Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
74-Year-Old, 300-lb. Man Who Can Hardly Walk vs. FBI SWAT Team of Dozens
God help us. Let’s see if I have this straight—a man, 74 years old, who weighs 300 pounds, who can hardly walk on his own and is required to use a cane, often needs help in getting out of a chair, is a Leader in the Church of Latter Day Saints, is beloved by his neighbors as the neighborhood “Teddy Bear,” who is an accomplished woodworker and is the sole source of support for his adult, mentally challenged son (who recently suffered a stroke), but who made the certainly grave mistake of putting online clear threats against the President of the United States, is shot to death in an early morning raid by a SWAT team of dozens of FBI agents and a tank.
That statement is based on numerous factual accounts available as of the evening of August 13, 2023, none of which appear in the “elite” publications of the “mainstream media.” However, they do appear if you look hard enough in what remains of the pathetic “press” we are left with in this country.
Do a Google search and what you will find is that this American citizen made social media threats against the alleged “President” of the United States and he was executed by a crack FBI team of agents who were afraid for their lives when confronted by the aforementioned 300-pound, 74-year-old, mobility-challenged “deadly threat” who, sadly, said what he thought, clearly in inexcusably illegal (about which more later) and improper language, of the current occupant of the White House.
Executed for social media posts?
Seriously?
Have you seen the video of the SWAT team arriving at 6:15 a.m? After viewing it, please refer me to the exact moment when these agents’ lives were in the slightest peril sufficient to justify gunning down this American citizen—and then leaving his blood-soaked body at the curb for two hours. Here’s one of the videos available online for your consideration:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1689635453677563905
Another, longer video, accessible within this Fox News report, is quite disturbing and appears to this listener, at least, to indicate that Robertson was yelling back at the agents or even perhaps sobbing or crying shortly before the shots were fired. Others may receive a different impression, obviously.
The Online Images and the Law Governing Threats to the President
The internet is swarming with images Robertson put on his Facebook page; here is a sample:
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members.
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community
of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.
I think it was known ahead of time what the outcome of this encounter would be. Otherwise a different approach would have been chosen so that an arrest could be effected.
This was done to show the people what kind of force can be employed.
Maybe the other posts were different, but I fail to see any direct threat in that one.
P.S. SWAT should also be all-caps since it’s an acronym for Special Weapons And Tactics.
Well, perhaps states are going to have to tell federal law enforcement that state officials will handle executing arrest warrants issued for federal crimes to prevent unnecessary homicides.
What is the kill rate for people who threaten the president?
Last century people who literally shot presidents got jail time.
These raids look risky because someone could get killed. But considering it is almost always the target of the raid it’s hard not to wonder if they see that as a downside. Dead people do not sue.
And the relatives better not either, if they know what’s good for them.
Some hair-raising examples of his posts are here. It looks like he did threaten the FBI.
What was the FBI’s official objective with respect to Mr. Robertson? The FBI had been following Mr. Robertson for months. The FBI was familiar with Mr. Robertson’s physical limitations, yet also would know that Mr. Robertson did leave his house on regular occasions.
Friends and neighbors have pointed out that if the FBI’s objective was to arrest him and take him into physical custody, there were many public places in which they could have done so easily and with zero chance that Mr. Robertson would be able to mount any resistance that would put FBI agents at risk.
I tend to be unimaginative, but I cannot think of a legitimate official objective concerning Mr. Robertson that calls for a 6:15 am raid by a large contingent of heavily armed government agents that couldn’t have been accomplished more safely and at lower cost in some other fashion.
This is getting to be a pattern. Once again, the Department of Justice (of which the FBI is a part) are doing nothing to reassure the general public of its fairness and good faith, and actually seems eager to be seen as an instrument of terror.
I am guessing we will not see huge protests with the theme “Craig Robertson–Mormon Lives Matter”
Thank you! My proof reader staff – moi! – definitely fell down on the job!
I did pick the wrong one as a sample; there are so many in my haste I didn’t select one of the truly violent threats but did try to emphasize in the text of the post there was little question in my mind that the statute had been violated and there were clearly proper grounds for his arrest.
