Posted on 06/10/2011 7:51:40 AM PDT by freedomwarrior998
A California man who initially claimed to a local television station that he was roughed up by "SWAT team" members who allegedly battered down his front door to execute a search warrant related to his estranged wife's unpaid student loans was targeted due to an ongoing probe into alleged financial aid fraud.
Local law enforcement officials have thus far not commented on the Stockton man's claim to ABC News 10/KXTV that he was grabbed by the neck and placed in handcuffs in back of a patrol car for six hours as his three children looked on during execution of the search warrant on Tuesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Levin covered this on his program Wed and also read the OIG update. He was shocked to learn that the DOE had a law-enforcement arm.
Levin then raised a bigger question: How many departments in the Fed Gov’t have law-enforcement arms? He said regardless of what the facts are in this specific case, he planned to look into the larger question.
I couldn’t find the FR thread for Levin’s program last night & did not hear his show, but no doubt we will be hearing more on this from him.
When one pulls in a red herring, it means that they lost the debate. When one tries to deflect to another unrelated matter, it means that they lost on this one.
Nice job conceding. I appreciate it.
"Financial Aid Fraud" = not paying back loans, possibly.
Sounds to me like the jury's still out on this one.
I’ve had second-hand dealings with Cato ... and can assure you I have heard people who live/work in DC, and who should know better, refer to it as “right wing” and “left wing” (depending on their perspective). I.e., as I understand it, they lost a LOT of conservative support when they opposed the Iraq war. And, of course, it is very favorable to the homosexual agenda. Whatever sarcasm Mr Rogers intended gets lost in the reality of how Cato is perceived (and operates).
I am more than certain that “the law” you originally referenced was legislated much later than the Founders. Regardless of all of the citations you post, the fact is that neither you nor I can fully understand the law. Heck, we see everyday that the “authors of laws” don’t even understand them and that even Judges interpret them differently.
Your posted claim to “know the law” without fail is all I need to know about your perspective.
BTW, I never made any declaration of which side of this particular issue that I would take. What I did respond to was first the fact that you posted an excerpt that said absolutely nothing, then you claim that any (or all) force is acceptable in executing a warrent (murder?) and finally you claim to “know the law” without fail.
You are clearly pushing an agenda and that is all I addressed. Feel free to continue to call me names, I have thick enough skin to take it.
Dude, you were wrong on the K9 story and when corrected you ran. That’s cowardice.
I conceded nothing. You aren’t worth anymore of my time.
Like I said before, have a fine day.
Government workers must be aclimatized to doing as they’re told, even going armed to be used as disposable pawns in the coming ‘unsettling’ times of our near future.
It's supposed to be a government of the People, not a Police State for the benefit of the Masters.
I gave you the definition for libertine Hey Jackwagon.
and you seem incapable of learning it's use
I note a couple of characteristics about this poster...Abandon a thread where he is shown to be wrong or just revert to attacking poster’s character.
Has yet to address any of the points brought up by others...
I think he is off his meds.
Is there a copy of the warrant on the internet?
There seems no need in this case for any sudden entry at all. Arrest the guy at work and search his place at your leisure.
Sheesh. Those doughnut eating union fatasses really have feces for brains.
So the DOE has a "Fraud Search Warrant Team" (mustn't call them SWAT lest we offend someone, you know?) that knocks down doors while heavily armed so that they can get those fraudsters... I guess to those kids it really wouldn't matter what you called the team coming through the door.
Now, having grown up in a LE household, and having worked undercover myself many, many years ago (before the militarization of most LE began) let me quote my police officer father's statement just before he retired: "I'm glad to be getting out, because my days as a Field Training Officer will be done. These kids they are sending out of the academy these days aren't taught to think any more - they are taught 'You've got to get them before they get you!', but the academy isn't teaching the kids who the 'them' is..."
That, from my father who retired in 1988... I left the work a couple a years earlier and went another route. Very thankful I did. It seems that common sense law enforcement has been replaced by brute force law enforcement.
Regards
Raven6
This thread isn’t about the K9, you keep deflecting because you lost here. You conceded whether you want to admit it or not.
There was no arrest warrant issued. They had no authority to arrest anyone.
The founders created a Republic, not a democracy. The Constitution places the judicial power of the United States, which includes determining probable cause, not in Palidin2, but in the Judiciary. Your personal interpretation of what constitutes probable cause is not in conformity with the Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.