FBI Authorized Use of Deadly Force During Mar-a-Lago Raid

[Hans Blaster]

Tyranny is not a laughing matter. The Biden White House acted illegally when they authorized the raid on Mar-a-lago.

Just because you strung these actual words into a grammatically correct sentence does not mean it comports with reality.

The Executive Office of the President (aka, "the White House") does not order or authorize search warrants. DOJ/FBI officials approve the submission of proposed search warrants to a judge that must approve the warrant;

 

[Bradskii]

Tyranny is not a laughing matter.

Tyranny might not be. But this...

The Biden White House acted illegally when they authorized the raid on Mar-a-lag.

...well, you just have to laugh. Until you realise that people who actually think like this have the vote.

 

[Valletta]

Just because you strung these actual words into a grammatically correct sentence does not mean it comports with reality.

The Executive Office of the President (aka, "the White House") does not order or authorize search warrants. DOJ/FBI officials approve the submission of proposed search warrants to a judge that must approve the warrant;

I. The Biden White House Illegally Facilitated Access to Former
President Trump’s Records.
The Biden White House brazenly violated the Presidential Records Act when
it granted a “special access request” to President Trump’s records to facilitate a
prosecutorial inquisition by the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.21
The law is clear. Prefaced with the critical caveat that any access to
Presidential records otherwise restricted is “subject to any rights, defenses, or
privileges which the United States or any agency or person may invoke,” the
Presidential Records Act only makes records available in three situations: (1)
“pursuant to subpoena or other judicial process issued by a court of competent
jurisdiction for the purposes of any civil or criminal investigation or proceeding;” (2)
through the request of an incumbent President for information “that is needed for the
conduct of current business of the incumbent President’s office,” or (3) “to either
House of Congress.”22

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/Hamilton%20Testimony_0.pdf

 

[Hans Blaster]

I. The Biden White House Illegally Facilitated Access to Former
President Trump’s Records.
The Biden White House brazenly violated the Presidential Records Act when
it granted a “special access request” to President Trump’s records to facilitate a
prosecutorial inquisition by the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.21
The law is clear. Prefaced with the critical caveat that any access to
Presidential records otherwise restricted is “subject to any rights, defenses, or
privileges which the United States or any agency or person may invoke,” the
Presidential Records Act only makes records available in three situations: (1)
“pursuant to subpoena or other judicial process issued by a court of competent
jurisdiction for the purposes of any civil or criminal investigation or proceeding;” (2)
through the request of an incumbent President for information “that is needed for the
conduct of current business of the incumbent President’s office,” or (3) “to either
House of Congress.”22

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/Hamilton%20Testimony_0.pdf

Let me repeat for you:

The Executive Office of the President (aka, "the White House") does not order or authorize search warrants. DOJ/FBI officials approve the submission of proposed search warrants to a judge that must approve the warrant.

 

[Occams Barber]

(1)
“pursuant to subpoena or other judicial process issued by a court of competent
jurisdiction for the purposes of any civil or criminal investigation or proceeding;”

In the case of Mar-a-Lago, option 1 (above) would apply. The DoJ would apply to a court of competent jurisdiction (i.e. a judge) for a search warrant.

OB

 

[Bradskii]

For security, if possible the hourly movements of those guarded by the Secret Service are known to a very small number of people.

Maybe they didn't do such a good job.

'Trump, however, painted the released order as evidence that Biden's Department of Justice was authorized to shoot him in his fundraising email, alleging he "nearly escaped death." Trump claims in fundraising email he 'nearly escaped death' in FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago

Phew. Nearly escaped with his life.

 

[Valletta]

Maybe they didn't do such a good job.

'Trump, however, painted the released order as evidence that Biden's Department of Justice was authorized to shoot him in his fundraising email, alleging he "nearly escaped death." Trump claims in fundraising email he 'nearly escaped death' in FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago

Phew. Nearly escaped with his life.