But, not execution.
Chances: snowball in hell.
I just picked off a few examples of this developing pattern from pure memory, or what was left of it late last night. As I noted in the post, the sounds I heard on the longer video were, to me, the sounds of a man sobbing or crying. In other words, a man who was truly terrified. Seen in that light, it appears this bunch of jackboots were totally successful in their mission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell,_Michigan
Which GOP candidates have made destroying the FBI a campaign issue?
As Jack Benny used to say, long ago: “I’m thinking, I’m thinking!”
I am aware of feds (two at a time) knocking on the doors of people who posted such threats against Trump but no SWAT teams.
If there was no indication of a larger violent risk or concerted action, why send a SWAT team which itself creates an atmosphere and risk? Like the pro-life family man in Philadelphia, the SWAT raid appears to send a larger message about what displeases the authorities.
Everybody involved should be questioned at the level of a prostate exam. A breezy assurance that he looked dangerous should be scrutinized.
I’m starting to believe a judge should also be required to sign off on a warrant for a SWAT-type raid . . .
Brilliant! What a concept! You should — we all should– write your Congress/man/woman/thing/it immediately and urge them to pass legislation making it clear that this “check and balance” must be scrupulously observed! Bravo!
Like Waco, maybe it’s not a great idea to confirm the worst fears some people have about their government by armed government teams coming at them as a first step.
Why is it that many of the same sorts who think that social workers should be deployed to deal with armed criminals think that sending SWAT teams against an elderly fat guy or a pastor at home with family is OK?
It’s about making the locals powerless and making the feds all-powerful.
The comments here make me think that some of us would call this premeditated murder.
Or at a minimum, deliberately creating conditions in which a nominally justified homicide is far more likely than it ought to be.
Bob, in consideration of the fact that My Lady, my puppy Winston and our sons might want to have me around just a bit longer, I will not answer your speculation directly, save to say that it is certainly food for thought when one looks at the evidence that they knew everything about Craig Robertson since March, had visited with him once before, had to know of his condition and had to know that they almost certainly could have taken any one of a dozen other routes to execute (poor choice of words, perhaps) their arrest warrant, including asking his Bishop to intervene on their behalf.
In the end I would not be surprised to find out that somebody connected to the government wanted this man’s property in some manner or other and the dead individual did not want to give it up. Now that he is dead all will go forward as planned from the government perspective.
From the Salt Lake Tribune:
Robertson did publish posts making specific threats against federal employees and in some of posts he displayed firearms that he owned.
Some background on preparing for a Presidential visit. The Secret Service and the FBI will start interviewing local individuals that have made threats against the President. Local law enforcement will have their own briefing with the Secret Service involving traffic control and secondary routes that the motorcade might have to take. On an overnight visit the briefing will include security assignments for the hotel, and any venue that will host the President. I have worked three overnight Presidential visits as a police officer. Police officers assigned to the visit must attend the Secret Service briefings.
When it comes to the raid on Robertson’s home there has to be a full investigation of what happened, and that investigation needs to be released to the public. The raid is now a homicide investigation, not all homicides are murders, but a homicide involving a law enforcement agency requires transparency after a full investigation.
You are the person here with experience and what you have said makes sense. Based on known facts at this point does this look good or not so good? And should the full investigation be carried out by Utah authorities? @dougwatt
Waco, Ruby Ridge, Utah,…
So, the threat made two days before Biden’s arrival in Utah would certainly get the attention of the FBI and Secret Service. The raid itself still requires a full investigation. I’ll have to wait and see if that will happen.
@DougWatt, thank you for this excellent comment; a valuable contribution to this discussion. I echo Bob’s request as I would be most interested in your observations on the question of excessive force. I would also like to hear your candid thoughts as to whether we really, actually will get the transparency we all deserve out of the present version of the FBI. My opinion is obvious from my post.
I’m not sure what will happen the 7th floor of the FBI in DC is a mystery to me, and they have created a lack of trust, as has the DOJ and some of their prosecutors.