Gartland Comments

[GURPS]

Garland: Far-Left Rioters Attacking Federal Courthouse Not Domestic Terrorism Because It’s At Night When Court Is Closed

“Well, senator, my own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition is the use of violence or threats of violence in attempt to disrupt democratic processes,” Garland responded. “So an attack on a courthouse while in operation, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases that plainly is, um, domestic extremism, um domestic terrorism.”

“An attack simply on government property at night or any other kind of circumstances is a clear crime and a serious one and should be punished,” Garland responded. “I don’t mean, I don’t know enough about the facts of the example you’re talking about, but that’s where I draw the line when it one is, both are criminal, but one is a core attack on our democratic institutions.”






I'm glad this guy did not end up on the Supreme Court

 

[GURPS]

DOJ Open To Helping ‘Craft Legislation’ With Congress To Combat Online Misinfo, Incitement



TRANSCRIPT:

SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): I’ll be serving as the chair of the Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law in this Congress and look forward to working with Senator Sasse who will serve as ranking member, one of the core things we’ll be looking at is how online misinformation is contributing to domestic terrorism to division here. You’ve discussed your own experience with domestic terrorism cases. And your plan to prioritize this issue. It’s something the FBI director has said is one of our most pressing threats. Do you think the DOJ has a role to play in examining the role of misinformation and incitement online, to contributing to violence? And that the DOJ has a role in working to help us develop reasonable solutions to this challenge?

MERRICK GARLAND, BIDEN AG NOMINEE: Well, again, Senator, I think that every opportunity that Justice Department has to work with members of the Senate to think about how to solve problems and how to craft legislation is one that we should take. I don’t have in mind particular legislation in this area, I do think that an important part of the investigation of violent extremist groups is following their activities online and getting an idea of what kind of information and misinformation is putting being put out. Well, I look forward to talking more about this with you.

COONS: Well, there’s increasing regulatory schemes both in Europe and in California and other states being considered. And I look forward to working with you on striking that appropriate balance between protecting data privacy, protecting individual liberty, but also protecting the competitiveness of the United States and globally, making sure that we’re pushing back on digital authoritarianism. Last, I’m glad to see the department is prosecuting. I think there’s 235 charges brought so far against rioters who invaded the Capitol and attacked our democracy in January 6. I’ve supported calls for a 911-style independent commission, to investigate the bigger picture of what caused this and what we might learn from it. Do you think an independent commission of that style would help complement the department’s work and help the American people better understand the root causes of that riot that incident and then better help us both protect the capital and those of us who serve here, but more importantly, protect the underpinnings of our democracy?

GARLAND: Well, Senator, I do think the 911 Commission was very useful and very helpful in understanding what happened then. And of course, the the Congress has full authority to conduct this kind of oversight investigation or to set up an independent commission. The only thing that I would ask if I were confirmed, is that care be taken that it not the investment, that Commission’s investigation not interfere with our ability to prosecute individuals and entities that caused … the storming of the Capitol, and as Well, no, this is a very sensitive issue about you know, disclosing operations which are still in progress, disclosing our sources and methods, and allowing people to testify in a way that then makes it impossible to prosecute them. So with those caveats, I certainly could not object to anything that the Congress would want to do in this regard.

 

[BOP]

I'm glad this guy did not end up on the Supreme Court

Pfft...it's not like he'd be any different from the rest of them.

 

[GURPS]

Merrick Garland Won't Call Antifa Attacks on Federal Buildings Domestic Terrorism. His Reason Is Absurd


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.

“But, that’s where I draw the line,” Garland continued. “One is, uh, both are criminal, um uh uh, but one is, uh, a core attack on our democratic institutions.”

 

[GURPS]

Merrick Garland Vows to Prioritize Prosecuting Capitol Rioters and Their 'Abettors'








Some Democrats have celebrated Garland’s response to Whitehouse’s question about pursuing the “ringleaders” of the Capitol riot, suggesting that the DOJ should pursue Trump for his alleged role in inciting the riot. Garland should make it clear that the DOJ will not attack the former president. An incitement charge in this context would almost certainly fail in court and an investigation into Trump would only divide the country further.

While some of the rioters did identify themselves as “white supremacists,” racism was not the motivating factor for the riot — the claim that Democrats had stolen the 2020 election was. While the riot was a heinous black mark in American history, Garland’s rhetoric tracing the riot back to the Ku Klux Klan is unwarranted.

Garland’s rhetoric about the KKK and his claims that the threat of domestic terrorism is worse in America today than it was at the time of the Oklahoma City bombing seem to prop up the idea that racist far-right extremism poses an imminent threat in America. Using similar logic, some Democrats have weaponized the Capitol riot to demonize their opposition and call for a new domestic “War on Terror” apparently targeted at conservatives.

Former CIA Director John Brennan warned against an “unholy alliance” including “religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, and even libertarians” that “looks very similar to insurgency movements that we’ve seen overseas.” These remarks came amid leftist calls for “deprogramming,” “de-Baathification,” “re-educating,” and “reprogramming” the 75 million people who voted for Trump.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has strained to pin various crimes on former President Donald Trump for the riot. Last month, she accused Trump of being an “accessory” to “murder.” She also suggested that her Republican colleagues who contested the election results may be “accessories to the crime.” She has called for a 9/11-style commission into the Capitol riot, explicitly connecting it with the deadliest terrorist attack in American history.