In addition to other anti-Trump posts, on Inauguration Day, she updated her profile picture to an artist’s rendering of Princess Leia with the words, “A woman’s place is in the resistance.”

More like in the unemployment line.

She can always get a job in a sammich shop.

"They are worried that she will be transferred to another division of the Homeland Security Department and allowed to serve out her time"

Why would she want to serve in ANY part of the federal government under Trump?

I don't care who it is... you gotta be a dimwit to willing "take a bullet" for someone else... When the bullets start flying, the #1 priority is ALWAYS to do whatever it takes to save your own sorry ass... If you can help someone else at the same time, GREAT.... but sacrificing yourself is just plain goddam stupid.

" She can always get a job in a sammich shop. "

Washing dishes, scrubbing floors, and taking out the garbage !

I don't care who it is... you gotta be a dimwit to willing "take a bullet" for someone else... When the bullets start flying, the #1 priority is ALWAYS to do whatever it takes to save your own sorry ass... If you can help someone else at the same time, GREAT.... but sacrificing yourself is just plain goddam stupid.

I really don’t understand part your post, Willie.

If you “take a bullet” for someone - aren’t you “helping someone else at the same time”….by saving their life.

I think I understand, from reading many of your posts, that “saving your own sorry ass” would be the greatest priority for you.

But, maybe I have that wrong….I stand to be corrected, if I do.

With this said, I realize how difficult it is for you to understand, Willie, how anyone would give [sacrifice] their life that another might live, but it does happen and the Web is filled with those stories.

Here is but one of many true stories:

On February 3, 1943, an Army transport ship called the Dorchester, carrying American soldiers through the icy North Atlantic on their way to serve in World War II, was about 100 miles off the coast of Greenland in rough sea. More than 900 people were on board.

Many of them were little more than boys -- young soldiers and sailors who had never been so far from home. The journey had been arduous already, with the men crammed into claustrophobic, all-but-airless sleeping quarters below deck, constantly ill from the violent lurching of the ship.

In the blackness of night, a German submarine fired torpedoes at the Dorchester.

One of the torpedoes hit the middle of the ship. There was pandemonium on board. The Dorchester swiftly began to sink.

The soldiers and sailors, many of them wakened from sleep by the attack, searched desperately in the dark for life jackets and lifeboats and a route to safety.

With them on the ship were four military chaplains, from four disparate religions.

They were Father John Washington, born in Newark, New Jersey, who was Catholic; the Rev. Clark Poling, born in Columbus, Ohio, who was ordained in the Reformed Church in America; Rabbi Alexander Goode, born in Brooklyn, New York, who was Jewish; and the Rev. George Fox, born in Lewistown, Pennsylvania, who was Methodist.

In the chaos onboard, according to multiple accounts by survivors of the attack, the four men tried to calm the soldiers and sailors and lead them to evacuation points. The chaplains were doing what chaplains do: providing comfort and guidance and hope.

"I could hear men crying, pleading, praying," a soldier named William B. Bednar would later recall. "I could also hear the chaplains preaching courage. Their voices were the only thing that kept me going." With the Dorchester rapidly taking on water, there were not enough life jackets readily available for every man on the ship.

So, when the life jackets ran out, the four chaplains removed their own, and handed them to soldiers who didn't have them.

More than 600 men died that night in the frigid seas, but some 230 were rescued. And some of the survivors, in official accounts given to the Army, and in interviews after the war, reported what they saw as the ship went down:

Those four chaplains, men of different faiths but believing in the same God, their arms linked, standing on the deck together in prayer.

They had willingly given up their futures, their lives, to try to help the men who had been placed by the Army in their care.

The U.S. Army War College has in its records a narrative of what happened that night. One of the men who survived the sinking of the Dorchester, a Navy officer named John J. Mahoney, is quoted as recalling that before heading for the lifeboats, he hurried in the direction of his quarters.

Rabbi Goode, seeing him, asked where he was going. Mahoney said he had forgotten his gloves, and wanted to retrieve them before being dropped into the cold sea.

Rabbi Goode said that Mahoney should not waste fleeting time, and offered Mahoney his own gloves. When Mahoney said he couldn't deprive Rabbi Goode of his gloves, the rabbi said it was all right, he had two pairs.

Only later, according to military historians, did Mahoney realize that of course, Rabbi Goode was not carrying an extra pair of gloves. He had already decided that he was going down with the ship.

According to the Army War College account, another survivor of the Dorchester, John Ladd, said of the four chaplains' selfless act: "It was the finest thing I have seen or hope to see this side of heaven."

