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.
you mean the guy who looks like Satan?
‘Turley’…, you say there haven’t been specific death threats as a result of trump uncontrably blowing his cookies yet again re the FBI…, but how do you know that? Other than the fact that you’d have no way to know it, this much is undoubtedly true — trump’s claim garnered enough threats to agents in general that it’s become, at the very least, problematic.
As someone who has liberally censored this blog comment section previously you’re well aware of free speech only extending toward criticizing the government, not so much toward private speech. Hoping that the FBI, writ large counts as the government, no doubt.
Fact is though, trump is just as much of an a hole as he ever was, worse probably, and he doesn’t just need a gag order, he needs to be literally gagged.
Why aren’t Comey, McCabe, Stzork and Paige in prison yet? Why wasn’t Hillary indicted on any number of readily apparent crimes, why wasn’t Bill Clinton arrested for raping Juanita Brodderick, why wasn’t Joe Biden indicted and charged for stealing classified documents and mishandling them, why did the DOJ slow walk Hunter Biden’s tax evasion? Why? I don’t believe Trump has to incite people to do anything, it’s all right there in our faces every single day.
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
______________
“We will stop him.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
___________________________________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
___________________________________
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page
_________________________________
“People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”
– Bill Priestap
It’s coming, like a bulldozer! There’s going to be some political carnage long past due!
Caterpillar D11T!
Garland exercise responsibility? Silly Rabbit!
Turley needs to do something about the lying attack trolls that he’s hired to infest this digusting blog, and particularly NOW.
Meanwhile, this controversy concerning alleged standard procedure would be easy enough to clear up if Professor Turley or AG Garland would just produce copies of the FBI orders authorizing shootings when they raided the homes of Hillary Clinton and Fake President Joetard to retrieve documents that they STOLE from the federal govenment without having ANY authority to possess those records, since Hillary was NEVER president, and Joetard STOLE the records he unlawfully possessed BEFORE he stole the 2020 election.
“ Meanwhile, this controversy concerning alleged standard procedure would be easy enough to clear up if Professor Turley or AG Garland would just produce copies of the FBI orders authorizing shootings ”
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.566.3.pdf
Page 10
in a situation involving a person under Secret Service protection, such as the President, Vice President, or other protected individuals, the Secret Service would have primary authority over that of the FBI.
And AG Merrick Garland should have KNOWN that before he signed any orders sending in the FBI armed and licensed to shoot. This never would have happened under an honest and competent Attorney General or President.
Jonathan: As an attorney and law professor you know gag orders are used in criminal cases to prevent a defendant from interfering with the fair and orderly administration of justice– by attacking judges, witnesses, family members and law enforcement. So why is it that when it comes to DJT you apply a different standard? When it comes to DJT suddenly gag orders are “overbroad and unconstitutional” and “interfering with elections or curtailing free speech”.
Why are gag orders particularly necessary when it comes to DJT? Because when he attacks judges, their family members, law enforcement and the entire judicial system it inevitably leads to violence. We saw that on J 6 when DJT’s followers attacked the Capitol. It also happened when DJT attacked Judge Chutkan. A Texas woman and DJT supporter made a death threat against the Judge. She is now being prosecuted.
In the present Mar-a-Lago docs case Judge Cannon released redacted docs connected with the FBI search of DJT’s residence. Included in the docs were the protocols for the FBI search. It was the standard boilerplate language in every search warrant that the FBI is authorized to use deadly force if attacked. But DJT immediately seized on that language to falsely claim the FBI/DOJ plotted to murder DJT, his family and the SS agents.
Anyone familiar with the search of MAL knows DJT’s claim is a lie. The search was well coordinated with DJT’s lawyers, the SS and other staff to ensure DJT would not be present during the search. How could the FBI assassinate DJT if he was not there? While the FBI was armed they didn’t point guns at anyone at MAL. The search was conducted in a peaceful and orderly fashion.
Jack Smith’s emergency appeal was prompted by DJT’s lies about the search–by his unwarranted attacks on law enforcement. And you intentionally misstate what Smith is asking of Judge Cannon. Smith is not trying to protect the “entire government from criticism”. On page one of Smith’s “Motion for Modification of Conditions of Release” it states clearly: “The Government moves to modify defendant Donald J. Trump’s conditions of release, to make it clear that he may not make statements that pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents participating in the investigation and prosecution of this case”. On page seven of the Motion Smith states: “Trump, however, has grossly distorted the standards [ for the use of deadly force] by mischaracterizing them as a plan to kill him, his family and US Secret Service Agents. These deceptions and inflammatory assertions irresponsibly put a target on the backs of the FBI agents involved in this case, as Trump well knows.”
