You might remember Trump is petitioning the court for "presidential immunity"
Is this why Biden's DOJ asked the court if a president sends someone to kill their opponent that they cannot be prosecuted for it? Because they knew this would eventually come out.
The conservative Heritage Foundation says Americans of any political leaning should be "outraged" and "shaken to the bone" over the Biden administration’s authorized use of deadly force when the FBI raided former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.
Inquiring minds want to know.
TM
"Presidential Immunity" is bullshit. (So is "qualified immunity" among LEOs.) We should hold our elected officials to the same standard that we must adhere to. If Trump is found guilty of anything, he should be penalized according to the law.
So should Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton and any other sitting or former president. Fuck this "above the law" BS.
I'm not in agreement with you here. I believe you have to have an immunity for any acts that are done in the capacity of the office. We already do it anyway. Let's say Biden flies out to CA for a fund raiser. If he has a meeting with our governor over some bullshit item while he's here, the government picks up the whole tab for all the travel because he "officially" came out for the meeting with the Gov. So how is that not the same thing? We end up paying all his travel for his campaign.
TM
The same boilerplate language was in the warrant to search Biden’s property for records.
Stop listening to the media that is trying to get you outraged at things knowing that you won’t even do a cursory check on them.
But it's not a "boiler plate" search is/was it? And The DOJ did NOT go search unannounced in the Biden locations. And They didn't even go do the search when they found out. They tried to hide Biden's issue for a very long time didn't they.
The Shop
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
BTW, it was actually a Biden appointed judge that asked the question of Trumps attorney. Not the DOJ attorney
No
Ams who signed what docs (warrants) is also an issue.
Properly audited business expenses are not illegal. No problem there. Hookers & blow would get declined by my company's auditor, and so should they be for politicians as well. Travel, lunch, lodging, etc. for Biden and his staff are perfectly fine.
No immunity for illegal doings by any elected official, period. I'd even go so far as to say such acts are malfeasance if performed while in office, which is tantamount to treason, which is punishable by death. FUCK each and every politician who takes advantage of our system, until none who would cheat us out of OUR blessings of liberty by their station in life is left.
Why is everybody so up in arms at the authorization of deadly force in a warrant? If it was Tyrone Shoelaces down the street, accused of the same thing……….
Tyrone Shoelaces? He’s back on the streets?
Saw him and Basketball Jones the other day.
The FBI sent agents armed with automatic weapons to Mar-A-Lago. Did armed FBI agents accompany the folks searching Biden's property?
A president authorizes a drone strike to kill people. By any stretch that's outright murder. And you want no immunity for that?
There has to be an immunity for acts that are made in the capacity of the office because you'll never get 100% of people who agree with you. And if you don't have that, a president cannot do his job because as soon as he leaves office he'll spend the rest of his days in court, jail, and in debt.
A drone strike to kill enemy combatants cannot be called murder and is also not illegal. Casualties which may occur in relation to that are unfortunate, but certainly possible. Still not an illegal act.
Ordering a drone strike on your political enemy, voters in a certain district, or peaceful protesters would be murder. That's the difference.
I think you and I are speaking the same language, but just on a different page. I don't think a president should be hamstrung from doing his job; I simply don't think our elected leaders should be given leeway to commit crimes. I'm talking about bribery, sexual assault, blackmail, etc. They are supposed to be our best examples of American goodness. If we elect you, keep your damn nose clean!
That's what the Coke in the White House was for, keeping the sinuses clean.
But those things are in a personal capacity. They absolutely should be (and are) illegal. But, what if Trump truly believes there was fraud in 2020, should he just allow it because if true, he is the beneficiary of proving it? He is actually tasked as the head of the executive branch to do something. The what to do is where we disagree. (I think)
I wonder if APLMAN somehow missed this question?
What people fail to realize is that the FBI plays second fiddle to the Secret Service. That's why they got warrants. Shit is unheard of.
Had this been carried out in a normal way, there's no way guys are walking into that place with guns of any kind.
Pit Row
But then there wouldn’t have been as much drama!
So did the FBI raid Bidens document stash spots strapped up for a fire fight like Mar a Lago raid or did they make an appointment and bring ice cream?
*sarcasm alert
Oh, so it was for medicinal purposes......Biden Cartel could not discuss because of HIPAA laws.
