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

a reply to: Dandandat3

Umm, due to the 2nd, isn't every US Citizen (including your law enforcement) authorized to use deadly force?

It's like you guys don't even realize what firearms are for.

STUPID, GUILT-RIDDEN AG Merrick Garland says Trump's claims about the FBI being ready for a shoot-out at Mar-a-Lago, are dangerous.

www.reuters.com...

What this nutjob Biden protector fails to mention is that his lapdogs in the U.S. Media published this story. Trump just commented on it, as millions of people did.

His payback (Garland's) is going to be so much fun to watch and experience!

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes.

If plotiticians were treated equally to Trump, there would be some consistency.

..but that's not the case now is it.

This lawfare is all directed at one person and their orbit.

Look at your freakin' avatar.

This is why law enforcement are armed and authorized to use deadly force.

LOL

originally posted by: xuenchen
Anybody know if The FBI highlighted and wrote the deadly force statement in the Biden Search documents like they did in the Trump documents? 😀

If it is standard boilerplate on a search warrant, then yes, absolutely.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Justoneman

You might be right that they possibly handled it differently if wasn’t running.

But I have to imagine they wouldn’t have raided if he just gave back the documents too. He was even public in the fact he was pushing back.

There was no raid.

His lawyers knew everything. They knew when the FBI were coming.

They knew about the search warrant.

Calling it a raid -- is just more MAGA hyperbole.

If there was "no raid" like YOU say, why were FBI Agents authorized to use deadly force if "necessary"? 😬

Because Brawndo has electrolytes! It's what plants crave.

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Annee

But but

But here's your answer: anyone who intentionally/deliberately causes physical damage to another's property or negatively affects their livelihood -- should be shot on site.

On Inauguration Day actual damage to private property and millions of dollars were lost by the local businesses.

On J6, some worthless politicians were inconvenienced and a few gov't building doors were broken.

Are they the same in your book?

There were death threats and they even built a gallows, as well as the property damage.

The people policing the Capitol building were also authorized to use deadly force, and I believe, warning shots were even fired and yet those guarding the Capitol building were overcome by force and the trespassers continued to enter parts of the building they were denied access to.

It is delusion to believe it was peaceful and just people doing a public tour of the building.

a reply to: chr0naut

You do know that the authority of law enforcement is delegated by the populace.

Not given over to, correct?

Of course you don't.

You believe that the gov't should have a monopoly on force...as long as its forcing something you agree with.

All these years and you've learned nothing of your own authoritarian leanings.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Annee

But but

But here's your answer: anyone who intentionally/deliberately causes physical damage to another's property or negatively affects their livelihood -- should be shot on site.

On Inauguration Day actual damage to private property and millions of dollars were lost by the local businesses.

On J6, some worthless politicians were inconvenienced and a few gov't building doors were broken.

Are they the same in your book?

The people policing the Capitol building were also authorized to remove the barriers.

Fixed
Done

I won't reply again

retard

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen

Are you suggesting that GSA, Government Services Agency, pawed through Trump and Melania's stuff and decided what to pack and what not to pack? That the GSA saw some classified documents, and decided those documents should leave the White House with the former president, while other documents should stay? That GSA staffers saw the letter that Kim Jong Un sent Trump and decided themselves that the letter should be packed, not Trump? That Trump has nothing to do with instructing staffers what to pack?

As those the facts you think you're presenting?


What's in YOUR Wallet ?

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: matafuchs

What about Trump’s assistant packing file boxes into a vehicle then transporting them to an airport.

GSA no where in site.

And don’t tell me they were boxes of office supplies.

Sources?? 😀 [if any credible]

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: xuenchen
Anybody know if The FBI highlighted and wrote the deadly force statement in the Biden Search documents like they did in the Trump documents? 😀

If it is standard boilerplate on a search warrant, then yes, absolutely.

Where is that document??????? People are shy to post it 🤣

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: chr0naut

You do know that the authority of law enforcement is delegated by the populace.

Not given over to, correct?

Of course you don't.

You believe that the gov't should have a monopoly on force...as long as its forcing something you agree with.

All these years and you've learned nothing of your own authoritarian leanings.

The government gets its authority from the populace. This is mandated and constrained by legal statute such as the US Constitution.

If you are an anti-government individual, suspicious of most corporates, governments and 'social groups and movements', then you are by definition an anarchist.

If you are an anarchist willing and armed to enforce your personal grievances on the majority of others, or their representatives, and to resist the elected and Constitutional governance and law enforcement of your country, then you are not a patriot.

If you then take violent action against others or their property on the basis of your ideology and they have committed no crime against you, you are a felon.

originally posted by: underpass61

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Annee

But but

But here's your answer: anyone who intentionally/deliberately causes physical damage to another's property or negatively affects their livelihood -- should be shot on site.

On Inauguration Day actual damage to private property and millions of dollars were lost by the local businesses.

On J6, some worthless politicians were inconvenienced and a few gov't building doors were broken.

Are they the same in your book?

The people policing the Capitol building were also authorized to remove the barriers.

Fixed
Done

I won't reply again

retard

GAO says 114 Capitol Police officers reported injuries on Jan. 6

New Videos Underscore The Violence Against Police At The Jan. 6 Capitol Riot

Inside the Capitol siege: How barricaded lawmakers and aides sounded urgent pleas for help as police lost control

Capitol Police Captain said officers held the door closed as Jan. 6 rioters tried to get into the building

Chicago man gets 3 years for breaking through barricades at U.S. Capitol insurrection

a reply to: chr0naut

Weird how you don't apply those same buzzwords to that boot you love oh so much....

a reply to: chr0naut

Weird how you don't apply those same buzzwords to that boot you love oh so much....

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: chr0naut

Weird how you don't apply those same buzzwords to that boot you love oh so much....

No one should be above the law. Not even government officials.

By the way, I am not American. I live in a New Zealand and have also been one of those 'government people' here (20 years ago), because I believed in, and cared about, good governance.

Did you know that instead of waving guns at people, you too have the right, and ability, to influence governance in your state and/or at a Federal level, and if you don't contribute, then you are part of the reason that things aren't as you would like them?

I know that as few as a couple of hundred people, allied with common purpose, can make their voices heard and even push changes to government policy, even in your country (it has happened).

originally posted by: Dandandat3
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

Lies .. The use of deadly force is in every search warrant issued

STOP

a reply to: rigel4

Well , I think you are just Wrong about that Assumption . Heres Why............


x.com... 005f85ae8c931996a503985d6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.infowars.com%2F

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: rigel4

Well , I think you are just Wrong about that Assumption . Heres Why............


x.com... 005f85ae8c931996a503985d6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.infowars.com%2F

Well that just throws these nitwit’s story of “Boilerplate” in the sh!tcan.

Good find.

originally posted by: rigel4

originally posted by: Dandandat3
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

Lies .. The use of deadly force is in every search warrant issued

STOP

Thank you.

I think this is one of the most manufactured hyperbole “debates” ever.