The Morning Briefing: Thank God Merrick Garland Isn’t on the Supreme Court By Stephen Kruiser
Justice Garland Would Have Been a Nightmare
When looking at Joe Biden’s various appointments and nominations here in the first month of the Grandpa Gropes Traveling Sham Presidency Circus, one gets the feeling that former President Barack Obama is running a staffing agency these days. Or a recycling center. Team Biden-Harris has been stocking up on Obama administration retreads. Perhaps Ol’ Joe doesn’t remember most of these people and his empty head thinks they’re all fresh blood.
While Merrick Garland wasn’t really a member of the Obama administration, he is, of course, closely associated with it thanks to The Lightbringer’s lame-duck nomination of him for the Supreme Court in 2016.
Garland’s performance during his confirmation hearing this week has clearly illustrated that the United States really dodged a bullet in keeping him off of the Supreme Court.
The world is so screwed up right now that this guy is going to be the chief law enforcement officer in the land, but at least that’s not an appointment for life. At least not yet. The Democrats are all about fundamentally overhauling America and they’re clearly fans of one-party rule, so this administration may be around longer than we’d like.
I will share just a couple of the lowlights that Garland offered forth under questioning this week.
Matt had a post on Monday that revealed Garland’s disturbing partisan skew on who and what constitutes domestic terrorism:
During his testimony, Garland said that domestic terrorism in America today is “more dangerous” than at the time of the 1996 Oklahoma City bombing, and pledged to continue the investigation in the January 6 Capitol riot wherever it takes him, including “aiders and abettors who were not present on January 6.” To elaborate on his position on domestic terrorism, Senator Hawley asked Garland whether he considered antifa assaults on federal property, like courthouses and other federal buildings in (for example) Seattle and Portland, where antifa and BLM rioted in the summer of 2020.
“An attack on a courthouse while in operation — trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases—that plainly is domestic uh uh um um uh uh extremism uh uh um um uh uh um domestic terrorism,” Garland explained before adding the following caveat: “An attack simply on government property at night, or under any other kind of circumstances, is a clear crime and a serious one, and should be punished.”
“I don’t mean—I don’t know enough of the facts of the example you were talking about,” Garland told Hawley. Apparently, Garland slept through the summer of 2020.
That is especially frightening if, like me, you’re one of the millions of Americans who believe that this administration is going to weaponize the “domestic terrorism” label to punish all conservatives, even those of us who are just here writing things and not rioting.
Matt had more yesterday about Garland and immigration:
Senator Josh Hawley, (R-Mo.) inquired about Garland’s position on immigration policy by asking if he believed illegally entering the United States should remain a crime.
Garland’s response was very concerning.
“I haven’t thought about that question. I just haven’t thought about that question,” he replied. “I think the president has made clear that we are a country with borders and with a concern about national security. I don’t know of a proposal to decriminalize but still make it unlawful to re-enter. I just don’t know the answer to that question. I haven’t thought about it.”
Hasn’t thought about it?!? Border security isn’t exactly a peripheral issue in American politics. Many would say it’s been the dominant issue for decades now. What does Merrick Garland think about? Anything?
As Bonchie asked in a headline at our sister site RedState, “Does Merrick Garland Even Know What Day It Is?”
I have written on more than one occasion that the Biden presidency may very well make us miss Obama.
Merrick Garland may make us miss Eric Holder.
Comments are closed.