It's not just Trump. Joe won't give protection to Kennedy, despite all of the death threats. Joe refused to enforce the laws in regard to Supreme Court justices and put their lives in danger. Joe pulled the military out of Afghanistan before the civilians and also released terrorists before getting the civilians out. Joe knowingly violated our border laws and increased the number of hardened criminals entering our country and the amount of human trafficking. Joe and other Democrats persecuted and imprisoned a number of non-violent conservatives while allowing violent thugs to rule the streets. Does anyone else see a pattern?

 

[Bradskii]

It's not just Trump. Joe won't give protection to Kennedy.

So Kennedy nearly escaped death as well? Yikes!

Does anyone else see a pattern?

With your posts? Oh, yeah. We all see a pattern. Don't be under any illusions about that.

 

[Valletta]

So Kennedy nearly escaped death as well? Yikes!

With your posts? Oh, yeah. We all see a pattern. Don't be under any illusions about that.

You don't see any of the leading Democrats pull their own protection. The old double standard.

 

[Hans Blaster]

So Kennedy nearly escaped death as well? Yikes!

Brain worms.

With your posts? Oh, yeah. We all see a pattern. Don't be under any illusions about that.

Agreed.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Minorities do have ID. Republicans at the national level support not allowing noncitizens to vote In Washington D.C. and want legislation that requires states to require some kind of proof of citizenship, such as passports or birth certificates. If you don't need to require proof of citizenship for a university ID or handgun license than I and many many others would be against it, and it may not comply with the proposed federal legislation.

But the point was that the issue of lacking a current photo ID disproportionately impacts certain groups more than others. Obviously I understand that most people from all demographic groups have a driver's license, but the issue of some people not having them isn't one that's evenly spread across the various demographics.

These were the stats I was referring to:

• Nearly 29 million voting-age U.S. citizens lacked a valid driver's license and more than 7 million had no other form of non-expired government-issued photo identification.
• In states with strict photo identification laws in 2020, more than 3 million voting-age U.S. citizens did not have a current driver's license, and more than 1 million did not have a non-expired government-issued photo identification.
• More than 11 million people ages 18–29 did not have a current driver's license, and more than 3 million did not have any unexpired government issued photo ID.
• Members of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups were less likely to have a current driver's license or other government-issued photo ID. An estimated 1.86 million Black non-Hispanic Americans (6.2%) and 1.86 million Hispanic Americans (6.1%) lack a photo ID, as do 4.5% of those who identify as Native American, Native Alaskan or another race. This compares to just 2.3% of White non-Hispanic Americans and 1.6% of Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander Americans.

...and like I noted, being that state-level GOP entities were being selective about what types of ID would be considered makes me question their their sincerity about this.

If the stat was "6.2% of white southern baptists don't have a current drivers license or government issued photo ID", I sincerely question whether or not the GOP would be pushing for measures like these.

Not to mention, there are some challenges (especially for students) in this regard

New voter ID requirements put out-of-state college students "between a rock and a hard place" • Ohio Capital Journal

A new law changing voting ID requirements is making it more challenging for out-of-state college students to vote.

ohiocapitaljournal.com

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

It's not just Trump. Joe won't give protection to Kennedy, despite all of the death threats. Joe refused to enforce the laws in regard to Supreme Court justices and put their lives in danger. Joe pulled the military out of Afghanistan before the civilians and also released terrorists before getting the civilians out. Joe knowingly violated our border laws and increased the number of hardened criminals entering our country and the amount of human trafficking. Joe and other Democrats persecuted and imprisoned a number of non-violent conservatives while allowing violent thugs to rule the streets. Does anyone else see a pattern?

It was Trump that released the Taliban terrorist, before he left the white house. Then the Taliban released ISIS. Also, this was also a war zone for years. Every American going to a war zone. Knows the risk. And their death is on them. Biden tried to get the the house to vote to make it more difficult for illegals. But they denied it.And No Christian would be okay with Trump separating families. Biden isn't against peaceful protest on either side. Biden isn't okay with riot's. Trump tried to get his people to overthrow the government.

