I think if you're worried about anything it would be what Biden's DOJ is willing to do to citizens.
Trump indicted over classified documents
266,111 Views |
3603 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by HTownAg98
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,090
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
it should not have been executed in the first place.HTownAg98 said:ThunderCougarFalconBird said:seriously go read the briefing.HTownAg98 said:Ellis Wyatt said:This is nothing like "nearly every search warrant." This has never happened before. Seems a little "robust" to me, but Biden would probably have been glad if Trump had been injured. It would have saved all the lawfare to put him in prison.HTownAg98 said:The hyperbole about "lethal force." That's standard for nearly every search warrant the FBI executes. She's trying to drum up outrage about standard language in a search warrant. It's nonsense.jt2hunt said:she is literally posting up the unsealing of documents verbatim copy and paste. What part are you not liking?HTownAg98 said:
You all need to stop listening to Julie Kelly.These are the rules that apply to FBI agents whenever they do anything. https://t.co/SN9SCJ7t2D
— Brad Heath (@bradheath) May 21, 2024
Uh, yes it is. Every single LEO has a right to use reasonable force, and that can include deadly force, when executing a warrant. If someone came around a corner at MAL and started shooting at the agents, they'd be well within their rights to return fire. The idea the Biden was hoping Trump would be shot in this raid is just mind-boggling stupid.
They do not have the right to lie repeatedly through their teeth to the judge that signed the warrant to get it in the first place.
The "standard" FBI raid you're so adamant was completely routine was based on a warrant obtained by defrauding a court with the fruits of an investigative process that was, in itself, illegal.
So no, there is nothing "standard" or "routine" about this.
Which is all irrelevant to the actual execution of the warrant itself. Answer me this. If some dumbass came up behind the agents and starting shooting at them, would the agents have a right to engage and return fire if necessary to neutralize the threat?
Why are you being so defensive and cute about this?
Because there's an idiot out here claiming "Awh mah gerd!!! DOJ authorized legal force!!!" when she either knows better and is just doing it to foment outrage and clicks, or she's too stupid to know better.
Uh, no it isn't. This has literally never happened before and never should have happened. The whole thing is absurd. All protocol was already set aside for the whole case. "Lethal force" should be nowhere near this case. This is sick.HTownAg98 said:Ellis Wyatt said:This is nothing like "nearly every search warrant." This has never happened before. Seems a little "robust" to me, but Biden would probably have been glad if Trump had been injured. It would have saved all the lawfare to put him in prison.HTownAg98 said:
The hyperbole about "lethal force." That's standard for nearly every search warrant the FBI executes. She's trying to drum up outrage about standard language in a search warrant. It's nonsense.
Uh, yes it is.
The agents never should have been there. A DOJ worried about due process and rule of law would never have allowed any of this. A DOJ run by Stalinists interested in jailing dissenters did.HTownAg98 said:
Which is all irrelevant to the actual execution of the warrant itself. Answer me this. If some dumbass came up behind the agents and starting shooting at them, would the agents have a right to engage and return fire if necessary to neutralize the threat?
That you defend them screams a lot about you.
Ellis Wyatt said:The agents never should have been there. A DOJ worried about due process and rule of law would never have allowed any of this. A DOJ run by Stalinists interested in jailing dissenters did.HTownAg98 said:
Which is all irrelevant to the actual execution of the warrant itself. Answer me this. If some dumbass came up behind the agents and starting shooting at them, would the agents have a right to engage and return fire if necessary to neutralize the threat?
That you defend them screams a lot about you.
Whether they should have been there or not is immaterial to the execution of the warrant itself. If you don't understand that, I can't help you.
I am just shaking my head. This is exactly how we have become a banana republic.HTownAg98 said:Ellis Wyatt said:The agents never should have been there. A DOJ worried about due process and rule of law would never have allowed any of this. A DOJ run by Stalinists interested in jailing dissenters did.HTownAg98 said:
Which is all irrelevant to the actual execution of the warrant itself. Answer me this. If some dumbass came up behind the agents and starting shooting at them, would the agents have a right to engage and return fire if necessary to neutralize the threat?
