In his recent (8/11) address to American citizens, Attorney General Merrick Garland, stated:
Faithful adherence to the Rule of Law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and our Democracy. Upholding the Rule of Law means applying the law evenly, without fear or favor. Under my watch, that is precisely what the Justice Department is doing.
All Americans are entitled to the even-handed application of the law, the due process of the law, and to the presumption of innocence.
Where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken.
Let me address recent unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the FBI and Justice Department agents and prosecutors. I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. The men and women of the Justice Department are dedicated, patriotic public servants. Every day, they protect the American people from violent crime, terrorism and other threats to their safety while safeguarding our civil rights. They do so at great personnel sacrifice and risk to themselves.
After four days of deafening silence, AG Garland offered up this Nothingburger regarding the Mar A Lago raid of President Trump’s living quarters. The vacuity of the “statement” was so…vacuous…several pundits correctly pointed out it easily could have been delivered promptly on the evening of the unprecedented events.
But he didn’t. So what? He got around to it.
What is more remarkable is twofold: What the nation’s Attorney General said and what the mainstream media blow-dried anchors and commentators did not say about what he did say.
Consider: “Faithful adherence to the Rule of Law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and our Democracy. Upholding the Rule of Law means applying the law evenly, without fear or favor. Under my watch, that is precisely what the Justice Department is doing. All Americans are entitled to the even-handed application of the law, the due process of the law, and to the presumption of innocence. “
The outrageous condescension of arrogant hypocrisy within those comments is breathtaking. Can it be America’s Chief Law Enforcement official is so stupendously deaf and blind to the obvious contradictions within his fantasy? Is it possible he and his vaunted Justice Department are so intellectually hobbled it is impossible for him and them to not have realized immediately when he spoke those words millions of American voices screamed in unison “What about Hillary? What about Hunter? What about Comey? Clapper? Brennan? Loretta “Tarmak” Lynch? Eric “Fast & Furious” Holder? Lois “IRS” Lerner?” The list of Democrats who walk free and freely today despite the unquestionable certainty of their crimes grows and chokes like kudu throughout the swamp of the Logic Free Zone and our judicial system. Did Garland miss the live televised commissions of perjury as well as the refusal of one of his predecessors to obey a Congressional subpoena?
It is impossible to conclude whether General Garland is suffering from aggressive arrogance or indolent indifference.
Moving on…
Where possible, it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken.
The written and broadcast record has established the series of cooperative negotiations during the FBI’s numerous Florida meetings with Trump’s attorneys. The targeted boxes had been observed and secured with double locks as suggested by the always helpful visiting Feds. Yet those same agents, 30 strong, spent upwards of 9 hours scouring Trump’s living quarters, office and, adding insult to injury, availing themselves access to Iyanka Trump’s wardrobe closet remember: agents were already aware of the exact location of the boxes of documents in question. Is this your version of “…less intrusive“, …narrowly scope…”, Gen. Garland? What a deep river of obfuscation you swim in. Has the fog of politics clouded your legal vision? Is it possible you are seeking revenge against Republicans for being denied a shot at the SCOTUS bench? Or are recent revelations confirming the declassification of the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” your next scandal?
Finally…
Let me address recent unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the FBI and Justice Department agents and prosecutors. I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. The men and women of the Justice Department are dedicated, patriotic public servants. Every day, they protect the American people from violent crime, terrorism and other threats to their safety while safeguarding our civil rights. They do so at great personnel sacrifice and risk to themselves.
Considering your lofty legal position, it is appalling you are so casual and comfortable uttering Constitutional contradictions to American citizens whose inalienable rights you and the rest of the Justice Department are sworn to protect – but don’t. Criticizing “public servants” is the pure exercise of our Free Speech. You “will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked.”? Is that a threat, General? Does well-deserved criticism of you and our employees in your department constitute an action to which you intend to retaliate – like targeting Virginia parents, labeling them “domestic terrorists” because they are concerned about the racist education being imposed on their children? American citizens have seen the deadly results of the Justice Department’s work product at Waco, Ruby Ridge, the FBI’s own admission to contact and conversation with mass murderers, imbedding with BLM arsonists, the J6 rioters, the dozen FBI agents that helped concoct the phony kidnapping of Michigan Gov. Whitmer.
“[P]rotecting the American people from violent crime…” doesn’t appear to be one of your agents’ bragging points. Most citizens have crystal clear memories of the Justice Department and FBI’s sordid past, from James Comey to J. Edgar Hoover. Care to comment, General? Sadly, the only thing louder than your threatening comments has been the silence of Media watchdogs which have the special protection of the First Amendment in return for the obligation to guard the gates of Freedom against an intrusive, over-reaching Government – not the other way around.
By Brian Wilson
Brian Wilson is a nationally ignored talk show host and occasional un-indicted co-contributor. He recently released his fourth book, “50 Stories; 50 Years in Radio”, now busily scribbling an unlikely screenplay for Book #3. With his spare hour, he is focused on splitting the atom and pursuing the ever-elusive Whirled Peas, all from his technically challenged studios on the formerly pristine shores of the Great Unnamed Lake, allegedly in the Southeast. Brian is also a regular contributor to The Blue State Conservative.
Enjoy HUGE savings at My Pillow with promo code BSC.
Follow The Blue State Conservative on Facebook and be sure to sign up to our Email List.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Blue State Conservative. The BSC is not responsible for, and does not verify the accuracy of, any information presented.
Notice: This article may contain commentary that reflects the author’s opinion.
Featured photo courtesy of Senate Democrats, CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons ~
This story syndicated with permission from The Blue State Conservative