The government often waits until Friday night when it wants to file something controversial in seeking to reduce media coverage and public attention. Special Counsel Jack Smith followed this practice this week in quietly filing a motion to gag former president Donald Trump in his Florida case. Smith took the action after Trump suggested that the warrant used on his Palm Beach home included a provision allowing the use of lethal force. While the provision is standard in such warrants, Trump has portrayed the inclusion of the boilerplate language as a threat to his life and the lives of his family. Nevertheless, I believe that the gag order, like Smith’s past demands, is over-broad and a violation of the free speech rights of the former president.
I have been a long critic of gag orders as inimical to free speech. I have specifically opposed past demands by Smith (and prior orders) as overbroad and unconstitutional.
There has been much discussion of the gag order imposed on Trump by Justice Juan Merchan, who is controlling not only the travel but the speech of the leading presidential candidate from his small Manhattan courtroom. He has gagged Trump from speaking about witnesses like Michael Cohen, who has attacked him as both a candidate and as a defendant in public. The New York courts have upheld the order.
What is most troubling is the bar on Trump discussing such figures as Matthew Colangelo. Colangelo was third in command of the Justice Department and gave up that plum position to lead the case against Trump. Colangelo was also paid by the Democratic National Committee for “political consulting.”
So a former high-ranking official in the Biden Justice Department and a past consultant to the DNC is leading the prosecution. With the weaponization of the criminal justice system by the Democrats as a central issue in this campaign, the gag order is curtailing the ability of Trump to address one of the most controversial figures in the effort.
Now Smith would like to radically expand the gag with a new order out of Florida. Notably, Smith has thus far failed in his unrelenting efforts to get one of his two cases to a jury before the election. Thus, this order would gag Trump through the election even though the cases could be effectively scuttled if he were elected.
Trump has used the language to galvanize his supporters, claiming that FBI “WAS AUTHORIZED TO SHOOT ME” and that the government was “just itching to do the unthinkable.” He added that the FBI was “locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.” Figures like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) have piled on with claims that the DOJ and FBI were “planning to assassinate Pres. Trump and gave the green light.”
My strong disagreement with Trump on this lethal force provision does not alter my opposition to the gag effort. Many of us have publicly disagreed with these claims and expressed concern that they are fueling rage. Trump’s opponents and the media have made the statements a focus of coverage for days. That is how free speech works. Citizens can reach their own conclusions on the merits in a free and open debate.
Once again, the solution to bad speech is good speech, not censorship or gagging of those with opposing views.
In his Friday filing, Smith is not seeking to protect specific witnesses but the entire government from criticism. He objects that the statements create “a grossly misleading impression about the intentions and conduct of federal law enforcement.” That could very well be true, but Smith is seeking to control what a presidential candidate can say about the government, a chilling measure for any political system. It is particularly concerning when directed at an anti-establishment candidate.
The concerns over the premise of such an order are only exceeded by concerns over its scope. Smith does not seek to define that scope, but rather says that we will know a violation when we see it:
“Whether a particular statement meets that test “must be determined by reference to the statement’s full context. But that condition would clearly prohibit further statements deceptively claiming that the agents involved in the execution of the search warrant were engaged in an effort to kill him, his family, or Secret Service agents.”
The vagueness of the order would create a chilling effect on a political candidate who would have to self-censor to avoid possible contempt sanctions, including jail. For the United States government to seek such a limit on political speech should be widely condemned in the media and politics.
Under this order, the Justice Department would effectively limit what criticism could be voiced of its actions and intentions by the leading candidate for the presidency. For a candidate who has been subject to false allegations, including in the federal Russian collusion investigation, the gag would impose an unprecedented and unconstitutional limit on political speech.
It is another example of Smith’s lack of any sense of restraint in his pursuit of Trump. He has repeatedly shown a pronounced disregard for both due process and free speech in his prosecution of these cases.
Indeed, while the inclusion of the boilerplate language has been exaggerated and distorted, the real threat from the government is evident in the motion filed in response to that criticism. Smith has again fulfilled the narrative with another motion that speaks to his animosity and sense of impunity in the prosecution of Donald Trump.
The Smith motion should be denied and Attorney General Merrick Garland should exercise a modicum of responsibility in his supervision of the case. While Smith is being given broad discretion, that independence should not extend to contradicting core departmental policies on interfering with elections or curtailing free speech.