That you defend them screams a lot about you.
Whether they should have been there or not is immaterial to the execution of the warrant itself. If you don't understand that, I can't help you.
There is also fruit of the poisonous tree issue here with a faulty search warrant.Quote:
The agents never should have been there. A DOJ worried about due process and rule of law would never have allowed any of this. A DOJ run by Stalinists interested in jailing dissenters did.
HTownAg98 said:Ellis Wyatt said:The agents never should have been there. A DOJ worried about due process and rule of law would never have allowed any of this. A DOJ run by Stalinists interested in jailing dissenters did.HTownAg98 said:
Which is all irrelevant to the actual execution of the warrant itself. Answer me this. If some dumbass came up behind the agents and starting shooting at them, would the agents have a right to engage and return fire if necessary to neutralize the threat?
That you defend them screams a lot about you.
Whether they should have been there or not is immaterial to the execution of the warrant itself. If you don't understand that, I can't help you.
I think you're confused about who needs help. Wake up man.
Nah, I'm good.
HTownAg98 said:
Nah, I'm good.
That's not the word around here.
HTownAg98 said:
Of course not. That's as ridiculous as thinking Biden was hoping Trump would be injured.
I think Biden would have Trump executed if he could.
Are you a lawyer?
No to both. You've got to have a screw loose if you think Biden wants Trump executed.
Rockdoc said:HTownAg98 said:
Nah, I'm good.
That's not the word around here.
And you base this on what exactly?
Common sense and observation.
Sure thing buddy.
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,090
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
HTownAg98 said:
Because there's an idiot out here claiming "Awh mah gerd!!! DOJ authorized legal force!!!" when she either knows better and is just doing it to foment outrage and clicks, or she's too stupid to know better.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.566.0.pdf
Read the brief.
The raid never should have happened in the first place. So she's absolutely right that authority to use lethal force against a former President and his family was improvidently authorized.
You seem to insist on avoiding the forest for the trees here. Based on recently unsealed briefing, it's apparent that the government used an illegal investigation and a fraudulent warrant affidavit to get a facially defective and illegal warrant to conduct a raid that they already knew they didn't need.
But, uh, ok…that's apparently all just standard FBI procedure?
HTownAg98 said:
No to both. You've got to have a screw loose if you think Biden wants Trump executed.
The man is literally ****ing over the entire country and you think he's above having someone killed? You aren't paying attention.
HTownAg98 said:
Sure thing buddy.
Agreed
Well hey, at least we agree on something. Enjoy your evening.
HTownAg98 said:Ellis Wyatt said:This is nothing like "nearly every search warrant." This has never happened before. Seems a little "robust" to me, but Biden would probably have been glad if Trump had been injured. It would have saved all the lawfare to put him in prison.HTownAg98 said:The hyperbole about "lethal force." That's standard for nearly every search warrant the FBI executes. She's trying to drum up outrage about standard language in a search warrant. It's nonsense.jt2hunt said:she is literally posting up the unsealing of documents verbatim copy and paste. What part are you not liking?HTownAg98 said:
You all need to stop listening to Julie Kelly.These are the rules that apply to FBI agents whenever they do anything. https://t.co/SN9SCJ7t2D
— Brad Heath (@bradheath) May 21, 2024
Uh, yes it is. Every single LEO has a right to use reasonable force, and that can include deadly force, when executing a warrant. If someone came around a corner at MAL and started shooting at the agents, they'd be well within their rights to return fire. The idea the Biden was hoping Trump would be shot in this raid is just mind-boggling stupid.
why do they need to put in the use of deadly force?
If they didn't put that in the warrant and the Leo's came up on someone firing at them they couldn't return fire because they wouldn't legally be allowed to? That's bull*****
Will do.
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,090
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Put another way, if this was all just standard FBI procedure, why did they go to such lengths to put their own people in "lethal force approved" danger to execute a search warrant they already knew they didn't need to execute?