 

[Valletta]

It was Trump that released the Taliban terrorist, before he left the white house. Then the Taliban released ISIS. Also, this was also a war zone for years. Every American going to a war zone. Knows the risk. And their death is on them. Biden tried to get the the house to vote to make it more difficult for illegals. But they denied it.And No Christian would be okay with Trump separating families. Biden isn't against peaceful protest on either side. Biden isn't okay with riot's. Trump tried to get his people to overthrow the government.

Joe simply dropped the DNA requirements at the border, this way unrelated adults can bring in children in mass numbers to be trafficked. Joe claims to be a Christian. I am unaware of Biden ever trying to get the House to make it more difficult for illegals--just the opposite is true, in fact Joe secretly flew many in.

 

[Mayzoo]

Perhaps most shockingly, the FBI team included a medic to tend to anyone “injured” during the raid. The operations order identified a nearby trauma center with directions how to get there:​

FBI Authorized Use of Deadly Force During Mar-a-Lago Raid

Newly unsealed documents in Special Counsel Jack Smith's espionage case against Donald Trump demonstrate the FBI's plans to use deadly force--even if the former president arrived at the scene.

www.declassified.live

Not a two-tiered system of justice?

I would be shocked if they did not make a contingency plan for a negative outcome while serving a contended search warrant. Do they know who will be on the premises at the time they serve it? Do they know if those people present will have weapons or not? Do they know the mental state of everyone that could be armed?

Not having a contingency plan would be irresponsible, and had someone gotten hurt, the outrage over the time it took to get medical care for that person would have been heard loud, clear, and for a very long time.

 

[Valletta]

But the point was that the issue of lacking a current photo ID disproportionately impacts certain groups more than others. Obviously I understand that most people from all demographic groups have a driver's license, but the issue of some people not having them isn't one that's evenly spread across the various demographics.

These were the stats I was referring to:

• Nearly 29 million voting-age U.S. citizens lacked a valid driver's license and more than 7 million had no other form of non-expired government-issued photo identification.
• In states with strict photo identification laws in 2020, more than 3 million voting-age U.S. citizens did not have a current driver's license, and more than 1 million did not have a non-expired government-issued photo identification.
• More than 11 million people ages 18–29 did not have a current driver's license, and more than 3 million did not have any unexpired government issued photo ID.
• Members of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups were less likely to have a current driver's license or other government-issued photo ID. An estimated 1.86 million Black non-Hispanic Americans (6.2%) and 1.86 million Hispanic Americans (6.1%) lack a photo ID, as do 4.5% of those who identify as Native American, Native Alaskan or another race. This compares to just 2.3% of White non-Hispanic Americans and 1.6% of Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander Americans.

...and like I noted, being that state-level GOP entities were being selective about what types of ID would be considered makes me question their their sincerity about this.

If the stat was "6.2% of white southern baptists don't have a current drivers license or government issued photo ID", I sincerely question whether or not the GOP would be pushing for measures like these.

Not to mention, there are some challenges (especially for students) in this regard

New voter ID requirements put out-of-state college students "between a rock and a hard place" • Ohio Capital Journal

A new law changing voting ID requirements is making it more challenging for out-of-state college students to vote.

ohiocapitaljournal.com

Perhaps you need to meet more Republicans so that you would not question their motives. I believe only one country in the entire EU does not support vote ID, it is also popular here as the poll shows:

Broad Support - Lawyers Democracy Fund Is Now Center for Election Confidence

The public widely supports voter ID laws: Gallup published a poll in October 2022 finding 79% of voters support voter ID laws, including 97% of Republicans, 84% of Independents, and 53% of Democrats. A UMass poll in January 2022 found that 67% of voters favor requiring voter ID at polling...

lawyersdemocracyfund.org

And I think many Democrats have just been talked out of it by their leaders and the media. The best course of action is to find people who wanted to vote but could not because they had no ID. Then we could identify the exact demographic. Next go out and make sure they obtain an ID and register to vote well before the election. I have seen little action in this area.

