Join 3,522 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


chelsea.clinton@ox.ac.uk?
August 28, 2000 10:27 PM   Subscribe

chelsea.clinton@ox.ac.uk? The Times is reporting that Miss Clinton is planning to follow in her father's footsteps. Though probably not too closely... I'd imagine that it'll be easier for her to fit into the college environment once she doesn't have the Secret Service in tow, but I'm still intrigued how she'll get on here...
posted by holgate (13 comments total)

 
I believe that a president's immediate family gets secret service protection for life . . . anyone have a working knowledge of the secret service?
posted by alan at 10:49 PM on August 28, 2000


Yeah, we just covered this recently. Immediately family gets coverage for life, unless they specifically refuse it. Relevant law.
posted by aaron at 10:56 PM on August 28, 2000


Is Oxford Univeristy's domain name really ox.ac.uk... Sounds like a "What do you get...?" punchline.
posted by rschram at 7:47 AM on August 29, 2000


It would appear so. (ac.uk is the British equivalent of edu -- from "academic").

If anything, she's MORE likely to be closely watched overseas, although England is about as close as you can get to being on native soil and not be, not just in cultural and linguistic terms, but in having a working security relationship with their government.

I find it interesting that she's following Karenna Gore Schiff in becoming a political adviser and confidant to her dad. (I wonder if they're friends. I've heard both ways.) Here's some critical words on Karenna, who's mostly escaped them so far.
posted by dhartung at 8:46 AM on August 29, 2000


To be really pedantic (shoot me now) her e-mail address would be chelsea.clinton@collegename.ox.ac.uk - because you don't actually belong to the University as a whole, you are a member of an individual Oxford college. I'll be able to tell you more about it in a month's time, once I've started there, but royalty/VIP students are not out of the ordinary, so provisions for Chelsea would most likely be made without much difficulty.
posted by kitschbitch at 9:10 AM on August 29, 2000


As I recall, Presidents and their families do receive protection from the Secret Service for life. You never know when some lunatic may want to exact revenge on Jimmy Carter by taking out Billy.

I imagine Roger Clinton could be a marked man as well.

Getting back to the real intent of this post, I feel compelled to say that Chelsea Clinton is damn cool. Without a doubt one of the most capable and intelligent women on this planet. Indeed, how many of us could have managed our lives so well while under the constant scrutiny of the press? She most certainly would do well at Oxford.

On a slightly different note: If ever there were a presidential offspring suited to run for office, it'd be Chelsea. At 20, she's proven herself to be a great deal more intelligent and capable than a certain GWB.

Of course, I doubt the good ol' boys would see it that way.
posted by aladfar at 9:11 AM on August 29, 2000


From the Secret Service website: Today, the Secret Service is authorized by law to protect... children of former presidents until age 16.

So Chelsea will probably just get the Special Branch paying a cursory interest rather than the full-on treatment.

(Of course, it's another question whether the Secret Service's jurisdiction under the US Code extends to foreign countries, beyond the usual courtesies granted to heads of state and other politicians... I still have some great pictures of them perched on Oxford landmarks for Clinton's visit a few years ago, looking incredibly conspicuous.)

One good thing about Oxford, though, as far as security's concerned, is that it's much easier to spot unwanted guests in a walled-off college of 500 than a campus of 15,000. And from experience, the students aren't that bothered about the status of their peers. I was talking to a friend in a pub when someone else came over to say hello to him. Afterwards, I asked who he was: "Oh, that was Freddie Windsor -- I used to kick him at school."

And yes, Chelsea would have a "unit.ox.ac.uk" email address -- the name of the unit depending on whether she's officially affiliated with a college or a department, since she'll have that choice as a graduate student.
posted by holgate at 10:12 AM on August 29, 2000


from the article:

"As with her present life at Stanford University in California, she will be accompanied by at least two American secret service agents at all times. In addition, she will be shadowed by a team from Special Branch. "

posted by centrs at 12:12 PM on August 29, 2000


...though I gather that, like the agents following Jack Ryan's kids around, those details are just a *bit* cooler then the customary Men In Black.

And note, Aaron, that the Code you cited says what happens to them if you threaten them while they're under SS protection... it does *not* explicitly say what they're entitled to; only by reference.
posted by baylink at 2:51 PM on August 29, 2000


Y'know, I don't know about youse guys, but with my lifestyle, I'd be frankly hesitant to hang around Chelsea and her "friends". I don't really want my "friends"--er, friends-- doing time.
posted by lbergstr at 3:08 PM on August 29, 2000


Yeah, technically, she's only entitled to protection until Jan. 20, 2001 -- after that she's an adult child of a former President, and not protected, unless the then-President authorizes it. So how they can say she'll have USSS protection in August next year is questionable.

Clinton gets protection for life, but he'll be the last: Congress, alarmed at the burgeoning number of living former Presidents (until recently, including Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush), limited protection for future Presidents to 10 years after leaving office.

That would have been plenty for some former Chief Executives, but not all: LBJ lived 4 years; Ike 9; HST 19; and Hoover a remarkable 31 (the only reason we didn't break the record sooner is that FDR held office so long, and didn't survive).
posted by dhartung at 3:55 PM on August 29, 2000


this reminds me, somewhat laterally, of the leave chelsea alone campaign from waaaaaaaay back in 1993...anyone remember when chelsea was under much public scrutiny?
posted by patricking at 8:37 PM on August 29, 2000


chelsea.clinton@warwick.ac.uk I think
posted by laukf at 7:01 PM on April 6, 2001


« Older Jason found a pretty cool javascript/CSS hack...  |  The Leaning Tower of Pisa now ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments