Garland's attempt to criminalize Biden's 2024 opponent

 Michael Goodwin:

Merrick Garland belongs in Hollywood. His Friday performance where he pretended to be a squeaky-clean, by-the-books attorney general was completely persuasive — if you didn’t know squat about the last two years.

Even those who didn’t just come from Mars had to admire Garland’s ability to keep a straight face while making the absurd claim that fairness dictates he appoint a special counsel to take over two probes into Donald Trump because Trump is running for president and Joe Biden says he intends to also.

The slippery reasoning survived the event because Garland made a fast exit left without taking questions. Otherwise, some pesky journo might have asked the obvious: If the prospect of a Trump-Biden showdown now triggers a conflict of interest for the Justice Department that requires an independent counsel, why wasn’t a conflict triggered the moment Garland started the Trump probe?

After all, Trump was defeated by Biden two years ago and Biden is Garland’s boss. And there’s never been much doubt that both Trump and Biden aimed for a 2024 rematch. So why is there a conflict just now?

An even more glaring conflict emerged last April when Biden let it be known publicly he wanted Trump prosecuted. Within months, Garland turned his boss’ wish into his command, and Trump became the subject of not one but two probes.

That was a red alert conflict of interest, yet Garland ignored the political implications of investigating his boss’ former and possibly future opponent, convened a grand jury and orchestrated a raid on Trump’s home and office at Mar-a-Lago.

Naturally, sensationalized FBI leaks about what the raiders found made Trump look like a traitor or madman, while more recent low-key leaks paint the documents as secret but benign.

Welcome to Justice, Garland style.

Then there’s his slow-walking of the Hunter Biden case, which has been crying out for a special counsel since 2019 when Joe Biden announced he was running for president while Trump was the incumbent.
...

There was no chance in hell the new president’s son was going to be treated like any other private citizen under his father’s attorney general, especially when there is so much evidence about Joe’s involvement. Garland should have named a special counsel but didn’t, and two years later, the Hunter case and Joe’s role have disappeared into an FBI black box reserved for friends and family.

I’ve said it before: Merrick Garland is a partisan hack. But a clever one, maybe even Oscar-worthy.
...

 Look at it this way: While Trump and Biden are both under investigation, there is no balance in the scales of justice because Garland simultaneously targets Trump and protects Biden. 

Now that’s a threat to democracy.

The DOJ is looking like an arm of the DNC under Biden and Garland as does the FBI.  Both are losing respect because of their partisanship.  It also looks like the Biden DOJ is trying to thwart democracy by attempting to criminalize a potential opponent.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more