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

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: DBCowboy

How many times has a Democrat lawmaker arrested a Republican with deadly force?

Looks like the FBI is taking credit for this under OBiden.

a reply to: Dandandat3

It's interesting to me that you left a key line from your source article out, a quote that would have set the context and tone much differently. A quote that is literally the second paragraph. This quote is not found anywhere in your OP. Why?

"

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter," the FBI told Fox News in a statement Tuesday.

originally posted by: WeMustCare
May 21, 2024

WHY "deadly force" was authorized, in order to obtain these documents from President Trump's home..

Some people are expressing shock that the FBI was prepared to use deadly force against President Trump and his Secret Service security detail during the DOJ raid on Mar-a-Lago. Julie Kelly has the DETAILS HERE.

I am not surprised in the least. Remember, the objective of the FBI raid was to re-secure the physical evidence that President Trump had, which demonstrated how the DOJ and FBI action in 2016 was targeting him, using the power of their law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

The origination of all the DOJ/FBI/IC issues goes back to the ’15/’16 FBI exploitation of the NSA database; this is not a contested discussion issue – it’s just continually forgotten.

The raid on Mar-a-Lago, just like the Robert Mueller investigation, was part of the long standing coverup operation.

The FBI was looking for what Trump took with him as evidence of the weaponized system that targeted him. The FBI wanted that back. The FBI was willing to use deadly force to get it back, if that’s what it took.

Yes, apparently the FBI was prepared to engage in a gun battle or kill people in Mar-a-Lago, in order to retake the evidence against them.

I know it sounds scary, but that’s the reality of our modern FBI. These are not good people. Remember also that AG Merrick Garland said he authorized every facet of the raid.

Continued at: theconservativetreehouse.com... ng-mar-a-lago-raid-to-regain-deep-state-fbi-doj-secrets/#more-260724

Judge Aileen Cannon sees the damning information against the criminal Obama-Biden Administration, and the scum running this major coverup operation.

As a pro-America Patriot, she is not letting this illegitimate case go to trial before January 20, 2025. PERIOD.

I see...thats some good fanfic you have going this time.

Can you help me understand the second paragraph from the source?

originally posted by: opethPA
a reply to: Dandandat3

It's interesting to me that you left a key line from your source article out, a quote that would have set the context and tone much differently. A quote that is literally the second paragraph. This quote is not found anywhere in your OP. Why?

"

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter," the FBI told Fox News in a statement Tuesday.

Newsweek thought the "deadly force" wording was newsworthy.

www.newsweek.com...

Several news outlets were surprised by it. Must not be "normal" wording for FBI raids of high-ranking officials.

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: WeMustCare
May 21, 2024

WHY "deadly force" was authorized, in order to obtain these documents from President Trump's home..

Some people are expressing shock that the FBI was prepared to use deadly force against President Trump and his Secret Service security detail during the DOJ raid on Mar-a-Lago. Julie Kelly has the DETAILS HERE.

I am not surprised in the least. Remember, the objective of the FBI raid was to re-secure the physical evidence that President Trump had, which demonstrated how the DOJ and FBI action in 2016 was targeting him, using the power of their law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

The origination of all the DOJ/FBI/IC issues goes back to the ’15/’16 FBI exploitation of the NSA database; this is not a contested discussion issue – it’s just continually forgotten.

The raid on Mar-a-Lago, just like the Robert Mueller investigation, was part of the long standing coverup operation.

The FBI was looking for what Trump took with him as evidence of the weaponized system that targeted him. The FBI wanted that back. The FBI was willing to use deadly force to get it back, if that’s what it took.

Yes, apparently the FBI was prepared to engage in a gun battle or kill people in Mar-a-Lago, in order to retake the evidence against them.

I know it sounds scary, but that’s the reality of our modern FBI. These are not good people. Remember also that AG Merrick Garland said he authorized every facet of the raid.

Continued at: theconservativetreehouse.com... ng-mar-a-lago-raid-to-regain-deep-state-fbi-doj-secrets/#more-260724

Judge Aileen Cannon sees the damning information against the criminal Obama-Biden Administration, and the scum running this major coverup operation.

As a pro-America Patriot, she is not letting this illegitimate case go to trial before January 20, 2025. PERIOD.

I see...thats some good fanfic you have going this time.

Can you help me understand the second paragraph from the source?