In his Motion, Smith also addresses DJT’s First Amendment rights. The Motion does not prevent DJT from exercising those rights. But like any criminal defendant DJT’s “free speech” rights are curtailed because pre-trial release “commonly includes measures that burden criminal defendants’ ability to act, associate, and speak…”. For example, a criminal defendant cannot have any contact with potential witnesses. That’s a necessary and limited restriction on “free speech”. The Motion does not prevent DJT from attacking the “entire government” or exercising his other First Amendment rights.
The interesting Q is what will Judge Cannon do with Smith’s emergency motion? If she denies it Smith may use the opportunity to file an emergency appeal with the 11th Circuit that has slapped Cannon down before. Smith might even ask that Cannon be removed from the case because she has shown a clear bias in favor of DJT. Cannon will take her good time in ruling on the Motion. She may take another month to rule–another indication Cannon is trying to slow walk her case so it can’t be tried before the election. And here is where the law of “unintended consequences” comes in. By telling lies about the search of MAL, DJT may be unintentionally be giving Smith the one opportunity he needs to get Cannon removed from the case!
Why are gag orders particularly necessary when it comes to DJT? Because when he attacks judges, their family members, law enforcement and the entire judicial system it inevitably leads to violence
That means we can silence all the Dems attacking SCOTUS
Dennis – the authorization to use deadly force should never be boilerplate. We saw in Waco and Ruby Ridge how federal agents eagerly and easily resorted to deadly force unnecessarily.
As to “attacks” on witnesses, etc., I would remind you that Trump has not called for violence against as anyone. Criticism is not “an attack.”
Edwardmahl said: “We saw in Waco and Ruby Ridge how federal agents eagerly and easily resorted to deadly force unnecessarily.”
You’re wasting your time. I’d bet you good money that the a$$hat troll that you responded to thinks that those incidents were great victories for justice.
Or if he — Dennis — even exists.
If he does, he takes being an ignoramus very seriously.
Edwardmahl: Why wouldn’t the authorization to use deadly force be “boilerplate” in every search warrant. It’s a constant reminder to FBI agents to use deadly force ONLY and if you are fired upon. Why wouldn’t you want that admonition in EVERY search warrant? Your claim makes no sense.
As to your claim that “Trump has not called for violence against as [sic] anyone”. What about J.6? DJT told the Proud Boys, the Oathkeepers and his other followers that J.6 would be “wild” and called on them to “fight or you won’t have a country anymore”. That was a green light for his supporters to attack the Capitol police–causing deaths and severe injuries to those defending the Capitol. That call for violence by the President has never been seen in our history. Now DJT is a criminal defendant for his calls for violence.
In the present context, the trial in Manhattan, DJT has been very careful not to directly call for acts of violence against prosecutors, the judge, family members and the witnesses. He learned a lesson from J6. Don’t risk being a criminal defendant in another trial. So now DJT resorts to VERBAL attacks on those arrayed against him.
Now you won’t see another head of a criminal syndicate directly and publicly call for violence against prosecutors, a judge or witnesses. They know better. So what does a Mafia Don do? He whispers into the ear of one of his capos: “Take care of that meddlesome judge who hates me”. That’s all it takes. Do you think DJT would shed a tear if one of his MAGA supporters were to assassinate Judge Merchan? That’s why all the jurors in the Manhattan trial are “Anonymous” and the judge and prosecutors and witnesses are under constant protection by law enforcement. They know the capabilities of DJT to repeat what he did on J6!
Dennis: thanks for another wonderful post. Turley is more concerned about Trump being forbidden from stirring up potential violence than the fact that he blatantly lied about Biden ordering a hit on him. Think about that you Trumpsters: even Turley admitted that Trump lied about Biden ordering a hit on him and his family.
Smith’s motion made clear that it was Trump ‘s LIE about Biden ordering an assassination that was the impetus for seeking the gag order. And, there have been death threats.
NUTCHACHACHA, please cite a legal basis for the issuance of a gag order and denying the 1st Amendment freedom of speech. The only authority for amending the Constitution is in Article 5:
Article 5
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
“So why is it that when it comes to DJT you apply a different standard?”
– Dennista
____________
It’s not “a different standard,” you ——- idiot, it’s the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
The court is not above the law, the fundamental law, and the court is compelled to support the Constitution and generate a “workaround.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Here’s the standard Turley is talking about. It’s on page 10.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652/gov.uscourts.flsd.648652.566.3.pdf
Everything Trump does to the Democrats, they routinely employed to smear their opponents for decades. That’s not news; it’s not even debatable.
