Biden administration authorized 'Use of Deadly Force' in Mar-a-Lago raid

During the country wide debate as to whether or not a President should receive immunity for the decisions that they and their administration make the Liberal Tribalists amongst us crafted arguments stating that it would be inappropriate for a president and their administration to have total immunity because they might use it to physically harm their political rivals.

Most of us rebuted that the argument invoiced an unlikely extreme and not worth of considertion when making policy decisions.

Turns out we were wrong. And in fact it was the tribal leader of the liberals who had already authorized deadly force be used against his 76 year old political rival. The lawfair and political persecution wasn't enough for this blood thirty autocrat; he also needed to put his political rivals life in jeopardy... over an infrastructure he himself was guilty of.

Biden administration authorized 'Use of Deadly Force' in Mar-a-Lago raid

The Biden administration authorized the use of deadly force during the FBI’s raid on former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida in August 2022 as part of its investigation into classified records, court documents revealed.

The order, according to a court filing, contained a "Policy Statement" regarding "Use of Deadly Force," which stated, for example, "Law Enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force when necessary."

According to the filing, the DOJ and FBI agents "planned to bring ‘Standard Issue Weapons,' ‘Ammo,’ ‘Handcuffs,’ and ‘medium and large sized bolt cutters,’ but they were instructed to wear ‘unmarked polo or collared shirts’ and to keep ‘law enforcement equipment concealed."

link

a reply to: Dandandat3

Hate to say "told ya so" but there it is.

lol

Sometimes I hate being right.

Who is actually running the Biden Admin? The DOJ said he was too senile in 2012 to even stand trial for felonies. He's a career monster, but he has no idea who or where he is. Who is running his nightmare reign?

a reply to: Dandandat3

The order, according to a court filing, contained a "Policy Statement" regarding "Use of Deadly Force," which stated, for example, "Law Enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force when necessary."

Sounds like boiler plate stuff. Besides, Trump was in New York during that FBI search. It wasn't like some kind of coded hit job on the former president. LOL

a reply to: Sookiechacha

a reply to: Sookiechacha

"Boiler plate" in a highly unprecedented and historic rade on a former president's home?

That slimy reptile p.o.s. Eric Holder started the BAMN directive back in the Obama admin, and the deep state Dems have made it a big part of their playbook.

a reply to: Dandandat3

I've never heard of a police / law enforcement raid/action where they didn't have the right to use lethal force, if necessary. Have you?

If Trump had been there, which he wasn't, and pointed a loaded gun at one of the FBI agents, do you think that agent should have taken that hypothetical bullet, or been able to use deadly force to defend themselves?

a reply to: DBCowboy

DITTO! Trump isn't above the law. The FBI doesn't suspend their policies because Trump is a former president.

Talk about a 2-tiered justice system. Geeez!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Is it your argument that officers not given authorisation to use deadly force loss theit right to self defense?

a reply to: Dandandat3

Of course. Besides, Trump wasn't even there.

Like I said. Sounds like standard boiler plate, SOP.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

There is always an excuse isn't there.

a reply to: Dandandat3

There's always an excuse to get outraged over nothing.

What is the FBI’s policy on the use of deadly force by its special agents?

FBI special agents may use deadly force only when necessary—when the agent has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the agent or another person. If feasible, a verbal warning to submit to the authority of the special agent is given prior to the use of deadly force.

LINK

Like I said BOILER PLATE

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Dandandat3

There's always an excuse to get outraged over nothing.

What is the FBI’s policy on the use of deadly force by its special agents?

FBI special agents may use deadly force only when necessary—when the agent has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the agent or another person. If feasible, a verbal warning to submit to the authority of the special agent is given prior to the use of deadly force.

LINK

Like I said BOILER PLATE

No you’ll always make excuses for the America hating Democrat scum balls.

Use of deadly force authorized at a former president’s home over some F’ing documents?
Get the hell out of here with that crap.

When Trump gets elected, I am going to cheer on the Trump Vendetta Tour every goddamn minute while you clowns howl at the sky.

a reply to: RazorV66

Use of deadly force authorized at a former president’s home over some F’ing documents?
Get the hell out of here with that crap.

Why? Why wouldn't FBI agents be ready to use deadly force, if necessary, while executing a search warrant at his property. Especially since he wasn't there and wasn't in any danger of getting between an armed FBI agent and some nut bag.

a reply to: Dandandat3

My guess is that FBI Director Christopher Wray alerted Donald Trump of the upcoming raid, which is why the former President was not in Florida when it occurred. WHILE THE RAID WAS STILL IN PROGRESS, Donald Trump sent out a message to the world letting everyone know it was occurring, in real time. There's more (good things) going on than we know.

a reply to: Dandandat3

All federal, sworn Law Enforcement Officers carry firearms. It goes with the job. They do under Biden and they did under Trump. That includes FBI agents. By definition, any LEO who carries a firearm is authorized to use lethal force. Otherwise, it would make no sense for them to carry firearms. Because they are authorized to use lethal force, there are policies for when it is appropriate and those policies take into account federal laws and Supreme Court decisions. For Federal LEOs those policies are created by and published by the DOJ. After Biden came into office he ordered a review of those policies in 2021 and updated them in July of 2022--one month before the August FBI search of Mar-a-Lago. Here's what the DOJ manual has to say about those policies:

1-16.200 - DEADLY FORCE

Law enforcement officers and correctional 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 discharged solely to disable moving vehicles. Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless: (1) a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or (2) 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. Firearms may not be discharged from a moving vehicle except in exigent circumstances. In these situations, an officer must have an articulable reason for this use of deadly force.

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 the 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.

I notice that the article you quoted misrepresented the policy. The article says that the DOJ can use force "when necessary". The actual statement is "ONLY when necessary". Why do you suppose Fox News found it necessary to omit that word?

That policy statement was included in the warrant to remind FBI agents what the limits on use of lethal force were. The policy was the result of a review process that started in 2021 and was in place a month before the Mar-a-Lago search. They weren't cooked up just to piss off Trump and his supporters.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: RazorV66

Use of deadly force authorized at a former president’s home over some F’ing documents?
Get the hell out of here with that crap.

Why? Why wouldn't FBI agents be ready to use deadly force, if necessary, while executing a search warrant at his property. Especially since he wasn't there and wasn't in any danger of getting between an armed FBI agent and some nut bag.

Keep defending the corrupt criminals.

You are so good at it, you must do it for a living.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: DBCowboy

DITTO! Trump isn't above the law. The FBI doesn't suspend their policies because Trump is a former president.

Talk about a 2-tiered justice system. Geeez!

Yeah! Shewt em!

lol

a reply to: Sookiechacha

What part of use of deadly force on your political opponent, a former president is boilerplate ? That’s one of the most ignorant things I’ve ever heard . Are you denying ignorance or wearing it like a suit ?