The secret service is a lawful organization, they aren't going to engage in a shootout with the FBI over a lawful search of premises.Would have been interesting if the fbi and the ss got into a shoot out over a fuck up, as long as no one got hit.
So against whom were they "prepared to use deadly force"? Were they "prepared" to have a shoot out with the secret service? What is an example scenario where they might have to shoot people? Yes, they could have easily sent a couple of suits who don't carry guns for a document retrieval. You bust in with guns drawn if you're trying to take somebody into custody or breaking up a drug ring and are concerned about a potential ambush or hostages. Which of those apply to a document retrieval at a recent president's house?or anyone else who doesn't have authority........
should they be unarmed?
the fbi was conducting a search of a private residence with a warrant based on suspected criminal actions. they took precautions to ensure the former first family wasn't present. whine on.
The secret service is a lawful organization, they aren't going to engage in a shootout with the FBI over a lawful search of premises.
Wasn't even that. His own lawyers found them, then reported to the NARA that day, and then they retrieved them the next day.There wasn't any raid..
Biden was told to return the papers and he did.
Good thing they didn’t try this with Biden,You mean like a raid the fbi fucks up and doesn't knock and just kicks the door in.
I was pretty clear in what I meant.You mean like a raid the fbi fucks up and doesn't knock and just kicks the door in.
If they're being shot at. Obviously.So against whom were they "prepared to use deadly force"?
If the president directly ordered something like that, it would be an issue. And neither of them ever refused to comply with legal requests or instructed subordinates to.I guess congratulations if your goal was gain support for Trump, because you know goddamn well that if Trump had sent agents to bust into Obama's house with guns drawn to retrieve documents, or to the Clintons' house to retrieve the furniture they stole, or a drug and prostitution raid at Hunter's house, you'd absolutely shit yourself and say we're living in Nazi Germany.
Good thing they didn’t try this with Biden,
As a True Patriot and Proud gun holder, Hunter would have shot them the moment they breached his property and the Constitution would have allowed it..
I was pretty clear in what I meant.
I think that was the point,Well if it was a no knock and he purchased the gun legally then you might have been right.
The first part, ni knock I don't should be legal except in very rare cases.
The second part is he was not a legal gun owner.
So your post was kind of a fail.
Who are you claiming might start shooting at them?If they're being shot at. Obviously.
You know, you don't have to parrot every dumb partisan talking point you hear. No one's going to take your pompoms away.
If the president directly ordered something like that, it would be an issue. And neither of them ever refused to comply with legal requests or instructed subordinates to.
they were on a large private property. they don't know with 100% certainty who they may encounter in advance. they coordinated with trumps detail to ensure the trump family was not there. you're trying to pretend mar-a-lago is some secure government property.So against whom were they "prepared to use deadly force"? Were they "prepared" to have a shoot out with the secret service? What is an example scenario where they might have to shoot people? Yes, they could have easily sent a couple of suits who don't carry guns for a document retrieval. You bust in with guns drawn if you're trying to take somebody into custody or breaking up a drug ring and are concerned about a potential ambush or hostages. Which of those apply to a document retrieval at a recent president's house?
you're aware, trump is a citizen. he doesn't hold an elected position. the secret service is there to protect him from bad guys / bad actors. not to protect him from law enforcement. and not to enable illegal activity. lol at "opponent". they had a warrant based on probable cause.What is the point of secret service protection if the opposing DOJ can send a separate unelected agency to their opponent's house "prepared to use deadly force"?
You've never said anything in your life or had a novel thought that was over my head.And the fact that I was making a off hand post about law enforcement fuckups of this kind of thing just went past you because of your TDS.
Whoever might be there. It's standard for all search warrants. If you support exempting politicians from laws, you should want it codified.Who are you claiming might start shooting at them?
Did they coordinate with the secret service or did they have no idea who they might encounter who could start shooting at them?they were on a large private property. they don't know with 100% certainty who they may encounter in advance. they coordinated with trumps detail to ensure the trump family was not there. you're trying to pretend mar-a-lago is some secure government property.
you're aware, trump is a citizen. he doesn't hold an elected position. the secret service is there to protect him from bad guys / bad actors. not to protect him from law enforcement. and not to enable illegal activity. lol at "opponent". they had a warrant based on probable cause.
Where’d you get the guns drawn talking point that you keep repeating here now?Did they coordinate with the secret service or did they have no idea who they might encounter who could start shooting at them?
If they coordinated with the secret service beforehand, then that is closer to 100% than they get entering their own home, but they don't come every night with guns drawn "prepared to use deadly force".
And we know you're only fine with it for partisan reasons because we have countless examples with the exact same people outraged by cases that are not nearly this egregious. If it was anybody else coming in with guns drawn because "you never know with 100% certainty who you might encounter", you'd call them paranoid gun nuts and accuse them of trying to provoke an altercation to live out their fantasy of shooting someone, then probably say their penis isn't big enough for you because for some bizarre reason you all immediately think of penis. We do already have plenty of raids on actual armed drug dealers that none of you support and go on a nationwide campaign of outrage replete with baby pictures and graduation photos, and a document retrieval at a 75 year old former president's house seems to be the only one that you do support.
Yes. Because trump claiming that this was something out of the ordinary for an fbi search? Is that edgy?? Do you suggest the fbi change their standard policy for these tasks to cater to whom they are searching?Obviously not, you know better. Sometimes, you guys and your desperation to be as edgy as possible come off so dumb.
Looks like he just made it up or misunderstood something (he does that a lot--kind of slow).Where’d you get the guns drawn talking point that you keep repeating here now?