thompson, former chairman of the now-dissolved Jan. 6 Select Committee, argued that the current law fails to address how Secret Service protection would impact the incarceration of a convicted former president. “It is necessary for us to be prepared and update the law so the American people can be assured that protective status does not translate into special treatment,” Thompson stated.
LEFTISTS want to #DerekChauvin the President of the United States of America! They hate PRESIDENT TRUMP but mostly #DemocratsHateAmerica https://t.co/0lP18LEZpa
— Blue Knight đşđ˛đđšđź (@Lightning1z) April 20, 2024
Trump supporters and conservative commentators have criticized the bill as a thinly veiled attempt to weaken the 45th president’s security and, by extension, his campaign. They argue that the bill reflects a broader strategy by Democrats to use legislative and judicial means to obstruct Trump’s political comeback. One analyst said, “This is not just a move to enforce the law but appears to be a strategic play to sideline a political opponent.”
Legal experts have pointed out the complexities involved in stripping Secret Service protection, which could include significant changes to security protocols and potential legal challenges regarding the interpretation and application of such a law.
As Trump continues to face legal battles, including his ongoing Manhattan trial related to alleged “hush money” payments, the proposed bill will likely become a focal point in the broader narrative of the 2024 election campaign. The timing and targeted nature of the bill suggest that it is more than just an update to existing laws â it is simply the latest move by cynical Democrats to prevent the American people from voting for the candidate of their choice, no matter the cost.