Sadly, it's quickly becoming standard FBI procedure as the alphabet agencies have all been politicized and weaponized with the FBI and DOJ running neck and neck for largest abuser of power.ThunderCougarFalconBird said:HTownAg98 said:
Because there's an idiot out here claiming "Awh mah gerd!!! DOJ authorized legal force!!!" when she either knows better and is just doing it to foment outrage and clicks, or she's too stupid to know better.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.566.0.pdf
Read the brief.
The raid never should have happened in the first place. So she's absolutely right that authority to use lethal force against a former President and his family was improvidently authorized.
You seem to insist on avoiding the forest for the trees here. Based on recently unsealed briefing, it's apparent that the government used an illegal investigation and a fraudulent warrant affidavit to get a facially defective and illegal warrant to conduct a raid that they already knew they didn't need.
But, uh, ok…that's apparently all just standard FBI procedure?
Anyone who defends them is either a useful idiot or a complicit Marxist.
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,090
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You should peruse the brief I posted on this thread a few minutes ago. It was filed in February and unsealed today.
The allegations plus an unfriendly judge suggest to me that a lot of people in the Biden administration have some 'splainin to do. I'd like your thoughts.
The allegations plus an unfriendly judge suggest to me that a lot of people in the Biden administration have some 'splainin to do. I'd like your thoughts.
Quote:
But, uh, ok…that's apparently all just standard FBI procedure?
Well, it is the procedure used in 100% of the FBI raids on the residences of former presidents.
Will do
jt2hunt said:HTownAg98 said:Ellis Wyatt said:This is nothing like "nearly every search warrant." This has never happened before. Seems a little "robust" to me, but Biden would probably have been glad if Trump had been injured. It would have saved all the lawfare to put him in prison.HTownAg98 said:The hyperbole about "lethal force." That's standard for nearly every search warrant the FBI executes. She's trying to drum up outrage about standard language in a search warrant. It's nonsense.jt2hunt said:she is literally posting up the unsealing of documents verbatim copy and paste. What part are you not liking?HTownAg98 said:
You all need to stop listening to Julie Kelly.These are the rules that apply to FBI agents whenever they do anything. https://t.co/SN9SCJ7t2D
— Brad Heath (@bradheath) May 21, 2024
Uh, yes it is. Every single LEO has a right to use reasonable force, and that can include deadly force, when executing a warrant. If someone came around a corner at MAL and started shooting at the agents, they'd be well within their rights to return fire. The idea the Biden was hoping Trump would be shot in this raid is just mind-boggling stupid.
why do they need to put in the use of deadly force?
If they didn't put that in the warrant and the Leo's came up on someone firing at them they couldn't return fire because they wouldn't legally be allowed to? That's bull*****
I don't even know if HTown is aware that Trump enjoys ARMED Secret Service protection 24/7, and what effect the Order had on potentially escalating an already illegal Wong Sun search into a full blown shoot out **** show?!?;
I would have agreed with you up until the last three years when we have seen the government weaponize it's agencies against the American people. This no longer even resembles the country I grew up in.HTownAg98 said:
Of course not. That's as ridiculous as thinking Biden was hoping Trump would be injured.
jt2hunt said:HTownAg98 said:Ellis Wyatt said:This is nothing like "nearly every search warrant." This has never happened before. Seems a little "robust" to me, but Biden would probably have been glad if Trump had been injured. It would have saved all the lawfare to put him in prison.HTownAg98 said:The hyperbole about "lethal force." That's standard for nearly every search warrant the FBI executes. She's trying to drum up outrage about standard language in a search warrant. It's nonsense.jt2hunt said:she is literally posting up the unsealing of documents verbatim copy and paste. What part are you not liking?HTownAg98 said:
You all need to stop listening to Julie Kelly.These are the rules that apply to FBI agents whenever they do anything. https://t.co/SN9SCJ7t2D
— Brad Heath (@bradheath) May 21, 2024
Uh, yes it is. Every single LEO has a right to use reasonable force, and that can include deadly force, when executing a warrant. If someone came around a corner at MAL and started shooting at the agents, they'd be well within their rights to return fire. The idea the Biden was hoping Trump would be shot in this raid is just mind-boggling stupid.
why do they need to put in the use of deadly force?