Psst... While you weren't paying attention a few decades ago, the Neocons ruined both the Democrat and the Republican parties.
I can see the point you’re making, TM. However, if we’re offering immunity for what a president believes to be true, then we’re opening a wide variety of options.
Take the 2020 election. Trump believes there was a fraudulent campaign so vast that it changed the outcome of the election. While his lawyers have been unable to prove that it happened, his opposition has not effectively proven to some that it did not happen. Ergo, it happened, and he’s immune from prosecution!
Once the burden shifts to proving beyond doubt that something did not occur, the bar effectively cannot be cleared.
^If Trump truly believes there was fraud, (and it's not really far-fetched to believe, given some of the facts that have yet to be explained away,) then he has every right to contest the election. That doesn't mean that it's OK to raid congress.
On the other hand, this whole ordeal seems a little too much like desperation on the part of the Democrats. Look, I don't like Trump one bit, but I don't see how anyone can say he's not the target of a massive lawfare campaign.
Back to the immunity thing; I don't see how any elected official needs it. You do your job well and lawfully, there's no problem. Just like us regular folks. Break the law, and you deserve punishment, same as us regular folks. No one is above the law.
The problem is always, there is more than one road to solve a problem. Lets take the phone call to Ukraine. One side claimed it was legit, one side claimed it wasn't. Since everyone always sees things different, we have to give the latitude to the president without fear of retribution.
TM
^Or assume innocence until guilt is proven, just like we do with regular criminals.
I don't like the idea of giving latitude, because where does the leeway end? Is it OK for the Pres. to make a phone call and imply something? Commit a conflict of interest? Perjury? Just one murder? Ten? Treason?
People wonder why we discuss things. I know 100% I won't change your mind on this. And I appreciate your values as to why you have your opinion. I think the reason we discuss things is that when someone else reads this who isn't so set in their opinion they see alternative ways of looking at things. So having said that. I believe every decision the president makes, he pleases a group and displeases a group. Usually the group that voted for him are the ones most pleased. When the president sends weapons to Ukraine, some are happy and some are not. We cannot let the "some are not" group drag him into court as soon as he's out of office. Let's take the MAL raid. Biden signed off on it, maybe even ordered it. Was that personal? Or in the capacity of Commander in Chief? How do you allow "use of deadly force" in a raid on a former President's residence? That's guarded by the Secret Service? Does anyone really thing the Secret Service would initiate gun fire? But they went in prepared for it because it was ORDERED by higher up. I don't like that it happened, but I don't like the idea of throwing Joe Biden in jail for using the FBI for a personal vendetta. But if we know for sure it's a personal vendetta, that should not have immunity. And yet we are seeing this happen to many people that are supportive of Trump, getting raided by SWAT teams. Government business? Or personal political gains? IF it's government business, there has to be immunity. If it's only for personal gain, no immunity, government business, immunity. I think the court will grant a "limited immunity"
TM
"Back to the immunity thing; I don't see how any elected official needs it. You do your job well and lawfully, there's no problem. Just like us regular folks. Break the law, and you deserve punishment, same as us regular folks. No one is above the law."
One more thing, your job affects commerce, the President's job affects lives. You can't compare. HIs decision by nature will likely cause loss of life. Does your job require you to make that decision?
Good call and good compromise.
For the sake of clarity, I say that any raid on a former president's property should meet all the same qualifications as a similar raid upon yours or my property would require. (A duly executed warrant by an impartial judge, etc.)
The qualification that deadly force is permitted would be OK in the sense that officers executing the raid could be in the position to defend their own lives. It doesn't mean that they are there to kill the occupiers of the property.
Finally, I think Joe Biden could and should be charged with a crime if it turns out and can be proven that he had a personal vendetta and used US assets (the F.B.I.) to perform it.
My whole opinion on the matter stems from the absolute disillusionment I have with virtually all of our elected officials. These are people who are supposed to represent the best values that America has to offer. They should be the most noble and most ethical people in our country, and yet I feel there are some pimps and drug dealers whom I'd trust more. I think we, as a people, have allowed a long, steady decline into a corrupt system that our forefathers would be ashamed of.
No, and that's a difficult thing to navigate, for sure. However, there are many times when taking life is justified and not criminal in nature. Those instances are not criminal activity.
Post a reply to: Deadly force