The story of the four chaplains was quite well known in America for a while; in 1948 a first-class 3-cent postage stamp was issued bearing their likenesses. There are still stained glass windows in some chapels across the U.S. that pay tribute to the four men, including at the Pentagon. But the national memory is short, and they are no longer much discussed. February 3 was, years ago, designated by Congress to be set aside annually as Four Chaplains Day, but it is not widely commemorated.

In the article, Willie, they call these kind of people….Real Heroes, four died so others might live.

Just to be fair, as I am always, I may be reading your post the wrong way….as I said, I did find it contradictory.

If you “take a bullet” for someone - aren’t you “helping someone else at the same time”….by saving their life.

No... "taking the bullet" means standing deliberately between the shooter & the target so that you get shot instead of them... and that's just plain stupid...

But say you're both trying to run away and the other guy trips... and you stop to help 'em get back up on his feet so you can both duck around the corner... then it's OK because the shooter was simply a bad shot who missed the other guy & got you... that's just bum luck and can happen to anybody...

But if you're so stupid as to deliberately make YOURSELF a target instead of someone else, then you deserve a Darwin Award more so than something more prestigious.

"The object of war is not to die for your country
but to make the other bastard die for his."
~ George S. Patton

I don't care who it is... you gotta be a dimwit to willing "take a bullet" for someone else... When the bullets start flying, the #1 priority is ALWAYS to do whatever it takes to save your own sorry ass... If you can help someone else at the same time, GREAT.... but sacrificing yourself is just plain goddam stupid.

Willie,it might not make sense to you,but it does make sense to people who seek bodyguard jobs. First off,they don't think they ARE going to lose their lives by doing their job. They think they are going to SAVE lives.

Secondly,it really isn't that different from being a firefighter or a EMT in Detroit or Chicago. Probably even safer.

And it's damn sure safer than being a infantry soldier or Marine.

But if you're so stupid as to deliberately make YOURSELF a target instead of someone else, then you deserve a Darwin Award more so than something more prestigious.

It's blindingly obvious you have never served in the military,or even have a good understanding of what is involved. I am having a hard time remembering ANYONE I served with in my 7 years in the army that didn't run towards gunfire to save a team member or a member of another team. If a team had "Bright Light Duty" that could expect to have to rappel out of helicopters hovering over jungle clearings while under automatic weapons fire in order to rescue another recon team that was so shot up they couldn't get out on their own. Sometimes even after dark. Yet I can't recall ONE SINGLE TIME anyone on any team refused to do that,or that there weren't other teams voluntarily standing by to go in if the first Bright Light team got shot up and needed help. Not even ONCE. Word would get around camp that a team was in trouble,shot up and unable to move,and as you walked towards the helipad you could look around and see pretty much everybody in the camp that didn't have duty heading that way,too.

Soldiers and Marines do this stuff every day. So do some sailors.

Members of the USCG don't do it everyday,but they DO go into the face of massive storms to save the lives of others when called upon to do so,and Mother Nature is a LOT meaner bitch than any armed enemy anyone has ever encountered. And yes,Willie,they would do it to save you if you were on a boat at sea.

No... "taking the bullet" means standing deliberately between the shooter & the target so that you get shot instead of them... and that's just plain stupid...

Okay, I now fully understand the meaning of your defining action and I take great exception to your statement….since I hold far higher life values and greater moral concepts than you, to guide me on deciding how to evaluate right versus wrong.

Maybe I can help you understand…I will try.

You see, Willie, I have been married to a wonderful lady for 62 long and beautifully filled years. A lady who for the entire time has been a fantastically devoted and caring housewife….who was also a stay-at-home-mom to raise our children.

Willie, I come before you and the entire Internet world to say here and now….there has not been a day or moment during that time when I would not [and still will] “deliberately stand between a shooter and her so I would get shot instead of her.”

I know that is a feeling and a dedicated action you cannot possibly understand and for me holding that position….you may call me “plain stupid.”

I will proudly “wear your title” with great honor and esteemed dignity.

You gave me a quote by George Patton that did not particularly fit the situation we have under discussion here.

Therefore, I will give you a quote I find more befitting….I have made a slight change at the end of it for the situation I have just described with my wife.

The quote is from John 15:13- the King James Version (KJV):

¹³ Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends loving and devoted wife.

So, while you call me “plain stupid," Willie….there are words I could call you for your strangely selfish attitudinal position.

But I will not …

I will only say, you have your life values....and I have mine.

If you think defending a loved one is equivalent to merely being a paid bodyguard, then you're actually dumber than I gave you credit for.