Answer this question.
With whom would they have started a firefight? How would it started.
With whom would they have started a firefight?
Were they trying to conceal their identity if they killed Trump or family members? Did they know that Trump wasn’t there?
They absolutely did. They specifically scheduled the search for when Trump was not there. The club is also closed in August.
Under emphasized is the polo shirts and concealed equipment. Why???
They mentioned this at the time, they were not trying to create a spectacle. We did even learn the FBI was there until after they left.The FBi did not release details of this. A local FL website got tipped off and confirmed it with folks in Trump's orbit. They posted just after the FBI left. Trump soon confirmed it.
Were they trying to conceal their identity
It would have been super, super to determine who was there.
Anyone know how Scavino foreshadowed it?
Why was Trump's ex lawyer in front of the grand jury?
Privilege would still apply even if he was not currently Trump's lawyer.
There's a problem with Julie Kelly's argument.
She quotes this section
But she gives no link to the actual document she is quoting. It's a document filed by Walt Nauta's lawyer
“[If] the investigative team found a document with classification markings, it removed the document, segregated it, and replaced it with a placeholder sheet. The investigative team used classified cover sheets for that purpose.”
In the photo above, there's easily over a dozen classified documents. That visible. However I see like 7 cover sheets.
Notice that In addition to the cover sheets, there's also a bunch of redacted documents. Look at the blank white squares. Those are redactions done after the photo was taken. There's at least as many of those as docs with cover sheets.
Notice it's also box 2.
You can see what the FBI found in the boxes. This is from 2022. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22274262-39-1
They found 24 classified docs and 43 folders marked classified that were empty.
Julie Kelly seems to be referring to this Filing by Walt Nauta's lawyer. This from this year
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.507.0.pdf
He doesn't discuss Box 2. The box in the picture
He talks about a different box.
Box A-15 is a box seized from the Storage Room
And he talks about the box after it's been indexed and evaluated and evidence numbers attached to the documents. His description clearly is not about when evidence photos were taken. And again not the same box
The optics would still suck for them if they'd shot one of the SS agents or an employee.
Again, read the authorization Force document. It's standard language and now a lot of people who are familiar with this stuff on Twitter are saying this.
It basically limits use of force to all but extraordinary circumstances. But it's the same extraordinary circumstances the FBI would use for anything.
The FBI coordinated with the Secret Service. They called hours before the search. What exactly would be the circumstance where the FBI would need to draw their guns at all?. Do we think a maid was going to come out strapped. Was a valet going to whip out a sawed-off shotgun? The FBI were there to execute a warrant. The Secret Service would have to obey that. There's nothing about the Secret Service mission that would prevent them from letting the FBI do this.
This is coming about because of what they call. Priming.
This is actually just a standard part of any plan. It's actually a reminder of the limited situations for FBI to use Force. It's a reminder of the restrictions on the FBI.
Most of us don't know that haven't seen this policy and we are only learning about it in this context.
The context is people have PRIMED us to say they were ready to go after Trump. These are actually two separate unrelated things, but when we hear about them for the first time in the same context PRIMES us to view one in relation to the other.
The classic example of priming is when we learn a suit cost $200. But it's on sale! Down from $600. It makes us thinking we're getting a great deal. It makes us think of. Hey I'm getting a $600 suit cheap rather than this is a $200 suit it. Is it worth $200?
People are now taking the standard limitation on FBI use of force I'm claiming that this search was an assassination attempt. It was. It could not have been. Which is why I said Trump was not being in Florida matters.
If you look in the FBI manual, the section on when they are authorized to use Force which is only if they are threatened. The next section is about deescalation and how every agent needs to be trained in it.
https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force Just to be clear, just like in any other law enforcement situation force is only allowed if there is
an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.
Do you know shipped wrecked crew on Twitter?
Former Federal prosecutor who is now known as a January 6th defense lawyer.
He is very familiar with this policy and He has been pushing back on this hard
He reposted this guy saying it was a nothing burger. https://twitter.com/GOBactual/status/1793047272185377039?t=Odzth46v8nBC4Jb7vAc6dw&s=19
And said this.
https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1793052713804054608?t=vICtip-x2UNeRIJuCDrOXg&s=19
And now he's having a Twitter fight with several folks
Where are you getting 8 days from?