If you want to know about the use of force issue, listen to someone who actually knows what they’re talking about!
https://bongino.com/ep-2255-the-fbi-screws-over-america-again
“ Trump has used the language to galvanize his supporters, claiming that FBI “WAS AUTHORIZED TO SHOOT ME” and that the government was “just itching to do the unthinkable.” He added that the FBI was “locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.” Figures like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) have piled on with claims that the DOJ and FBI were “planning to assassinate Pres. Trump and gave the green light.”
My strong disagreement with Trump on this lethal force provision does not alter my opposition to the gag effort. ”
The majority of the gag orders against Trump have been upheld on appeal and for good reason. Trump likes to incite his base into outrage that has the real potential to lead to violence. Professor Turley “strongly” disagrees, sure but he doesn’t explain why and that’s the problem. He stops short of explaining why he disagrees and instead attacks a legitimate legal restriction that has been upheld multiple times. It’s interesting how the professor spends a lot of time stating why a gag order should be unconstitutional but not why Trumps claims are wrong or why he strongly disagrees.
We can clearly see why Trump’s false claims are dangerous. On this blog we already have rampant assumptions and calls for violence against the FBI or attacking the credibility of the courts and law enforcement. Then there’s the enabling of the rhetoric by Marjorie Taylor Greene. She’s following his lead and invoking assassination attempts by the FBI and essentially telling Trump supporters their candidate is a target. We have seen how witnesses have been harassed and intimidated issued death threats and doxxed.
It’s obvious Trump is trying to sabotage in any way his criminal trials before they start.
Gag orders are not unconstitutional. There’s a specific reason why they exist and they have been upheld. Turley should spend more time explaining why he’s strongly opposed to the rhetoric Trump is getting gagged on. Because if he’s strongly opposed he understands the gravity and precarious nature of the rhetoric.
Professor Turley is obligated to maintain the Fox News narrative and he is going to be making sure Trump is the ‘victim’ in all this. Never mind the danger of claiming the FBI was going to do something they were never going to do. You know, lying. Lying was a big issue with Turley when it was all about Cohen, but here we have Turley looking the other way when Trump is lying.
JT loves to obfuscate the facts. But this…
“In his Friday filing, Smith is not seeking to protect specific witnesses but the entire government from criticism.”
Is utter BS. The “Entire Government from criticism”? Give me a break. That is so over the top BS that JT should be thoroughly embarrassed. trump as the leader of a cult causes others to act on his words. The number of death threats against so many government workers can be directly traced back to trumps words. Lies all of them, but being a cult leader, the cult followers do what their master asks.
JT, stop being the water boy for a cult leader, get a life.
Bongino-former Secret Service agent-says “this is not standard operating procedure”. https://rumble.com/v4x3jzf-dan-bongino-on-fbi-trump-raid.html
Furthermore, what justifies not giving Robert Kennedy secret service protection-he is a Kennedy, and the mortality rate on Kennedy’s is quite high. Trump-while prone to exaggeration-has been proven correct so often about what appeared to be exaggerated claims and that were branded as false. His claims about Biden and his getting rid of the investigator looking into Hunter in Ukraine, turned out to be entirely true by Biden’s own admission. This goes on and on. Trumps-“Obama spied on me through wiretaps” was proven true, even in the face of denials, like “it wasn’t really wiretapa s since it’s all based on a different technology”.
IT seems Mr. Turley, that you may be too quick to condemn Trump here given the incredible rate that the seemingly absurd claims of Trump come out to be true.
Add to that what might be an incredibly high mortality associated with getting arrested by a DOJ entity. The other day, a seemingly unjustified attack on a gun owner resulted in a death. There are many such incidents.
The FBI was expecting a shootout with the Secret Service here? Trump’s detail? The reports say they brought medics and an emergency medical team. Haven’t verified that, but it was alleged by Steve Bannon.
But perhaps the FBI is behaving with incredible levels of corruption and intimidation. IS this true?
https://comments.whatfinger.com/2024/05/24/how-corrupt-is-the-fbi-im-finance-director-for-donald-trump-in-mississippi-so-we-raise-money-ive-talked-to-a-number-of-very-wealthy-individuals-that-god-has-blessed-that-say-i-cant/
@anonynous,
From Rumble? The conspiracy theory site where pretentious bloggers like to claim they were “former” government agents? More likely weekend warriors who play airsoft or paintball “battles”.
Turmp is a liar. And. He loves to stoke his supporters with rhetoric like this. Because the gullible and weak minded are the easiest to convince.
I believe that Turley is either lying or just plain doesn’t know what he’s talking about when he claims that written authorization to shoot is any form of standard procedure regarding a search warrant for documents in a case related to the Presidential Records Act.
