Use Of Deadly Force
I don’t want to spend time on this, but I suppose I have to say something. This whole business about the supposed authorization to use deadly force in the Mar-a-Lago raid—it didn’t happen. The policy on deadly force was included in the search package as pro forma procedure. Boiler plate, if you will. In fact, if you read the policy you can see that deadly force would not have been anticipated in this situation. Further, the order specifies that any objections to the search on the part of Secret Service personnel at MAL were to be resolved through standard liaison contacts. IOW, the FBI would call their USSS liaison and explain that the search warrant had issued pursuant to the usual authorities and that USSS was required to comply. So:
Garret O'Boyle @GOBactual
The DOJ deadly force policy is literally in EVERY @fbi op order and read verbatim to every agent involved prior to the op. This is a giant nothing-. If @realDonaldTrump picked a competent @fbi director, he'd have known that. The MAL raid is dubious at best. This policy is not.
5:32 PM · May 21, 2024
The real point that shouldn’t be forgotten is in the last line:
The MAL raid is dubious at best. This policy is not.
Having a policy to brief agents on deadly force policy before any operation—an arrest, execution of a search warrant—is inarguably a good idea. On the other hand, the legal basis for the warrant is, as O’Boyle says, “dubious at best.” The DoJ and FBI were abusing the legal system to cover up their own criminal wrongdoing by recovering evidence of their wrongdoing that was legally possessed by Trump. That’s what was going on. Trying to make a deal out of standard operating procedures is silly and, when the silliness is exposed, unfairly damages the credibility of people who are making serious arguments against the legal basis for the warrant. Two separate issues.
Anyone who wants to read more about this should consult Shipwrecked Crew. Among various points he makes, the FBI agents were simply executing the warrant that DoJ had obtained—they didn’t actually have a choice, although they could and should have voiced their views on the advisability of the operation. The real blame ultimately rests on the judge. As SWC says:
This is not the same question as to whether the Judge should have signed the warrant.
LE only asks for warrants, they don't command them.
The Judge could have read it and handed it back saying "Yeah, I don't think so. Make a phone call and work out another way."
DOJ didn't have to ask for a warrant. They could have continued filed a motion to compel further GJ production -- I both did that as an AUSA and been on the receiving end as a defense attorney.
So seeking the SW is a discretionary call that Biden DOJ should be made to answer for in oversight hearings.
Again, O’Boyle says it correctly. In a situation where the legal basis was “dubious at best” a search warrant should have been well down the list of options. In fact, no action should have been taken at all, IMO. Nevertheless, misrepresenting standard FBI procedure to make it look nefarious is stupid—if not dishonest. Stick to the real issue—the raid was part of the Deep State campaign to get Trump and for that reason was an abuse of the criminal justice process. The people who staged this knew that Trump had done nothing that every other president hasn’t also done, and that the legality of Trump’s decisions to retain classified (or declassified) docs rested on strong legal and constitutional arguments. Boiler plate language in an operations order is simply beside the point.
On a lighter note, I laughed till I cried at this one:
Some of the comments were pretty funny, too. The movie title means, How I started World War Two. But there’s a sorta serious side to this. If Poles could make a movie like this in 1970, after the Germans had killed 3 million Poles, what is it that makes Poles so hyper about Russia? And yet they are. The US continually blunders into situations that it doesn’t understand and makes everything worse. Stirring up Polish - Russian animosities isn’t good for anyone. Only psychopaths do things like that.
And then there’s this:
Thanks for your explanation that this is a nothing burger. I accept your analysis. I'll say one thing in response that doesn't contradict my acceptance of what you wrote.
Perception is reality.
Mark I completely agree with your explanation coming from 35 years of local law enforcement. Escalation of/and use of force, deadly or otherwise is pretty well defined. Putting it in the op order is just someone ticking off boxes on a check sheet. What I do have issue with is having the agents dress in plain clothes, to what purpose? If it was to be a low key, not alert the press, event, which it wasn’t. Then why place the agents in a position of potential misidentification?
Several years ago a uniformed FL SWAT officer was shot and killed during the execution of a search warrant. The bad guy defense, I didn’t know he was a cop. The judge/jury agreed and determined the officer just didn’t have enough “markings/signage” on his uniform so that everyone knew he was a cop. Shouting “police, search warrant” apparently was insufficient also. Why put your agents into that situation?
Now MAL is hardly a crack den but still, with what we recently saw with our new DEI VP secret service detail, who says the past presidents detail is up to snuff.