Anybody who doesn't see the abuses by the DOJ in this raid is ignorant or lying because of bias. Garland DID NOT have to put the specific language of deadly force in his order. If it's standard practice, why did he go to the trouble of inserting the specific language.
Trump indicted over classified documents
266,084 Views |
3603 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by HTownAg98
Isn't it just a standard form?
eric76 said:Spinning, as usual?Foreverconservative said:
The FBI wasn't searching for just any random classified documents they were searching for Crossfire Hurricane documents that could hurt them. They were willing to do whatever it takes to obtain them and if they were stopped or resisted they would green light whoever was behind the counter resistance. All that talk of DoD paperwork was just a smokescreen for their real objective.
The irony of those words coming from you is hilarious
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" - Mark Twain
You are correct. Nothing was "added." This is already typed on the Law Enforcement Operations Order.MiamiHopper said:
Isn't it just a standard form?
That said, there are PLENTY of abuses here, from the start to finish. Abuses in seeking, issuing and executing the warrant.
This latest Internet outrage that they were there to kill Trump is hilarious given the FBI went when they knew Trump was not there!
I'm Gipper
No.MiamiHopper said:
Isn't it just a standard form?
Is raiding a President's home a standard practice? Does everyone the FBI raids have armed Secret Service protection?
Why do y'all continue regurgitating the same talking points? Can you think for yourself?
You are incorrect on the first part. This is a standard form. IEllis Wyatt said:No.MiamiHopper said:
Isn't it just a standard form?
Is raiding a President's home a standard practice? Does everyone the FBI raids have armed Secret Service protection?
Why do y'all continue regurgitating the same talking points? Can you think for yourself?
You are correct on the second part. This was FAR from standard practice to raid a former president's home. This was done to embarrass Trump as part of effort to keep him from winning in 2024.
I'm Gipper
Sorry, I should have been more clear.Im Gipper said:You are incorrect on the first part. This is a standard form. IEllis Wyatt said:No.MiamiHopper said:
Isn't it just a standard form?
Is raiding a President's home a standard practice? Does everyone the FBI raids have armed Secret Service protection?
Why do y'all continue regurgitating the same talking points? Can you think for yourself?
You are correct on the second part. This was FAR from standard practice to raid a former president's home. This was done to embarrass Trump as part of effort to keep him from winning in 2024.
By no means should it have been a standard form. It is ludicrous to imply anything about this was standard or should have been treated routinely. It is not standard for the Attorney General to authorize a raid of a former President's home. If this had to happen (it didn't), every single thing about it should have been done to deal with the gravity of this specific situation.
There is no legitimate justification for what they did or that they were authorized to use deadly force against a man with Secret Service protection.
Quote:
The irony of those words coming from you is hilarious
I agree with everything you wrote, but one comment on that last phrase in your post.
They weren't authorized to use deadly force against someone with secret service protection. He wasn't even there for starters. They were authorized to use deadly force if there was a danger of death of serious physical injury.
Here is what it says verbatim:
1. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
A. Deadly force may not be used solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect.
B. Firearms may not be fired solely to disable moving vehicles. Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless:
i. a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or
ii. the vehicle is operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical injury to the officer or others, and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.
C. If feasible and if to do so would not increase the danger to the officer or others, a verbal warning to submit to the authority of officer shall be given prior to the use of deadly force.
D. Warning shots are not permitted outside of the prison context.
E. Officers will be trained in alternative methods and tactics for handling resisting subjects, which must be used when the use of deadly force is not authorized by this policy.
F. Deadly force should not be used against persons whose actions are a threat solely to themselves or property unless an individual poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others in close proximity.
2. Officers should seek to gain voluntary compliance before using force if feasible and if doing so would not increase the danger to the officer or others.
3. Officers must prevent or stop, as appropriate, another officer from engaging in excessive or unlawful force, or force that violates DOJ policy.
4. Officers must request and/or render medical aid as appropriate.
I'm Gipper
They weren't authorized to use deadly force against someone with secret service protection. He wasn't even there for starters. They were authorized to use deadly force if there was a danger of death of serious physical injury.