Authorization to shoot may be standard procedure when busting down Al Capone’s door or rounding up people named Gotti, but I’d like to see the professor back up his statement with proof that written authorization to shoot has ever been used in relation to the Presidential Records Act and/or in any case related to unlawful retention of records by Hillary Clinton or Fake President Joetard or former Vice President Pence or other elected officials.
if Turley is correct about this, I’ll apologize, but I seriously doubt that he’s correct, and I doubt that he would even be in a position to know what he’s talking about in this instance, as it would require him to have done a LOT more research than he probably did when he rolled out of bed this morning. So I stand by my comment posted in yesterday’s story about Lawrence O’ Donnell:
Of course, if it’s standard procedure, the DOJ or FBI would have issued the same authorization to shoot when they raided Hillary Clinton’s home to retrieve unlawfully-retained classified documents back in early 2015.
Oh, that’s right — the DOJ and FBI never raided Hillary’s home to retrieve stolen classified documents, and just let her destroy more than 30,000 documents that were under subpoena, taking Hillary’s word that the destroyed documents were just about “wedding planning” and other such total BS — even though they found out much later that Hillary had lied and destroyed a large number of highly-classified documents instead of returning them to the government.
Dan Bongino, having a unique, perspective from actually being a law enforcement officer, and a Secret Service Agent, has repeatedly, and loudly stated that most of the lawyers commenting on the “use of force” issue, are a bunch of dipshits! That they have no idea what they’re talking about about. Go listen to his podcasts from last week, for any who doubt it.
Listening now (about half way through). Thanks for the recommendation. Bongino drinks too much coffee and gets too wound up for a guy that carries a gun — BUT he knows what he’s talking about here. Very good information. Thanks again.
I’m surprised they didn’t seek an order to cut out his tongue. If anyone casts a vote for a democrat they’re asking for their own enslavement. This is not America.
Really?, cut out his tongue?. If that is what you worry about you should seek help immediately.
All these lawfare people and their ‘gag orders’, sounds like S&M.
I agree with several comments here.
While it may be common language, it legally defines the rules of engagement. The FBI had shoot to kill authorization.
Why exactly would the illegal warrant require a dozen armored agents with assault rifles? Its insane.
We have 100’s of thousands of US troops around the world, keeping the peace, that are operating under rules of engagement that are far stricter, than the Shoot to Kill “boiler plate.
“ Why exactly would the illegal warrant require a dozen armored agents with assault rifles? It’s insane.”
The warrant didn’t require that. Trump wasn’t there and neither was the secret service. Trump literally lied. If you doubt it. Here’s the actual warrant.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.566.3.pdf
George said: “Here’s the actual warrant.”
And that warrant contains the (boilerplate) authorization for use of deadly force, as alleged and as disputed here by the colossally ignorant. Thanks for the link .Page 11/26: POLICY STATEMENT USE OF DEADLY FORCE …
I saw the video the morning of the raid. dozen agents in body armor with assualt rifles. That would only happen under direct orders from FBI Brass, with direction from the Attorney General
Turley said: “Trump suggested that the warrant used on his Palm Beach home included a provision allowing the use of lethal force. While the provision is standard in such warrants, Trump has portrayed the inclusion of the boilerplate language as a threat to his life and the lives of his family. Nevertheless, I believe that the gag order, like Smith’s past demands, is over-broad and a violation of the free speech rights of the former president.”
There is an issue there that goes way beyond Trump and his personal reaction to the provision. Why shouldn’t law enforcement (at all levels) be required to justify allowing lethal force when seeking the warrant? Yes, I already hear the objections about increasing risk to cops, and statistically, that no doubt would be true. However, based on my extensive reading about such raids, the predominant fatalities seem to lean very much in the direction of wounding and killing citizens without justification. I am convinced that there at least needs to be a better balance sought. If such a balance was achieved, perhaps Bryan Malinowski and many others who did not deserve death would still be with us.
Fatal Arkansas raid has lawmakers asking what went wrong?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/22/arkansas-lawmakers-demand-answers-atf-raid-death-bryan-malinowski/73413499007/
Oh, you can’t help but sense the growing desperation.
Jack Smith did not work for the ICC, nor the ICTY, he sat on the bench for the Kosovo Specialist Chambers.
A link to their rules of procedure and evidence c. 2017. The rules of procedure and evidence have changed for both the ICTY and the KSC, in part because the judges are allowed to change them. In effect, they make things up as they go, which is perhaps why it seems that Smith thinks he can do as he pleases.
