‘They Want Trump Dead’ — Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson Pushes ‘DISGRACED Act’ to Strip Trump of Secret Service Protection if He Goes to Prison

Credit: Getty Images

On Thursday, President Trump was convicted on felony charges for a made-up crime in a kangaroo court led by a corrupt judge. This comes at a time when a leading Democrat is aggressively pushing to strip him of Security Service protection, Fox News reported.

The Gateway Pundit reported last month that Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) proposed the Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act, aiming to strip President Trump of his Secret Service protection should he face imprisonment.

The bill was introduced along with far-left Democrats Troy Carter (D-LA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Frederica Wilson (D-FL), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), Joyce Beatty (D-OH), and Steve Cohen (D-TN). It was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

According to the press release, “This legislation would reform the U.S. Secret Service’s protective mission by automatically terminating Secret Service protection for those who have been sentenced to prison following conviction for a Federal or State felony—clarifying that prison authorities would be responsible for the protection of all inmates regardless of previous Secret Service protection.”

Thompson said in a statement, “Unfortunately, current law doesn’t anticipate how Secret Service protection would impact the felony prison sentence of a protectee — even a former President. It is regrettable that it has come to this, but this previously unthought-of scenario could become our reality. Therefore, 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—and that those who are sentenced to prison will indeed serve the time required of them.”

According to a fact sheet from the Committee on Homeland Security, the U.S. government has long recognized the need to protect presidents, former presidents, other high-level officials, and select family members from harm. Since 1901, this protective mission has been carried out by the U.S. Secret Service.

Section 3056(a)(3) of Title 18 of the United States Code mandates that the United States Secret Service provide protection for former presidents, their spouses, and their children under the age of 16 “for their lifetimes, except that protection of a spouse shall terminate in the event of remarriage.”

The act ensures their safety due to the sensitive information they possess and the unique threats they might face. There is no specific provision excluding protection in the event of incarceration, so Secret Service protection continues regardless of a former president’s legal status.

More from the fact sheet:

The DISGRACED Former Protectees Act would terminate Secret Service protection for individuals who otherwise qualify for it upon sentencing following conviction for a Federal or State felony.

Under current law, Secret Service protection is authorized for some current and former high-level officials and their immediate families. Current law does not contemplate how such protection would occur—or whether it should occur—if a protectee is sentenced to prison following conviction for a felony. As a result, current law may serve as an impediment to the equal administration of justice and present logistical difficulties for both the Secret Service and prison authorities at the Federal and State levels.

This bill would remove the potential for conflicting lines of authority within prisons and allow judges to weigh the sentencing of individuals without having to factor in the logistical concerns of convicts with Secret Service protection.

Is this bill ex post facto and therefore in violation of the Constitution?
No. The Supreme Court in Flemming v. Nestor suggested that there could be situations where the termination of a benefit may raise ex post facto concerns. However, such a law would have to be shown to have an unlawful, punitive purpose. This bill raises no punitive concern. The purpose of this bill is to hand off inmate protection to relevant prison authorities rather than involve the Secret Service. Further, the removal of Secret Service protection does not change the criminal statutes or alter the penalty for crimes.

Will this bill apply to former President Trump if he is convicted of a felony?
This measure would apply to former President Trump. It also would apply to all Secret Service protectees convicted and sentenced under felony charges.

During an interview with Alex Jones last month, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene stated the Democrats ‘want Trump dead.

Rep. Greene stated that Trump “is not invincible; he’s a man, he’s fighting as hard as possible, and he’s putting all he has into trying to win the election.”

Greene continued, “You have to remember, he’s trying to run for president again, and he has to put everything he has into defending himself against these rigged trials.”

“They literally want him dead; Billy Thompson introduced a bill to take away his Secret Service protection. They want to lock him up in jail for the rest of his life so he dies in jail, and they want to take away his secret service protection so that he is murdered,” added Greene.

This sentiment was echoed by Donald Trump Jr. during his interview with Tucker Carlson, saying, “Let’s be honest: These radical leftists don’t just want my father in a prison cell. They want him dead.”


Legal analyst Jonathan Turley lambasted the bill, exposing its blatant political vendetta against Trump, even after his conviction. In a scathing critique, he suggested more fitting acronyms such as SHAMEFUL (Stopping Harmful Antics by Members Eagerly Filing Useless Legislation) or CUCKOO (Congressmen Undertaking Changes to Kill Our Opponents) to reflect on the politically motivated actions.

“Describing this move as “regrettable,” Thompson has found a way to add lethal elements to the unhinged political rage in Congress,” Turley added.

Photo of author
Jim Hᴏft is the founder and editor of The Gateway Pundit, one of the top conservative news outlets in America. Jim was awarded the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award in 2013 and is the proud recipient of the Breitbart Award for Excellence in Online Journalism from the Americans for Prosperity Foundation in May 2016.

You can email Jim Hᴏft here, and read more of Jim Hᴏft's articles here.


Thanks for sharing!