The real reason Democrat leaders hate Trump is because he uses their own tactics against them, and it works. By using inflammatory rhetoric and name calling, he’s managed to strip much of the working-class base from the Democrat Party, and it’s only getting worse for the Democrats.
So of course The Party wants to silence Trump. Embarrassing the party of the little man while the party’s grandees are canoodling with oligarchs, that’s the real crime. Suddenly, populism is a “threat to democracy.” Whodda thunk it??
Bankrupting and gagging Trump is the Democrat tactic du jour, and yes, he’s just the trial run. If they can murder him in prison, what’s to stop them from scaling up this new business model for his supporters? They’ve already started with many of the J6 prisoners and the defendants in the Whitmer “kidnapping” case. That’s for real.
What do we do about these new lovers of terrorism and lawfare?
How about sending in a SWAT team authorized to use lethal force?
GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS OF RELEASE
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/581/united-states-v-trump/
That is Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Motion claiming that Trump is out of line and needs to be gagged because Trump brought the public’s attention to Merrick Garland’s and the FBI’s conduct associated with entering Mar-a-Lago with weapons, ready to shoot, and ready to transport shooting victims to a nearby hospital.
Depending on the Response of Trump’s lawyers, it seems hard to imagine that Judge Cannon won’t take a very serious look at Special Counsel Smith’s Motion and President Trump’s subsequent Response, including comparisons with prior search-warrant activities at locations protected by the Secret Service, such as FBI “raids” in search of records withheld by Fake President Joetard, Hillary Clinton, and former VP Pence.
It either is or isn’t standard operating procedure for armed FBI agents to be specifically authorized to shoot while executing search warrants related to the Presidential Records Act at locations protected by the Secret Service. I have every expectation that Judge Cannon, as always, will give these serious matters a thorough review — and I doubt that Merrick Garland’s conduct will escape such review unscathed.
The fact that authorization of the use of deadly force is “boilerplate” suggests it is present in virtually every warrant served. if so, 1) shouldn’t we be concerned that we are routinely sending out agents of the govt with an OK to kill, no matter what the nature of the warrant, and 2) in the event of the highly unusual search warrant for a presidential candidate’s home, might it not be wise to go over the entire warrant and question whether any provision of the warrant might be a provision that authorizes force that it is not intended to authorize?
Every law enforcement agency has deadly use of force policy. It’s clearly emphasized that it can only be used when agents or Leo’s are threatened and believe their lives are in danger. It also lists when deadly force is not authorized. Those policies are there in the event that circumstances change or if it becomes necessary to use it.
Your local police department has one too.
Isn’t it possible that the auth can be abused? Or simply interpreted differently, i.e. the killing of Ashli Babbitt? Can you picture ANY circumstance where a warrant to seize docs (particularly those under the watchful eye of the Secret Service) could justify deadly force?
emphasized that it can only be used when agents or Leo’s are threatened and believe their lives are in danger
Randy Weaver had his wife murdered by Federal agents, as she stood on her porch, holding her infant child.
That sniper was fearing for his life for sure
Good, very good. The federal government is and has been out-of-control for decades and decades as it claims authority not given by the People. To manage 350 million people seems to require excessive force simply because of a failure to think clearly on what the function of that government is and for. Too much has been illegally taken from the People with the procedures to challenge those takings ineffective. Mouth-pieces of higher education backup those claims by government by rote indoctrination without foreseeing the consequences of their actions, thus there is this system beyond a rational, effective, and peaceful control by the People.
Government without coercion must be the new standard, but, of course, that requires a better educated Citizen and by a better educated system of education where the means of operating the whole system, that is to say everything, is done in accordance to an improved framework of the system and the Citizens contained within.
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
Start here: Secession is not prohibited and is fully constitutional. Everything Lincoln and his progressive/socialist/communist successors did was and remains invalid, illegitimate, illicit, and unconstitutional. One may not violate fundamental law and have his subsequent acts declared legal and constitutional.
The post-Lincoln communist state must have been struck down from the outset every step of the way.
Lincoln’s installation of a foreign 4-million-man standing army on U.S. soil, in direct violation of the Naturalization Act of 1802, which was in full force and effect on January 1, 1863, was illicit, unconstitutional and an actionable crime of high office and must have been struck down immediately and with extreme prejudice.