 

[Mayzoo]

It's not just Trump. Joe won't give protection to Kennedy, despite all of the death threats. Joe refused to enforce the laws in regard to Supreme Court justices and put their lives in danger. Joe pulled the military out of Afghanistan before the civilians and also released terrorists before getting the civilians out. Joe knowingly violated our border laws and increased the number of hardened criminals entering our country and the amount of human trafficking. Joe and other Democrats persecuted and imprisoned a number of non-violent conservatives while allowing violent thugs to rule the streets. Does anyone else see a pattern?

The US Citizens in Afganistan had 18 months notice (February 29, 2020 to August 30 2021) to leave Afganistan prior to the Military pulling out. Biden actually extended the exit from May 2021 to August 2021 for the US Citizens to get out. Those who did not get out clearly did not want to get out or they would have during that 18 months. So far as I know, it is not possible to use US military forces to force a US citizen to vacate a foreign land if they wish to stay.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/timeline-of-u-s-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/

I lived in Southern California 45 years ago for almost a decade. The border was a problem then, it had been a problem for quite some time prior and it continues to be a problem. It is nothing new, just another generation screaming about is all that has really changed. No one still wants to really address the issues, they just want to find a scapegoat to blame--then and now. I took a cruise to Mexico. When I went to reboard the ship to head back to the US, they had dogs sniffing what we brought onto the ship. For drugs? Absolutely not--don't be ridiculous, it was for fruit! I was asked how much alcohol I drank on the ship and how much was bringing back into the US solely so they could tax it. Was I asked if I was bringing legally bought or illegally bought drugs into the US? Was my luggage checked? No, because those were not taxable. I could have brought all the drugs back in I wanted as there was no check or questions for that.

But sure we are supposed to believe all the drugs that are here are brought in by illegals. Got it!!

 

[camille70]

A good thing, the FBI was taking a chance because Melania or Barron or President Trump could have traveled there at any time. For security, if possible the hourly movements of those guarded by the Secret Service are known to a very small number of people.

If they were actually targeting Trump, you don't think the Biden administration is competent enough to make sure he is at home? We could be sure of Bin Ladins wearabouts in another country, but cant find the guy on this continent that travels with an 8 car escort and a private plane using government resources? The guy who announces travel plans and rallies weeks in advance? None of the family moves without secret service.

If they ever decide to take him out, the US has the means to make it look like an accident. He eats so many Big Macs and so much KFC, no sane person would even question it.

Regardless, if Trump gets his way in court, it wouldn't even be illegal. Biden would have presidential immunity if he were removing a political opponent because he believed it was in the best interest of the country, according to Trump's attorneys.

 

[Arcangl86]

Really, if President Biden wanted to assassinate Mr. Trump, all he would have needed to do was order Mr. Trump's detail to do so.

 

[Valletta]

If they were actually targeting Trump, you don't think the Biden administration is competent enough to make sure he is at home? We could be sure of Bin Ladins wearabouts in another country, but cant find the guy on this continent that travels with an 8 car escort and a private plane using government resources? The guy who announces travel plans and rallies weeks in advance? None of the family moves without secret service.

If they ever decide to take him out, the US has the means to make it look like an accident. He eats so many Big Macs and so much KFC, no sane person would even question it.

Regardless, if Trump gets his way in court, it wouldn't even be illegal. Biden would have presidential immunity if he were removing a political opponent because he believed it was in the best interest of the country, according to Trump's attorneys.

I didn't say they were "targeting" Trump or the Supreme Court Justices, they definitely broke the law in both cases. The violations of law made violence more probable and sent a message, a fascist message they are sending to all who oppose their tyranny.

 

[Arcangl86]

You don't see any of the leading Democrats pull their own protection. The old double standard.

Well yes. The protection of the current US President is required by federal law. Extending protection to a candidate is discretionary.