For .the KSC’s rules of procedure,
https://www.scp-ks.org/en/documents/rules-procedure-and-evidence
The rules of procedure and evidence of the ICC differ from those of the KSC and the ICTY, which created a new legal category, the JCE, which is based on our RICO laws and is designed to assure convictions in the absence of evidence.
https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/fall04_Martinez.pdf
“…assure convictions in the absence of evidence.” Lovely. Whatever could go wrong with that?
Sometimes I truly feel we are living in a James Bond movie where Blofeld is striving for world domination.
@Mary – Have you ever heard of Klaus Martin Schwab?
aka Goldfinger
I thought prior restraints on speech were unconstitutional. When did courts start allowing prosecutors of all people to dictate to litigants what they can talk about.
“… Trump suggested that the warrant used on his Palm Beach home included a provision allowing the use of lethal force. While the provision is standard in such warrants, Trump has portrayed the inclusion of the boilerplate language as a threat to his life and the lives of his family. …”
What’s good for the Goose (Jack Smith), is good for the Gander (Donald Trump). DJT is “Fighting Fire With Fire”.
They started it (The Government – The Shadow), Donald is merely repelling it. When the Government wanted to paint the situation as they chose, They used their favorite News Outlet Mouths to broadcast the word. When Donald Trump does it, he just opens his Mouth and pontificates.
Imagine if the Native American Indians in the time of European conquest had the ability (The Machine: Language and the ability to broadcast & smear) to do what Our Government does today, every day.
Their Land got stolen right out from under them by Language and disinformation, Pulling the Wool over Their Eyes as they say.
This Government (The Machine) hasn’t changed a bit since recorded History.
It’s Memorial Day weekend, remember the Native Americans that died defending what was Theirs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_the_Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas#Population_overview
Good points except about Native Americans. The small group of Clovis People were apparently were indigenous. But all the “native” people who came after them were Settlers who took the land (frequently by force).
Exactly.
@ allenbd0778ca91
“The Machine: Language and the ability to broadcast & smear”
The Machine is after You to. A.I. will wipe out your kind, just as it did American Indian Tribes en masses.
Through Language and Networking – It’s coming.
I’m sure the ICC (Mr Smith’s former employer) would be more than happy with his actions and gag orders. Europe, even the UK, has never been truly accepting of true freedom of speech. They still think it is just some crackpot idea of those crazy Americans.
The ICC has taken on the justice system of New York. If you shoot someone who is attacking you then you get arrested and maybe the criminal will be arrested also.
The wagging of war is the province of a Nation State not a bunch or terrorists who took over a strip of land and then never had another election. It’s also not the province of an illegitimate court in the Netherlands. To charge or try an individual who is already under the cover of a legitimate legal system is double jeopardy and basically says try them to you get a conviction. Thats why the US and Israel are not signatories of the ICC treaty.
I agree gag orders are illegitimate and unconstitutional. They are not explicitly allowed in the constitution or given as a power to the federal government. I think that sort of makes them unconstitutional.
Unfortunately for Jack Smith, and unlike the joke-that-isn’t-funny Juan Merchan, Judge Cannon didn’t get her law degree from Bob’s Live Bait ‘n’ Law Skool. I feel she is unlikely to agree to this latest abuse by the Biden DOJ.
And I disagree very strongly with Turley on this point. As “standard” as lethal force may be, any thinking person would see that in this case, it was incumbent on the DOJ to specify NO lethal force for an operation intended to retrieve documents; documents, among other things, that it now seems likely were sent by the same Biden goons some months earlier to entrap Trump.
As far above the law as “Biden” and his merry gang of thugs may be, how would it have looked if someone got killed as the FBI swooped in for a box of PAPERS?
I have tremendous respect for Professor Turley but his constant need to run interference for the corruption and abuses of the Biden crime syndicate is really wearing thin at this point. Just admit for once that the whole operation is deeply corrupt and that the whole papers case is a nothingburger. Meanwhile Clinton’s tapes remain in his sock drawer and Obama has 30 million classified documents in a furniture warehouse somewhere in Chicago and Hillary is somewhere smashing devices with a ball peen hammer.
This motion is just another part of the Biden re-election campaign. Keeping Trump bottled up and quiet is one of the legs of their plan.