I totally agree with you. We are not talking about arresting a murderer, this was a warrant for a document search that were secured in a SCIF, and it was taken to the extreme to humiliate the Trump family. IMO when you authorize deadly force, line up a hospital in case of gunshot injuries, that is not routine and is pushing the law to the extreme. Jack Smith is not helping the dimocrats one iota.
Much too logical for the Democrat mind.
Dan Bongino ?sp? while now a conservative pundit, was Secret Service.
He called out the nonsense about it being SoP.
Especially when there were Secret Service Agents on prem which meant that they would normally have to coordinate.
What’s even more telling and yet another reason to dismiss the lawsuit… An Obama era doc showed that the NA already had copies. of the docs Trump retained.
So there was no reason for any of this ….
Its all political.
Assuming Trump wins… he would be within his right to appoint an USAG who would go after many of the actors here.
It should scare them, and they are putting it out there ahead of anything as a way to deter Trump.
The DAs and some of the judges are breaking the law in terms of election interference. The NY cases are no brainers and both judges should be disbarred and taken off the bench at a minimum.
-G
Assuming Trump wins, he MUST pull a full “Lincoln” and impose martial law, suspend habeas corpus, smash printing presses, throw opponents in prison, ignore unconstitutional legislation, and seize power, not for the reason Lincoln did, to “Save the Union,” but to “Save the Nation” by extirpating Lincoln’s acts and those of his progressive, socialist, and communist successors, and re-implementing the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Naturalization Act of 1790.
It would be the quickest path but absolute power is corrupting. Without Congress it would be impossible to achieve a clean up, without a tribunal it would just be another death by meeting, layers of investigations and Wordsmithing without accountability.
Give them what they deserve!
It’s like the 15th century and regressing. The FBI rented a u-haul? Really?
They were looters dressed in costumes. Then the cover-up began.
Face it. Twin towers went down so make a new plan. Fascists is an idea thrown around and other muck like existential, elites, and bunches of other junk Americans care nothing about. Fascists must be the big business folks. Yes, that’s the place to be. No one does service in government anymore except bartenders and food service and a few other trades people.
Vocab development…the phrase made of whole cloth must come from fabrication. Fabrication contains the the fabric. Both mean —> a lie. 🤦♀️
‘Attorney General Merrick Garland should exercise a modicum of responsibility in his supervision of the case.’
😂😂😂 Oh, Professor. 🤷🏽♂️
you mean rat face?
I think everyone is missing the real question. The left is correct that this sort of deadly force provision is pro forma in these types of raids. The real question is why did they authorize this type of raid on a compound that was under secret service protection in the first place?
“these types of raids” — LOL — What does that even mean? Are you conflating raids on armed Mafia compounds or Columbian drug lords with raids related to the Presidential Records Act? Get serious.
I’m gonna repeat this one more time:
The FBI does NOT have LEGITIMATE authorization to shoot, or even carry weapons, when they enter a facility protected by the Secret Service, whether it’s Trump’s home or anyone else’s home under Secret Service protection.
Anyone telling you otherwise — whether their name is Turley or “Fox” or Rupert Murdoch or MSNBC, etc. — is just feeding you complete BS because they’ve calculated that you’re stupid enough to swallow it and then come back asking for more.
You seem to be losing sight of the fact that the Secret Service was notified ahead of time that the search would take place.
They coordinated with the FBI to conduct the search at a time when Trump and family would not be there.
The Secret Service knew about the impending search and did not tell Trump.
The Secret Service facilitated entry to the property.
Although the Secret Service did not take part in the search, they knew all the details ahead of time and assisted the FBI with entry to the property. They coordinated so that the search would occur when Trump was not there, because the FBI did not want to confront Trump. Therefore there could be absolutely no possibility that the intent of the search was to “assassinate” Trump.
I would be satisfied if Attorney General Merrick Garland were to exercise a modicum of responsibility in his oversight of this case. But based upon what I have seen of Garland’s actions over the previous four years, I don’t see that as likely. Or possible.
Turley is being lambasted by readers here. Because he’s not going on the expectations that most of his crazier readers want, to fully support Trump’s rhetoric. Obviously he strongly disagrees, but as an appeasement he leaves out why he disagrees.
Turley strongly disagreed with his Jan 6 speech and also never said why. If he took the effort to explain why he so strongly disagrees he would be immediately excoriated by Trump supporters and his status as a valued legal analyst on Fox News would be threatened. So he treads carefully, because exercising free speech does come with consequences.
