The case for impeachment of Merrick Garland

 Power Line:

The corruption of the U.S. government is exemplified by the Biden administration. The corruption of the Biden administration is exemplified by its Department of Justice. And the corruption of the Department of Justice is presided over by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

But that isn’t the worst of it. Corruption of the Department of Justice goes to the heart of American democracy. It makes a mockery of the rule of law. It thumbs its nose at the Constitution. Corruption of some agencies might only a costly annoyance. Corruption of the Department of Justice threatens our republic.

We have written about the controversy that recently has engulfed Merrick Garland here and here. There is substantial reason to think that Garland has lied to Congress.

But that isn’t the half of it. Garland has been central to the weaponization of government–specifically, the Department of Justice–to attack the Democratic Party’s political enemies, and run interference on behalf of its well-connected members. Garland has swung into action against the Democratic Party’s foes even when they are just parents who express concern at school board meetings. This is intolerable.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, citing the evidence of Garland’s perjury that we have written about, today signaled willingness to take action against the Attorney General:

 Garland's policies are doing more to harm America than he probably would have been able to accomplish if he were on the Supreme Court.  He appears to have little to no interest in reining in Biden corruption.

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

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more