Contrary to what Turley keeps saying, Jack Smith case was always the most dubious and corrupt of all of them. Jack Smith’s entire case rests upon the absurd idea that while a President to free to de-classify anything at any time, for any reason, but because Trump didn’t mention to anyone specifically that he was declassifying the documents he took to MAL, they somehow remained classified, and therefore, he is guilty of multiple felonies, Of course this is ignoring the fact that he isn’t required to do anything at all to declassify anything he wants. No matter what happens in this case at the trial level, it will ultimately be decided by the SC as it would involve an enormous, and completely confusing, restriction upon presidential powers. If a president can’t declassify materials, who could? The whole case is a farce, especially when you consider that three major players, Hillary, Biden, and Pence, all possessed classified material with no authority whatsoever. They were “investigated” but somehow these clear violations of the law were excused. Convictions for possessing classified materials without the proper authority are pretty easy to obtain. Lowly sailors on submarines have been convicted of felonies for merely having photos on their cell phones.
The GA case appears to be dead in the water, the NYC case has been a circus. Now the MAL case doesn’t seem to be panning out as expected for team Biden. It does seem odd that in each of those cases there has been members of the Biden DOJ and/or white house working in the background.
While I disagree with Turley here-see my above comments-he is not a cheerleader for Biden. He is thoughtful and honest.
Turley is a hardcore, lifelong, Chicago democrat who voted for Obama, Hillary, AND Fake President Joetard. And knowing what he knows now, he would STILL vote for Obama, Hillary, AND Fake President Joetard. You can bet on it.
Boilerplate means different things depending on the event. Boilerplate when you say “this is our assessment of the value of this property but you should get an independent assessment before using as collateral in a loan” is one thing but when you lead a raid on a former presidents home and use boilerplate saying that “ lethal voice is authorized “ is a whole nother matter. All it takes is one overzealous agent, a misinterpretation of an action or reaction, or agents entering homes with weapons drawn which has happened in the arrest of some the former presidents associates. A stumble or fall or a dropped weapon not “safed”.
There are signs about safety on gun ranges all across the country and they are not boilerplate. Weapon’s misfire or rounds stovepipe while ejecting, or a round fails to chamber correctly. I don’t think they go on these raids with blanks. People get killed on movie sets with “blanks” (more than once) or falling helicopters. And pro’s in law enforcement and the military make mistakes also resulting in an unforeseen death. Being blasé about lethal force as just boilerplate is an open invitation to a tragedy. I thought that was why you had a supervising agent or agent in charge who should have made that call or not while being on site.
Just because I have a concealed carry permit in my state does not mean I carry a weapon everywhere I go. I use something called good judgment, a rare quality these days.
GBE said: “There are signs about safety on gun ranges all across the country and they are not boilerplate.”
The very best rules regarding gun safety actually are a kind of boilerplate. Those were formulated by ex-Marine, Lt. Col. Jeff Cooper, became the standard for gun ranges and firearms instructors, and are supposed to also be the basis for government firearms use, although I strongly suspect that, llike any other reasonable standard that the “authorities” acknowlege. they are given no more htan lip service.
Jeff Cooper’s Rules of Gun Safety
https://thefiringline.com/Misc/safetyrules.html
Regarding carry, I hear you, and do much the same. However, I must also say that the argument I get from those who do carry everywhere, which is that you never know what you might run into during your daily routine, or other activities that *should* be low risk, and that it could just take one of those instances for you to be done serious harm that could have been avoided had you been armed, is not entirely without merit.
It will be hard to out this particular genie back in the bottle if the GOP wins in November. Seems like everyone has forgotten the words from Lincoln’s second Inaugural,
“With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive to finish the work we are in, to bind the nation’s wounds …:
hey that is the way Fascist Operate….shame Republicans continue to fund Fascist Democrat Government
The Russian Hoax Conspiracy was the biggest political crime in US History…and NO ONE but the victims of the HOAX went to JAIL!
I want 10,000’s of Criminal Democrat from across government in JAIL. I am fine jailing them no trial…but a Nuremberg style trial to jail the fascists is fine as well. Democrats are openly destroying the USA!
Gag orders exist to protect the Defendant during Trial.
Thats why I know Merchan and Smith are corrupt
The real culprit in all of this is the Attorney General. In the guise of being disinterested he has become disconnected.
Jack Liftom said: “The real culprit in all of this is the Attorney General. In the guise of being disinterested he has become disconnected.”
I wouldn’t exactly describe Garland as “disconnected”, I think that is far too generous. There are situations when a person who has affirmative responsibilities can facilitate misbehavior by passively ignoring them. That is exactly what Garland has done. He is just as guilty as Jack Smith or any of the other perps in this miscarriage.
Even if the permission to use deadly force is standard in most search warrants, it seems entirely inappropriate here and there no reason it couldn’t be dropped. You would think that in an action as momentous as this raid, extra care would taken about getting the details right.