Gag orders serve a purpose and even Turley would be forced to concede that they are necessary and he certainly would be agreeable that a limited one is sometimes necessary. He imposes a gag order on readers here. You can’t make openly racist comments or curse to your heart’s content. Because that kind of speech is protected free speech, it’s offensive and obnoxious so he gags his own readers from saying those things instead of using ‘good’ speech to counter. That’s his solution to that kind of speech. But it’s not the solution on his own blog. That kind of hypocrisy belittles the professor’s credibility.
LOL LOL LOL — Turley is LYING about shooting authorization being standard procedure in relation to the Presidential Records Act. You aren’t doing him any favors by agreeing with him. Turley needs to (1) start telling the TRUTH, and (2) hire better trolls for his comment section.
“He imposes a gag order on readers here.”…
This isn’t a courtroom nor a trial…he owns his blog,he’s allowed to do what he wants….
Cry your tears over at your own blog cry baby
@jmjUSA,
It still makes him a hypocrite. He believes gag orders are unconstitutional because the court shouldn’t be limiting Trump’s lying.
But Turley believes lying is protected speech and the only solution against it is more speech. Racist comments and cursing are also protected speech. Turley doesn’t adhere to his beliefs and imposes a gag on racist speech because he doesn’t like it. He’s clearly being a hypocrite.
But Turley believes lying is protected speech and the only solution against it is more speech.
That’s not Turley’s opinion. It’s the Constitution
George, you inaccurately say Turley never said why he condemned Jan 6. You are wrong on that. Here it is. https://jonathanturley.org/2021/01/13/the-case-for-a-trump-censure/
Authorization of shoot to kill search warrant for a former President and current candidate. Couple this with what transpired with the fake dossier, James Comey FISA warrant fabrication and what is now known about the DOJ handling of classified documents. Oh yeah, SOP.
There’s a reckoning coming.
LOL — Sorry, Professor, but you lose a LOT of credibility when Anti-Trump GARBAGE Fox agrees with you about authorization to shoot being standard procedure:
Jack Smith asks judge to restrict Trump statements after ‘inflammatory’ remarks about FBI raid
STILL waiting for you to post EVIDENCE that authorization to shoot is any form of “standard procedure” when it comes to retrieving documents associated with the Presidential Records Act. STILL waiting for copies of FBI documents that you reviewed in relation to the FBI being authorized to shoot when they raiided the homes and/or offices of Hillary, Fake President Joetard, or Mike Pence.
Ironically from an ‘anonymous”…hah! Move on to mslsd or the ChineseNewsNetwork…its your type
I haven’t even read the article and I’m pisssed off. When did use of deadly force become standard practice in SEARCH WARRANTS. Give me the year and date and place. I can barely comprehend granting authorization to use deadly force in some arrest warrants but not as an ordinary practice even then. Our police officers are regularly charged with murder when they use deadly force except for the cold blooded murder committed on Jan 6th.
@John Schwarz,
How many people have had the unfortunate experience of being subject to a federal search warrant? You may not know it’s standard but those that execute them know. It’s a policy to ensure the safety of the officers conducting the search. They don’t know if there could be armed resistance to the search or hostile individuals. To have that on standby is and has always been a precaution that every law enforcement agency including local ones.
No gag orders. Only liberals use thar to take away constitutional rights because they are trying to overturn the constitution and don’t want the world to know
You have NO clue what you’re babbling about — same as ‘Turley. The FBI does NOT have authorization to shoot, or even carry weapons, when they enter a facility protected by the Secret Service. Anyone that told you that is full of it. Stop spreading misinformation.
Trump and Secret Sevice were in NY when they went in
Anonymous said: “The FBI does NOT have authorization to shoot, or even carry weapons, when they enter a facility protected by the Secret Service”
Do you have enough intelligence to click on a link (previously furnished in these comments) and read plain English on the linked page? That boilerplate authorization WAS in the 2nd paragraph on page 11 of 26 on the operations directive for this particular raid. Your the one spreading misinformation.
George said: “It’s a policy to ensure the safety of the officers conducting the search. They don’t know if there could be armed resistance to the search or hostile individuals.”
And of course, the safety of the LEOs must ALWAYS be held superior to that of “ordinary” citizens. And, of course, raids with that boilerplate authorization NEVER take place at the wrong address, or against the innocent. What an statist, elitist, a$$bag you are.
They don’t know if there could be armed resistance to the search or hostile individuals.
George, The FBI was going into a facility, under control of the US Secret Service, 24/7. The FBI knew risk was less then going into the FBI gun range.