In this episode of Breaking Battlegrounds, Chuck Warren and Sam Stone dive into the headlines after President Trump revoked former Vice President Kamala Harris’s extended Secret Service protection. By law, former vice presidents are entitled to six months of coverage. Harris had already passed that point—seven months and one day—when President Biden granted her an additional year, citing only the “political climate.”

The hosts point out that such extensions are rare and typically tied to credible threats, like the six months President Obama added for Dick Cheney when terrorists openly targeted him. In contrast, Warren and Stone argue that Harris faced no such danger, noting even her critics have little incentive to see her silenced.

Trump, they explain, has rescinded extensions not just for Harris but for Republicans as well, insisting the practice has gone beyond federal law and that wealthy politicians can hire private protection if needed. Still, they debate whether the timing of this decision was wise. With the media quick to spin headlines and a recent mass shooting dominating the news cycle, revoking Harris’s detail now may have handed Democrats a narrative to exploit.

While Trump may be legally justified, Warren and Stone suggest that a phased withdrawal or better messaging could have avoided the perception battle. In their words, sometimes the smarter move is simply to let the opposition “immolate itself.”

Transcript

Sam Stone: Welcome to the podcast portion of breaking battlegrounds with us Chuck Warren. I'm Sam Stone. Chuck is eager to lead off this segment. He's fired up the since this morning. What do you got?

Chuck Warren: So it was it was announced this morning that President Trump has revoked former Vice President Kamala Harris secret service detail which had been extended by Biden. Now as we know 70 % of people will only get their information via the headline right and I want to I want to give a couple points here of the background of this but then I want you and I discuss even with the facts being on Trump's side should he still have done this?

So that's, know, so for example, when you leave office, federal law is a Vice President gets six months of secret service protection. Okay. Kamala Harris has been out of office seven months, one day. Okay. Biden extended it for her for one year above the six months because no real reason either than political climate.

Sam Stone: You know, I want to throw in something before you continue to explain this because working inside government I see this every day. Democrats in government are terrified of their own shadow security wise right now across the board.

Chuck Warren: And that's the point I'm going to make. It's a pretty lackluster excuse of political climate for Kamala Harris. All due respect, even Biden's worst enemies really want Kamala Harris to keep talking. I don't feel her life's in danger. Now, that being said, and you know, remind you also as well, Obama extended Dick Cheney's for six months, but he literally had a bunch of terrorists wanting to kill him.

So I think what Trump's doing is some of these have been extended and it's just not Kamala. He's done it to Republicans as well that were under it. He's doing it saying it's gone beyond federal law. They really don't need it. If they want more, they can hire their own security because they have the means to do this. Now that being said, you had the shooting yesterday in Minnesota, which Democrats for some reason cannot blame a mentally deranged trans person.

It is guns, guns, guns again. And they have gone out and mocked prayer over this issue. Was this the best thing for Trump to do, Sam, to take away her secret service detail at this moment of time?

Sam Stone: No, not at all. Not at this moment of time. And probably what I would have done, you know, look, you can never tell Trump what to do in hindsight is always 2020. But if you're going to revoke it early, what I would have said is a six month extension is plenty. You don't need a, you know, a year extension.

Chuck Warren: Explain it better, explain it better

Sam Stone: So five months from now, we're withdrawing your security. Take, take time so that it's not an immediate now issue, but two, you're 100 % right. Trump doesn't pay any attention at all to the media anymore. I mean, he just doesn't care what they print. But there are times when it would be really nice if you'd just let the left immolate itself.

Chuck Warren: For example, I would be, I'm more concerned, and I think he is a absolutely dishonest and disgusting politician, I would submit to you that Pete Buttigieg has a greater danger to his personal welfare than Kamala Harris.

Sam Stone: God yes. No, look nobody nobody on earth has any particular and like honest. Okay, actually I'm backed that up because the only people I think who might want to you know Go after our Kamala Harris are on the left For disappointing them like nobody on the right wants to get rid of her. She is an avatar of everything we want to see Democrats say on the stand.

Chuck Warren: Yeah, it's incredible. So, you know, I woke up this morning, read this and first thing I thought is, oh, good grief, what are they doing? And in fairness, the Washington Post, where I first got it, they cover the history of it. Look, this is a six month thing. Biden extended it for unknown reasons. Some say political climate. So he didn't give a reason. They're just assuming that's what he did it for. So kudos to the Washington Post, but they know people only read the headline.

Listen to the full episode of Breaking Battlegrounds anywhere you stream your podcasts!