Here is what it says verbatim:
1. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
A. Deadly force may not be used solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect.
B. Firearms may not be fired solely to disable moving vehicles. Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless:
i. a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or
ii. the vehicle is operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical injury to the officer or others, and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.
C. If feasible and if to do so would not increase the danger to the officer or others, a verbal warning to submit to the authority of officer shall be given prior to the use of deadly force.
D. Warning shots are not permitted outside of the prison context.
E. Officers will be trained in alternative methods and tactics for handling resisting subjects, which must be used when the use of deadly force is not authorized by this policy.
F. Deadly force should not be used against persons whose actions are a threat solely to themselves or property unless an individual poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others in close proximity.
2. Officers should seek to gain voluntary compliance before using force if feasible and if doing so would not increase the danger to the officer or others.
3. Officers must prevent or stop, as appropriate, another officer from engaging in excessive or unlawful force, or force that violates DOJ policy.
4. Officers must request and/or render medical aid as appropriate.
I'm Gipper
The "standard" form doesn't contain the correct language in this situation (it will be a different form from now on with language concerning when SS are in control of the scene), because under no circumstance would the FBI ever be able to authorize deadly force whether Trump was present, or not. He had guests at MAL, and the SS was supposed to be protecting them from death, and intimidation. That's their job, and the FBI was in their "house." Moreover, IF Trump had been there, the feds would've been forced to leave all weapons outside the gates of the residence.
BOTH sides F'd up, and Trump needs to hammer that home to his protective detail. He then needs to continue to trash the feds for their blatant lawlessness.
BOTH sides F'd up, and Trump needs to hammer that home to his protective detail. He then needs to continue to trash the feds for their blatant lawlessness.
Trump's Secret Service detail in no way shape or form F'd up or did anything wrong!
I'm Gipper
I'm Gipper
Listen to Bongino's show from today. The SS were supposed to instruct the feds to leave their weapons behind.
I'm just echoing what he was screaming about, and didn't know the rules of engagement until he spelled them all out.
I'm just echoing what he was screaming about, and didn't know the rules of engagement until he spelled them all out.
I don't have time to listen to his whole show, but I did see @shipwreckedcrew (former federal prosecutor and the leading lawyer defending J6 defendants) shredding Bongino on Twitter!
I'm Gipper
I'm Gipper
bobbranco said:
There Will Be Blood
Yes but where is the blood
At the RNCaggiejayrod said:bobbranco said:
There Will Be Blood
Yes but where is the blood
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3461769/replies/67622119
I'm Gipper
Hell, he may be lying for all I know. But, having been a SS agent in the past (he likes to brag about it a lot), I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt in this situation. That said, too many swinging d*cks on one room lends credence to why the secret service always has the upper-hand when the feds are in the same room.
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,090
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think we're a little lost in the weeds re the use of deadly force.
The real issue we should be focused on is the severity of the deceit used to obtain the warrant in the first place while knowing they didn't need it.
The real issue we should be focused on is the severity of the deceit used to obtain the warrant in the first place while knowing they didn't need it.
I completely agree!
But the online rage merchants have latched onto the "they were going to kill Trump" narrative and aren't letting go!
It really is a shame. They claim they want to help conservatism, but that's clearly a lie. They hurt it and distract from the real issues just like they have done here!
While everyone should be talking about the abuses in obtaining the warrant, thanks to charlatans on Twitter, that is not the case.
I'm Gipper
But the online rage merchants have latched onto the "they were going to kill Trump" narrative and aren't letting go!
It really is a shame. They claim they want to help conservatism, but that's clearly a lie. They hurt it and distract from the real issues just like they have done here!
While everyone should be talking about the abuses in obtaining the warrant, thanks to charlatans on Twitter, that is not the case.
I'm Gipper
Im Gipper said:
I agree with everything you wrote, but one comment on that last phrase in your post.
