Well - perhaps hard for some to accept, but Trump misstates truth (a/k/a lies).
USAToday, a month ago, published truth:
'Deadly force' rules for Mar-a-Lago search were boilerplate, not assassination OK | Fact check
The claim: 'Biden's DOJ gave the FBI authority to assassinate' Trump in Mar-A-Lago search
A May 21 Facebook post (direct link, archive link ) makes a heavy allegation about what the FBI was authorized to do when serving a warrant in August 2022 on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home.
“Newly released files show the FBI was given clearance, by Merrick Garland, to use lethal force against Trump, his family, and the Secret Service during the Mar-A-Lago raid,” the post reads. “Do you understand the implications here? Biden's DOJ gave the FBI authority to assassinate a former President and top political opponent on American soil.”
This echoes a claim made by Trump that the FBI documents "authorized the FBI to use deadly lethal force" in the raid.
[...] Document explains limits on use of deadly forceThe FBI searched Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8, 2022, to recover documents Trump had taken from the White House after his presidency. The investigation spawned federal charges over the handling of classified materials.
Documents released in the case referenced “deadly force,” prompting a flurry of claims across conservative social media, as well as claims by Trump himself and U.S. Reps. Paul Gosar and Marjorie Taylor Greene that the authorization was tantamount to greenlighting Trump’s assassination.
But all of those claims mischaracterized the nature of the DOJ's search document.
The Law enforcement operations order detailing the Mar-A-Lago search, dated Aug. 3, 2022, mentions deadly force only in one section: A copy of the DOJ's standard policy on use of deadly force that focuses primarily on ways to avoid using it and situations where it is not allowed.
When Trump's team criticized this inclusion in a Feb. 22 legal brief (cited by Gosar and many others), it also misquoted the document. The filing quotes the search order as saying the DOJ "may use deadly force when necessary," but the use of force policy actually says "may use deadly force only when necessary."
Those guidelines limiting when deadly force can be used are included in documents ordering any FBI operations, according to the bureau and past and present officials with the Justice Department.
Attorney General Merrick Garland noted at a May 23 news conference that the exact same guidelines were in place in the authorization of a voluntary search of President Joe Biden’s Delaware home for classified materials. Garland lambasted the suggestion that it was unusual to include a reminder of the department’s deadly force policy or that Trump’s assassination was authorized.
[...] The Justice Department's Justice Manual lays out specific, limited circumstances under which deadly force can be used.
“Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person,” the policy reads in part.
Yes, same boilerplate language applied when Biden's home was voluntarily searched; and neither Garland nor FBI agents acted wrongly; for both Trump and Biden the FBI sent out search teams, not snuff teams.
Trump needs to grow up. To stop fibbing. To act responsibly.
________________UPDATE_______________
Hat tip to Marcy Wheeler for her EmptyWheel post noting why Crabgrass is posting of something from a month ago. Wheeler notes a pending motion in the Florida Trump documents case to limit inflammatory rhetoric by Trump in the future (prior restraint of political speech being disfavored being the counter argument).
Wheeler links to an Amicus brief offered by America First Legal Foundation, a DC area 501(c)(3) operation, filed two days ago opposing the motion, for a statement of the counter argument.
Wheeler's item, by linking to arguments pro and con, with the amicus item dated this week, shows the matter is timely. Crabgrass posted first about a news item noted in EmptyWheel commentary - in effect getting to the meal before setting the table.
This update properly notes Crabgrass reliance upon the Wheeler initiative, (where the opening x-out of the Trump Social item above was, itself, first posted by Wheeler). And it sets the table.
Links to court papers provide a full background, while the opening focus on news reporting tightly shows how Trump twisted truth to fit his fibbing nature.
...................................................
A caveat - Readers should distinguish this "America First Legal Foundation" from the similarly named America First Foundation, (an apparently going concern as a 501(c)(4) operation), and the America First Foundation, Inc., a largely inactive Tennessee 501(c)(3), where name overlap, or other factors, (rhetoric included), might cause confusion.
Crabgrass is unaware of whether there is any degree whatsoever of actual relationship between the organizations.
Trump's use of the "America First" slogan in his own rhetoric adds further confusion.