This article describes some of what the documents held by former President Trump exposed, against Obama-DOJ-FBI.

Here: theconservativetreehouse.com...

I think our functional Republic is dead and buried, replaced by an evil-smelling pile of bloodthirsty Bolshevik bureaucrats who worship money and never consider their political opposition as human. This cannot stand, its a terrible abuse of power against Joe average but an ex-President? They do need some leeway for mistakes and having to make bad choices sometimes. We can't crucify every President that commits a "crime" (the list of which has become all-inclusive in our police/surveillance state. Even as a decades long conspiracy theorist I never dreamed we could reach such brazenly criminal and unethical words and actions coming from our supposed representatives on the Federal payroll.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: opethPA
a reply to: Dandandat3

It's interesting to me that you left a key line from your source article out, a quote that would have set the context and tone much differently. A quote that is literally the second paragraph. This quote is not found anywhere in your OP. Why?

"

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter," the FBI told Fox News in a statement Tuesday.

Newsweek thought the "deadly force" wording was newsworthy.

www.newsweek.com...

Several news outlets were surprised by it. Must not be "normal" wording for FBI raids of high-ranking officials.

That is great! Doesnt answer the question I asked an doesn't change the fact that something standard is trying to be made to look as unique to this event.

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: opethPA
a reply to: Dandandat3

It's interesting to me that you left a key line from your source article out, a quote that would have set the context and tone much differently. A quote that is literally the second paragraph. This quote is not found anywhere in your OP. Why?

"

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter," the FBI told Fox News in a statement Tuesday.

Newsweek thought the "deadly force" wording was newsworthy.

www.newsweek.com...

Several news outlets were surprised by it. Must not be "normal" wording for FBI raids of high-ranking officials.

That is great! Doesnt answer the question I asked an doesn't change the fact that something standard is trying to be made to look as unique to this event.

I've never read a search warrant before. If you say they all use the "deadly force" authorization, I have no choice but to believe you...or at least remain open to your belief.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: WeMustCare
May 21, 2024

WHY "deadly force" was authorized, in order to obtain these documents from President Trump's home..

Some people are expressing shock that the FBI was prepared to use deadly force against President Trump and his Secret Service security detail during the DOJ raid on Mar-a-Lago. Julie Kelly has the DETAILS HERE.

I am not surprised in the least. Remember, the objective of the FBI raid was to re-secure the physical evidence that President Trump had, which demonstrated how the DOJ and FBI action in 2016 was targeting him, using the power of their law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

The origination of all the DOJ/FBI/IC issues goes back to the ’15/’16 FBI exploitation of the NSA database; this is not a contested discussion issue – it’s just continually forgotten.

The raid on Mar-a-Lago, just like the Robert Mueller investigation, was part of the long standing coverup operation.

The FBI was looking for what Trump took with him as evidence of the weaponized system that targeted him. The FBI wanted that back. The FBI was willing to use deadly force to get it back, if that’s what it took.

Yes, apparently the FBI was prepared to engage in a gun battle or kill people in Mar-a-Lago, in order to retake the evidence against them.

I know it sounds scary, but that’s the reality of our modern FBI. These are not good people. Remember also that AG Merrick Garland said he authorized every facet of the raid.

Continued at: theconservativetreehouse.com... ng-mar-a-lago-raid-to-regain-deep-state-fbi-doj-secrets/#more-260724

Judge Aileen Cannon sees the damning information against the criminal Obama-Biden Administration, and the scum running this major coverup operation.

As a pro-America Patriot, she is not letting this illegitimate case go to trial before January 20, 2025. PERIOD.

I see...thats some good fanfic you have going this time.

Can you help me understand the second paragraph from the source?

This article describes some of what the documents held by former President Trump exposed, against Obama-DOJ-FBI.

Here: theconservativetreehouse.com...

Same as the last response what does that have to do with the standard part.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: opethPA
a reply to: Dandandat3

It's interesting to me that you left a key line from your source article out, a quote that would have set the context and tone much differently. A quote that is literally the second paragraph. This quote is not found anywhere in your OP. Why?

"

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter," the FBI told Fox News in a statement Tuesday.

Newsweek thought the "deadly force" wording was newsworthy.

www.newsweek.com...

Several news outlets were surprised by it. Must not be "normal" wording for FBI raids of high-ranking officials.

