Oh yes, because they're ALWAYS honest about who started what. The federal government has never instigated an engagement with people and killed innocents while gaslighting that it was the other side's fault.
I knew you'd keep up this narrative, even with Dan Bongino shitting on your narrative -- and Dan has actual experience, whereas you have fuck and all.
Name does not check out....but who's kidding who, after all?
Name checks out pretty damn well. There was after all no violence during this search. No threats or hints of violence. Except two years later. In people's imaginations.
even with Dan Bongino shitting on your narrative -- and Dan has actual experience, whereas you have fuck and all.
Actually a lot of my POV on this is from Shipwreckedcrew on Twitter who is currently in a twitterfight with Dan.
@shipwreckedcrew
22 years as fed. prosecutor;
Def. Attorney for 55+ Jan 6 Defs.
An ops plan doesn’t “authorize” any use of force that otherwise would not have been authorized.
Correct. That authority to use lethal force comes with the training, the oath, and the credentials. The Ops Plan is just written “legalese” that makes FBI General Counsel sleep better at night. Nothing depends on it being there or what exactly it says. It’s not necessary but it’s always included.
This issues is about boilerplate info that is at the beginning of every Ops Plan for a search warrant.
They aren’t created from scratch. The agent takes a recent one and makes changes where necessary re case, location, date, time, etc. But the “use of force” language never changes. It’s in the same place from the previous version used for an earlier search.
This language was not put there because it was MAL. Some modifications on how to coordinate with USSS were included - part of the specifics of the case. But some form of this language is used by every federal agency, not just the FBI.
It's not easy to follow their twitterfight because they are quote tweeted.
My whole position on this is FBI like Secret Service like the police like soldiers on base are not authorized to use deadly force except in very rare cases.
Oh yes, because they're ALWAYS honest about who started what. The federal government has never instigated an engagement with people and killed innocents while gaslighting that it was the other side's fault.
I knew you'd keep up this narrative, even with Dan Bongino shitting on your narrative -- and Dan has actual experience, whereas you have fuck and all.
Name does not check out....but who's kidding who, after all?
Name checks out pretty damn well. There was after all no violence during this search. No threats or hints of violence. Except two years later. In people's imaginations.
Actually a lot of my POV on this is from Shipwreckedcrew on Twitter who is currently in a twitterfight with Dan.
@shipwreckedcrew 22 years as fed. prosecutor; Def. Attorney for 55+ Jan 6 Defs.
https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1793382800558817776
https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1793366127168635154
It's not easy to follow their twitterfight because they are quote tweeted.
My whole position on this is FBI like Secret Service like the police like soldiers on base are not authorized to use deadly force except in very rare cases.
The FBI language is about limits.
Sure. The people who love "plausible deniability" have plausible deniability.
The whole point is being able to see through it, and we see through it.