Testimony closed Tues.
That's Wednesday which they have been taking off Thursday Friday before a holiday weekend.....most people try to get out of town Monday is a holiday Tuesday closing arguments begin. Even if you counted the normal days off that's not 8 days.
After they sent the jury home they still had to work.
The lawyers and the judge met to go over what the instructions to the jury will be.
The judge said he will publish his decision Thursday.. the lawyers will have the weekend to work on closing arguments.
I think there's other rulings to. Trump's lawyers asked for a directed verdict.
So I just started looking at the article. It's based on a court filing from 9/11 families who are suing Saudi Arabia
Here what they say
A filing in a lawsuit brought by the families of 9/11 victims against the government of Saudi Arabia alleges that al-Qaeda had significant, indeed decisive, state support for its attacks. Officials of the Saudi government, the plaintiffs’ attorneys contend, formed and operated a network inside the United States that provided crucial assistance to the first cohort of 9/11 hijackers to enter the country.
Specifically Saudi officials provided a support network for
hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, beginning upon their arrival in California on January 15, 2000
It links to the court filing
https://www.floridabulldog.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Redacted-Brief.pdf
And says other documents will come out soon
Some of the claims in the filing appear to be corroborated by a document, prepared by the FBI in July 2021 and titled “Connections to the Attacks of September 11, 2001,” as well as by other documents declassified under President Joe Biden’s Executive Order 14040.
Or striking while the iron is hot?
They are all becoming lobbyists. Mike Johnson just survived in his post.
Perhaps they are thinking, this might be the longest stretch of Johnson in power we are going to get.
Just looked up how tight the House is
Political groups Majority (217) Republican (217) Minority (213) Democratic (213) Vacant (5)
So it's pretty tight with 5 empty seats
Look up US treason trials. Almost all were held in civilian court
Now you're just making things up
Wasn't he accused by an Epstein victim?
Given that Trump was in New York at the time, what kind of sniper rifle could they have used?
Does this mean the tribunals will be televised?
Why would Alan Detshowitz's, of all people, opinion matter?
Why do you think she face a tribunal?
And where is Bandar bin Sultan now? H
His daughter is the current ambassador to the US
Lots of folks work in an embassy.
Trump was not in Florida.
The FBI scheduled the raid for a time when he was not at Mar A Lago.
The day of the raid they coordinated with the Secret Service.
Read the authorization of force document. They are only authorized if they are threatened.
Is there anything other than someone reading 1984 we are supposed to notice?
Cuz I'm pretty sure I was required to read that in HS
I just found this too. https://www.nypl.org/125/topcheckouts#:~:text=1984%3A%20441%2C770%20checkouts&text=George%20Orwell's%20dystopian%20novella%20has,since%20its%20publication%20in%201949.
Does this mean they have a SSS inside trumps team they are "friendly" with?
No. It means the DOJ and the FBI have established liaison relationships. It means they have people who can answer questions or negotiate issues if they arise.
It's absolutely normal and usual. It's just being deliberately misunderstood to anger people
They did ENGAGE the Secret Service that day. They called them hours before the raid.
Read some of the comments here.
Mar a Lago was closed at the time of the raid.
This all seems pretty standard stuff.
The Secret Service was notified hours before the search. A spokesman at the time said they facilitiated the search but did not participate. I would guess these means they unlocked doors.
As for the lockpicking stuff. If the FBI was searching your place, would you rather they picked a lock or broke down a door.
Julie Kelly has a history of hyping documents like these
You realize we're in the land of fantasy now. We are imagining some super violent event. About something that already happened with not only no violence, but without even the hint of violence.
If we are going deep into the world of imagination, what's to prevent the Secret Service from opening fire on Trump or soldiers or any other government employee who is given a gun?
Like if you think this was a real possible, thing, how would the standard FBI policy prevent this? You're describing straight up criminal activity. What you are describing is absolutely NOT ALLOWED under the standard FBI policy.
Have you read it? https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force
What you're describing violates multiple parts of the FBI policy on deadly force which IS ALL ABOUT THE LIMITS on the FBI.
Specifically it would violate the duty of an FBI agent to intervene if another FBI agent did as you said
It would also violate this section