AG Garland Didn’t Know DOJ Told Marshals NOT to Arrest Radicals at Justices’ Homes

3
86

Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL) questioned Garland about this as she presented the training slides that directed the Marshals NOT to arrest the [dangerous Antifa] radicals.

Attorney General Merrick Garland would not allow the arrest of radical protesters outside the homes of Originalist Justices, even after a man arrived at Justice Kavanagh’s house prepared to kill him and possibly his family. Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL) questioned Garland about this as she presented the training slides that directed the Marshals NOT to arrest the [dangerous Antifa] radicals.

As usual, Garland claimed to know nothing about the slides that came from the DOJ. He added a new issue – he couldn’t see the giant slides behind her. Let’s call him Sgt. Schultz.*

The radicals outside Justices’ homes screamed day and night, beat bongo drums, cursed, and threatened. It’s illegal. Still, Garland would not stop them or arrest them. However, he is now prepared to arrest 1,000 to 1,200 J6 protesters who merely walked into the Capitol after police let them do so.

The Left and their DOJ are so empowered that even something as absurd as this will be allowed. No one will balk.

Garland lied under oath, as The Gateway Pundit reported, but it’s worse than lying. He’s smart and cunning and uses semantics to deceive while never answering a question. He’s mocking us.

Junior Senator Britt said that Alabamans want the judicial system to mete out equal justice under the law. During AG Garland’s testimony, she grilled him on his unequal justice.

Senator Britt:

“The Marshals on the scene do make the decision of whether to arrest. After your appearance before the Judiciary Committee, we obtained copies of the slide deck that was used to train and prepare the Marshals for their protective detail at the homes of the Justices. Those training materials show that the Marshals likely didn’t make any arrest under section 1507 for a pretty simple reason. They were actively discouraged from doing so. As you can see on the slide behind me, the Marshals were explicitly told to avoid unless absolutely necessary any criminal enforcement action involving the protesters. The slides went on to explicitly state that making arrests and initiating prosecutions was not the goal of the Marshal’s presence at the homes of the justices, and the ‘not’ was actually italicized and underlined.

“The next slide directs the Marshals not to engage in protest-related enforcement actions beyond those that were strictly and immediately necessary and tailored to ensure the physical security of the Justices.

Last resort with radicals – arrest

“If you’ll see in the next slide here, it discourages the Marshals from making an arrest under any section 1507 by asserting that there may be a First Amendment right to harass the families of the judges and by concluding that any arrest of protesters are a last resort to prevent physical harm of the justices.

“Mr. Attorney General, yes or no, were you at any point before your testimony in front of the Judiciary Committee aware of these training materials or the fact that the Marshals had been heavily discouraged from making arrests?

Attorney General Garland:

“I haven’t seen this slide deck, and frankly, from here I can’t make it out, for which I apologize for my eyesight, but I can’t, can’t make it out. What I said before was correct. Their first and principal job is to protect the lives and property of the of the members of the Court, and as I said at the time, I’m the first attorney general who’s ever ordered the Marshals to protect the residences of the justices and protect them 24/7.

“That’s their principal responsibility, but that doesn’t mean that that other than that, they are in any way precluded from bringing other kinds of arrests.”

Senator Britt:

“So thank you so much, Mr. Attorney General, I do have another question …when you say they were given the full authority to arrest people violating section 1507, I would ask, will you take a look at these slides, these materials, dig into them? It is clear that these Marshals were given directives that limited, that narrowed the scope … we all want the physical safety … of our Supreme Court Justice is paramount. We thank you for sending those Marshals there.

“1507 though actually is more all-encompassing than that narrowly tailored objective and it says picketing or parading near a building or housing, if you’re doing it with the intent to interfere with obstruct …or influencing any judge in the discharge of his duty, it’s clear when you look at these slides, that the Marshals were not given those directives. I would like for you to take a look at that and if you agree with that statement I’d like for you to amend your testimony to the Judiciary Committee.”

Attorney General Garland:

“There’s nothing for me to amend because, as I said, I’ve never seen those slides before.”

Senator Britt:

“I know I need to yield my time. It’s clear that Marshals were given a different directive and I would ask you to look into that please.”

Attorney General Garland:

“I will.”

*Sgt. Schultz:

PowerInbox
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Vieira
Guest
John Vieira
10 months ago

The ‘weasels’ and ‘wimpy traitorous rats’ have their champions in the corrupt Main sewer Stream fake Media thus are emboldened to persist in their ‘foul’ ways….

GuvGeek
Guest
GuvGeek
10 months ago

It is clear these people Lie and Filibuster Congress. When is the Speaker going to direct the Master at Arms to take these Government Employees into Custody for obstructing Congressional Investigations? These snooty Lawyer types just make me sick! If they acted like this in front of a Judge in Court they would spend at least a month in jail for Contempt of Court. The Congress has far more power than a Judge and a Committee Chair should have at least the Power of a Judge when taking testimony.

There is precedence for Congress acting. In Anderson v Dunn (1821), the Supreme Court held that Congress’ power to hold someone in contempt was essential to ensure that Congress could discharge it’s duties under the Constitution.

William MacCracken was a Assistant Secretary of Commerce. He was was sentenced to ten days of detention for “allowing” the destroying of evidence. MacCracken appealed his sentence to the Supreme Court. The Court held that the Congress has this power (Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 -1935) and MacCracken surrendered to the Senate Master at Arms. He served his 10 day sentence at the Willard Hotel. This should be automatic when a Government Employee Witness shows up without subpoenaed evidence. I’m sick and tired of Government Employees acting like they are 15th Century British Nobles.

Personally I think they should try Attorney General Merrick Garland for lying and refusing to truthfully answer questions and sentence him to 7 days in a 1 Star Hotel in the Washington area. In the case of Alejandro Mayorkas he should be sentenced to a week on bread and water. Both should then be brought up on Impeachment Charges and tried in the Senate.

Any Congressmen not voting for their removal in both the house and Senate would have a serious problem being reelected. Speaker Kevin McCarthy need to take a Stand and put an end to disgraceful conduct of these Government Employees. The People have had it with these smart ass little weasels.

Since this is so rampant, maybe the Congress should set up a special court, outside of the DC area, to try these cases of Contempt. It would be a very busy Court.

The Prisoner
Guest
The Prisoner
10 months ago

That is very weak questioning. Garland is responsible for the lack of arrests, he took an oath, he saw that going on for weeks.