Our Current DOJ's arrest policies: Early morning or pre-dawn raids are designed for maximum humiliation and intimidation

American Thinker ^ | 04/05/2023 | John Dietrich

[SeekAndFind]

When Merrick Garland was questioned about why excessive force was used in the arrest of Mark Houck, an anti-abortion activist who had offered to turn himself in, the Attorney General evaded responsibility for the policy by saying,

“The determinations of how to make arrests under arrest warrants are made based by the tactical operators in the district. They made the decision on the ground as to what was safest and easiest.”

Garland did not comment on the enormous expense of sending a SWAT team to arrest a father of seven.  Also not mentioned was the fact that this early morning raid tactic, first developed by the Soviet KGB, is frequently used to arrest non-violent targets.

Early morning or pre-dawn raids are designed for maximum humiliation and intimidation. Dozens of federal agents with automatic weapons, armored vehicles, and sometimes a helicopter and amphibious watercraft are used intimidate the target, as was the case with Roger Stone. In the raid on Thomas Caldwell’s home, Caldwell’s 61-year-old wife was covered in red dots from the weapons aimed at her. She begged to put on her socks before they forced her outside in the cold. Caldwell himself, clad only in his underwear, was dragged through the grass. James O’Keefe claims he was partially clothed in front of his neighbors when he was dragged out of his apartment.

The federal government has a constitutional right to arrest people for certain offenses. When it goes to enormous expense to arrest cooperating subjects, there is another motive to their actions. Intimidation and humiliation are not proper components of an arrest. There is also the factor that SWAT raids can go terribly wrong. Innocent people have been killed in their homes.

[SeekAndFind]

The federal government has a history of heavy-handed attacks. It paid Randy Weaver $3.1 Million for the murder of this wife and son. There was also the Waco siege resulting in 75 deaths, including 25 children.

The Justice Department may be overzealous in some areas while in other areas they are reluctant to enforce the law. Merrick Garland claimed he was not aware of guidelines given to the U.S. Marshals Service to "avoid" arresting protesters outside the homes of Supreme Court justices. These protesters were in violation of 18 USC § 1507, which prohibits picketing with the intent of influencing any judge. Pro-abortion protesters have publicized the justices’ home addresses, the schools attended by their children, and their houses of worship. The protesters posed a serious threat to the justices and their families.

[Yo-Yo]

Who was the Trump official who had his home raided at 5 am, and by some miracle CNN just happened to have a cameraman stationed outside his home to record the arrest?

[dforest]

Don’t forget the early morning pre raid calls to CNN for maximum effect.

[dforest]

Roger Stone.

[PGR88]

Here’s a quick and easy legislative band-aid:

Mandate that the FBI must be completely unarmed. Not even a BB gun.

If they want to do any kind of operation, they must coordinate with local police.

[MMusson]

Please don’t tell my Mom I work for the FBI!

She thinks I have an honest job playing piano at the whorehouse in town.

[cyclotic]

It has nothing to do with the time of the raid. Humans are at their most docile and most out of it between 3 and 6 am. It makes sense to raid then.

The problem is that the raids they are doing with political crimes don’t need to in any instance be full on SWAT raids.

A couple agents knocking on the door at noon with a warrant will yield the same results, without terrorizing the Innocent until proven guilty or his family and neighbors.

These SWAT level over the top raids are designed simply to intimidate and strike fear of the Government in the minds of others who might choose to go against the official narrative.

[Keyhopper]

Roger Stone

[Alas Babylon!]

Which means it is political.

I know you said that, but we need to be perfectly clear as to what is actually going on.

Just a stark reminder that we are no longer a people under the rule of law.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

WE WERE WARNED!

“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is force! Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.”—George Washington.

[logi_cal869]

Mandate that the FBI must be completely unarmed. Not even a BB gun. If they want to do any kind of operation, they must coordinate with local police.

Interesting. Perhaps not all firearms, but certainly tactical operations

If we were to disarm, it ought to be ALL feds, sans the military, CBP and maybe DEA (obviously).

I'll be on board for that, but not FBI alone.

[nicollo]

Although different in their motivations and aims, the revolutions of the 17th and 18th centuries catalyzed the maturation of a fundamental concept – the rule of law – that today constitutes the foundation of Western societies.

The Soviet experiment was something else altogether. Legal tradition in most societies tends to be built upon precedents that span epochs, and even differing governing systems. But in the Bolsheviks’ case, they tried to make a complete break with precedent, mainly because they tended to see the law as a bourgeois creation. They wanted to build an entirely new legal system, yet, at the same time, they recognized the utility of trying to adhere to existing forms in order to give their efforts a greater appearance of legitimacy. Thus, in creating their new legal system, the Bolsheviks tried to dress up the dictatorship of the proletariat in an ill-fitting republican costume. The Bolsheviks and the Law: The Legacy of Arbitrary Justice

Emphasis is mine: and it's exactly what Soros and the American Left is up to.

[nicollo]

And it brings up James Otis:

This wanton exercise of this power is not a chimerical suggestion of a heated brain. I will mention some facts. Mr. Pew had one of these writs, and, when Mr. Ware succeeded him, he endorsed this writ over to Mr. Ware; so that these writs are negotiable from one officer to another; and so your Honors have no opportunity of judging the persons to whom this vast power is delegated. Another instance is this: Mr. Justice Walley had called this same Mr. Ware before him, by a constable, to answer for a breach of the Sabbath-day Acts, or that of profane swearing. As soon as he had finished, Mr. Ware asked him if he had done. He replied, "Yes." "Well then," said Mr. Ware, "I will show you a little of my power. I command you to permit me to search your house for uncustomed goods" - and went on to search the house from the garret to the cellar; and then served the constable in the same manner!

But to show another absurdity in this writ: if it should be established, I insist upon it every person, by the 14th Charles Second, has this power as well as the custom-house officers. The words are: "It shall be lawful for any person or persons authorized," etc. What a scene does this open! Every man prompted by revenge, ill-humor, or wantonness to inspect the inside of his neighbor's house, may get a Writ of Assistance. Others will ask it from self-defence; one arbitrary exertion will provoke another, until society be involved in tumult and in blood.

James Otis: Against Writs of Assistance, February 1761

[Texas resident]

Intimidation and humiliation are now components of an arrest on their political opponents.

Feds don’t use those tactics on the cartels because the cartels will shoot back.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Mandate that the FBI must be completely unarmed. Not even a BB gun.

Set that idea aside for the moment. The advertisement for hiring 87,000 more IRS agents supposedly has a requirement that one has to handle a gun.

Disarm the IRS first and then we’ll talk.

[rednesss]

But, but, but, back the blue!!!!!!!!!