They weren't authorized to use deadly force against someone with secret service protection. He wasn't even there for starters. They were authorized to use deadly force if there was a danger of death of serious physical injury.
Here is what it says verbatim:
1. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
A. Deadly force may not be used solely to prevent the escape of a fleeing suspect.
B. Firearms may not be fired solely to disable moving vehicles. Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless:
i. a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or
ii. the vehicle is operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical injury to the officer or others, and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.
C. If feasible and if to do so would not increase the danger to the officer or others, a verbal warning to submit to the authority of officer shall be given prior to the use of deadly force.
D. Warning shots are not permitted outside of the prison context.
E. Officers will be trained in alternative methods and tactics for handling resisting subjects, which must be used when the use of deadly force is not authorized by this policy.
F. Deadly force should not be used against persons whose actions are a threat solely to themselves or property unless an individual poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others in close proximity.
2. Officers should seek to gain voluntary compliance before using force if feasible and if doing so would not increase the danger to the officer or others.
3. Officers must prevent or stop, as appropriate, another officer from engaging in excessive or unlawful force, or force that violates DOJ policy.
4. Officers must request and/or render medical aid as appropriate.
It's lifted verbatim from the DOJ Justice Handbook, Sections 1-16:200-500.
https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force#1-16.200
People thinking the FBI was going in to assassinate Trump has to be some of the dumbest **** I've seen in a long, long time.
What's got more suspense buildup?
The next 166-days until the election or the final episodes of Breaking Bad?
The next 166-days until the election or the final episodes of Breaking Bad?
What part of the DOJ handbook did "use DC as the Grand Jury venue for a 'crime that occurred in Florida' " come from?Quote:
It's lifted verbatim from the DOJ Justice Handbook, Sections 1-16:200-500.
https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force#1-16.200
People thinking the FBI was going in to assassinate Trump has to be some of the dumbest **** I've seen in a long, long time.
Let's quit with the absurdities. They went with "standard, except in all the areas we want to do something different."
There is no justification for any of it, and as Thunder correctly points out, the problem is way worse than permitting the use of lethal force.
Is it SOP for the United States Attorney General to personally sign off on every FBI search warrant?
Of course not.
Of course not.
Gouveia just started a stream about this.
And the only thing the grand jurors in Florida repportedly heard was a recital of the transcript from the DC grand jury proceedings. Emphasis on "reportedly" because it is unlawful for grand jury proceedings to be leaked or released except under very specific exceptions.Quote:
What part of the DOJ handbook did "use DC as the Grand Jury venue for a 'crime that occurred in Florida' " come from?
Let's quit with the absurdities. They went with "standard, except in all the areas we want to do something different."
Cannon has been very skeptical of Smith's invocation and then abandonment of Rule 6 in the FRCP. (Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.)
Over 200 photos taken of the Trump private residence in Mar A Lago. Especially Melania's suite next to Trump's, their closets between the suites AND Barron's suite on the floor below them. That is what they photographed. What else did they do with no photographic evidence?
Federal agents also need to be required to wear bodycams during the executions of warrants, IMO.
Federal agents also need to be required to wear bodycams during the executions of warrants, IMO.
Uhmmm, this is getting worse.
Watching Gouveia going over the documents released by Judge Cannon addressing the possibility that Trump was there or arived while the search was in process. Their instructions to "engage" with SS protective detail is...unusual.
Look I am not on the "Biden tried to assassinate Trump" train at all. But the more I am seeing, the more I have to say WTF? Why put the SS in that position in the first place? To get a bunch of federal agents with holes in their bodies? SS and FBI?
That's the way that looks like it was set up to happen. Cannot believe how that raid was set up other than a real Mafia Don.
Watching Gouveia going over the documents released by Judge Cannon addressing the possibility that Trump was there or arived while the search was in process. Their instructions to "engage" with SS protective detail is...unusual.
Look I am not on the "Biden tried to assassinate Trump" train at all. But the more I am seeing, the more I have to say WTF? Why put the SS in that position in the first place? To get a bunch of federal agents with holes in their bodies? SS and FBI?
