The Joke Is On Us!

[Shadow]

As Lloyd Grove reported in the Washington Post:

It is a standard arrangement that the Secret Service provide payment to homeowners for space used by the agency in such situations. The Clintons did not take it upon themselves to "charge the Secret Service rent."

The amount provided is based on a government formula, not set by the homeowner, and in the Clintons' case this amount is $1,100. (Note that this figure was not chosen by the Clintons, and it is well short of their monthly mortgage payment.)

Most important, although regulations call for the payment of this amount, the Clinton's have not in fact accepted any money from the Secret Service.

[Shadow]

Where is the outrage here ?? (last sentence, bolded)

The Secret Service is notorious for its reluctance to discuss even mundane aspects of how it carries out its duties, so authoritative information about the setup of the Clinton home in New York state is hard to come by. However, around the time of the Chappaqua purchase, the press estimated that a permanent, taxpayer-funded security system worth more than $1 million would have to be installed to adequately protect the President. Security measures of this level are not specific to the Clintons; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of former Presidents.

In each case the costs of installation and maintenance for the security systems comes from public funds, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation. (In 1981, the Secret Service spent several months providing round-the-clock protection, at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars per day, for an empty Pacific Palisades, California, home owned by Ronald and Nancy Reagan — even though the Reagans no longer lived in or used the house, and even though it was vacant and up for sale.)