That is great! Doesnt answer the question I asked an doesn't change the fact that something standard is trying to be made to look as unique to this event.

I've never read a search warrant before. If you say they all use the "deadly force" authorization, I have no choice but to believe you...or at least remain open to your belief.

That is a fair response but it doesn't even need to be as complex as reading it.

This is taken from the source article posted and is the root of my question, why was the section left out of the OP?

"The FBI followed standard protocol in this search as we do for all search warrants, which includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter," the FBI told Fox News in a statement Tuesday.

An Opinion and Questions Worth Looking At -- I want answers to this for the former feds defending authorizations of use of deadly force in MAL raid.

Were those same "Agents" briefed on procedures to be observed if other Feds are on the premises? Like maybe armed Secret Service people guarding a former President who have the same deadly force authorization ???? 😃

Way too many responses on MSM are false equivilences !!!!! Somebody's covering something up 😀

originally posted by: Annee
The FBI in a statement on Tuesday said that their search at former President Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence followed standard protocol, which "includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force."

www.msn.com... b736b49f512af&ei=60

So the FBI says what The FBI did and does is just fine and dandy without any 3rd Party confirmations. 🤣🤣

They use a lot of false equivilencies don't they

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee
The FBI in a statement on Tuesday said that their search at former President Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence followed standard protocol, which "includes a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force."

www.msn.com... b736b49f512af&ei=60

So the FBI says what The FBI did and does is just fine and dandy without any 3rd Party confirmations. 🤣🤣

They use a lot of false equivilencies don't they

What 3rd party confirmation would you like for something that has been standard for years?
Maybe you can answer my question, leaving the standard part out of the OP really changes the context.

If you are interested in facts and not just trumps then this is s good read.
DOJ www.justice.gov...-16.200

a reply to: opethPA

It wasn't in the source when I made the OP.

Published May 21, 2024 6:09pm EDT Updated May 21, 2024 9:15pm EDT

The FBI's defense was edited in later. The original article stated that the FBI had not yet answered the News agency’s request for comment.... It clearly took them a while to come up with their boiler plate argument.

However now that the Biden Administration is defending their actions I still do not see how the defense exonerates them.

Sure, I fully expect the FBI to have authorisation to use deadly force when dealing with routine criminality, like drug busting and searching for kidnap victims and ect.

But we are discussing an extremely unprecedented raid on the house of a former president of the United States America, not your run of the mill criminal. The belief that any of the event was boiler plat is simply trible groaning. Any competent Administration would have spent days if not weeks planning their actions over such an event fraught with political overtones. And to believe the FBI, who normally would defend a former president's life with their own "for the sake of the country", would boiler plate their way through the use of deadly force is also nonsensical.

The idea that the Biden Administration planned for the use of any force at the home of a former president... and the Administration's top political rival is shocking. It is the exact same "seal team six" scenario being used against Donald Trump’s hope for immunity by the left and now they are crying "boiler plate" ... we are truly living in a post conviction society.

What is clear is that the Democrats, with their unrelenting zeal to "get" one man over a political vendetta, has desensitized the country to these actions. They may not be the blood thirty autocrats I paint them to be in my OP; but they sure are leaving the door open for when those people arrive.

Example: there is another current thread here on ATS werein the same people who are making the "boiler plate" argument regarding the authorisation to use deadly force at the home of a former president are decrying the fictional authorisation to use deadly force against drug cartels at the southern border as "unconstitutional" and dangerous.

a reply to: Dandandat3

You want an established standard protocol to be amended for one person?

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Dandandat3

You want an established standard protocol to be amended for one person?

When that one person is a former president of the United States and the top political rival of the current president of the United States; it is only common sence to treat the situation differently than your standard operation. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

originally posted by: Dandandat3

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Dandandat3

You want an established standard protocol to be amended for one person?

When that one person is a former president of the United States and the top political rival of the current president of the United States; it is only common sence to treat the situation differently than your standard operation. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

I'll take diminshed brain capacity for $200 Alex!

originally posted by: Dandandat3

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Dandandat3

You want an established standard protocol to be amended for one person?

When that one person is a former president of the United States and the top political rival of the current president of the United States; it is only common sence to treat the situation differently than your standard operation. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

NO

Standard protocols are standard for a reason.

Trump does not get a pass.