That's the way that looks like it was set up to happen. Cannot believe how that raid was set up other than a real Mafia Don.
Yeah...people said THAT stuff too...HTownAg98 said:
People thinking the FBI was going in toassassinateSPY ON Trump has to be some of the dumbest **** I've seen in a long, long time.
I don't think people grasp how evil the people we are dealing with are. I do not think there is any line they will not cross.Ag with kids said:Yeah...people said THAT stuff too...HTownAg98 said:
People thinking the FBI was going in toassassinateSPY ON Trump has to be some of the dumbest **** I've seen in a long, long time.
Ellis Wyatt said:I don't think people grasp how evil the people we are dealing with are. I do not think there is any line they will not cross.Ag with kids said:Yeah...people said THAT stuff too...HTownAg98 said:
People thinking the FBI was going in toassassinateSPY ON Trump has to be some of the dumbest **** I've seen in a long, long time.
Agree
Why would they stop? Nothing happens to them when they do. Until they start to have consequences, I don't expect them to do more/worse.Ellis Wyatt said:I don't think people grasp how evil the people we are dealing with are. I do not think there is any line they will not cross.Ag with kids said:Yeah...people said THAT stuff too...HTownAg98 said:
People thinking the FBI was going in toassassinateSPY ON Trump has to be some of the dumbest **** I've seen in a long, long time.
Ellis Wyatt said:I don't think people grasp how evil the people we are dealing with are. I do not think there is any line they will not cross.Ag with kids said:Yeah...people said THAT stuff too...HTownAg98 said:
People thinking the FBI was going in toassassinateSPY ON Trump has to be some of the dumbest **** I've seen in a long, long time.
They are painting Trump as literally Hitler and his election as the end of our democracy (most don't know we're a republic, or know the difference). They are setting up to justify ANYTHING. There is no limit to what their loons might do.
The generally considered best answer to "what would you do first, if you had a time machine" is go back in time and kill Hitler.
https://www.youtube.com/live/HeGKORCgX9s?si=7LDU1NtEUAhuN_lc
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" - Mark Twain
Good information there.
It is disgusting how authoritarian Jack Smith's thugs are acting.
It is disgusting how authoritarian Jack Smith's thugs are acting.
Spent most of the day at Ft. Pierce federal courthouse to cover two hearings in classified docs case.
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 22, 2024
Special Counsel team's frustration with Judge Aileen Cannon is really evident.
And it's glorious.
David Harbach, one of Smith's lead prosecutors and usually a cool customer in…
Quote:
David Harbach, one of Smith's lead prosecutors and usually a cool customer in court, had a series of mini temper tantrums this morning. At times pounding his fist on the podium and clapping his hands in anger to emphasize a point, Harbach was totally unprofessional, demeaning, and petulant.
Cannon asked Harbach to "calm down" during one diatribe about accusations DOJ threatened one of the defense attorneys to get his client to flip on Donald Trump.
He kept trying to argue with her--Cannon also remains measured most of the time and is no fan of antics--and when she asked him a question about an issue, he shot back "that's not the right question."
A few reporters in the media room even gasped.
Harbach is flailing bc his case is imploding.
DOJ never thought their dirty, sloppy, corrupt tricks would see the light of day. Biden regime never thought information such as the FBI's operations order related to MAL raid that included lethal force guidance would ever be made public.
But Cannon is systematically dismantling this case by holding hearings (like today) and ordering the unsealing of key motions and evidence. She is a one-woman wrecking crew and Smith's team knows there is very little they can do about it.
And she is nowhere near finished. Just this week, in addition to the unsealed motions posted yesterday that revealed details about the MAL raid, Cannon ordered the unsealing of several motions filed earlier in the case.
I'm working on a Substack post for the weekend on the nature of the motions today and the proceedings--but suffice to say Jack Smith's team already appears deflated and defeated.
lol, if you don't have the facts, pound the law. If you don't have the law, pound the facts. If you don't have either, pound the podium.