If they didn't put that in the warrant and the Leo's came up on someone firing at them they couldn't return fire because they wouldn't legally be allowed to? That's bull*****
Yeah, his argument is illogical.
There was no reason to explicitly add that.
And the FBI were ordered to NOT be marked as FBI? Did I read that correctly?Quote:
I don't even know if HTown is aware that Trump enjoys ARMED Secret Service protection 24/7, and what effect the Order had on potentially escalating an already illegal Wong Sun search into a full blown shoot out **** show?!?;
Is this egregious disregard of the constitutional rights of private citizens?
Seems like a hotel guest is entitled to constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures and a hotel clerk has no authority to consent to search a guests room, no?
What was the basis for probable cause to search individual guests rooms and what judge or magistrate signed off on this broad of a search warrant?
Now I know why the probable cause affidavit was withheld for so long.Quote:
The warrant also authorized agents to seize documents they believed to be "government and/or Presidential Records." Ex. 2 at USA-00043189 (c). Neither the affidavit nor the warrant articulates a basis for seizing "government" records, and the warrant provided no guidance regarding the scope of that term. Similarly, the affidavit included the PRA's definition of Presidential Records, but the warrant did not. Even if the PRA definition had been included, the citation in the affidavit to 44 U.S.C. 2201(2) elided the factual and legal complexities concerning, inter alia, President Trump's virtually unreviewable discretion to designate records as personal as discussed in President Trump's motion to dismiss pursuant to the PRA. Finally, in addition to the impermissible discretion conferred on seizing agents to apply vague terms such as "national defense information," "government" records, and "Presidential Records," the warrant authorized the seizure of "any containers/boxes (including any other contents" that included "physical documents with classification markings," "as well as any other containers/boxes that are collectively stored or found together with the aforementioned documents and containers/boxes." Ex. 2 at USA-00043189 (a). Based on this subparagraph, the agents were essentially authorized to seize all "containers/boxes" at Mar-a-Lago, so long as there was a plausible claim that the "container/box" was "stored or found together" with another "container/box" that contained a marked-classified document. Id. Read together, the limitless nature of the warrant's introductory language concerning "all" evidence of specified crimes, the limitless nature of certain terms on the illustrative list in the warrant's subparagraphs, and the authorizations relating to "containers/boxes," fail to meet the Fourth Amendment's particularity requirements.
That's bad.
One quick takeaway:Prosperdick said:Sadly, it's quickly becoming standard FBI procedure as the alphabet agencies have all been politicized and weaponized with the FBI and DOJ running neck and neck for largest abuser of power.ThunderCougarFalconBird said:HTownAg98 said:
Because there's an idiot out here claiming "Awh mah gerd!!! DOJ authorized legal force!!!" when she either knows better and is just doing it to foment outrage and clicks, or she's too stupid to know better.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.566.0.pdf
Read the brief.
The raid never should have happened in the first place. So she's absolutely right that authority to use lethal force against a former President and his family was improvidently authorized.
You seem to insist on avoiding the forest for the trees here. Based on recently unsealed briefing, it's apparent that the government used an illegal investigation and a fraudulent warrant affidavit to get a facially defective and illegal warrant to conduct a raid that they already knew they didn't need.
But, uh, ok…that's apparently all just standard FBI procedure?
Anyone who defends them is either a useful idiot or a complicit Marxist.
This...is a $18 million property in Florida...Quote:
entirety of Mar-a-Lago: "a mansion with approximately 58 bedrooms, 33 bathrooms, on a 17-acre estate,"
He does talk about taking Trump out back and beating his ass.HTownAg98 said:
No to both. You've got to have a screw loose if you think Biden wants Trump executed.
Not a stable President.
Featured Stories
See All
161:11
15h ago
2.2k
Players to Watch: No. 20 Texas A&M vs. No. 3 Texas
by Olin Buchanan
11:37
19h ago
2.5k
85:33
1d ago
6.9k