Merrick Garland won’t commit to protecting Russia-Trump hoax probe

2

According to The Washington Examiner, Merrick Garland, Biden’s pick for Attorney General, would not commit today to protect Special Counsel John Durham and his investigation into the Russia-Trump hoax.

That should immediately disqualify him.

If you will remember, then-attorney general Bill Barr, would not take measures to protect the Durham probe. He said it was not necessary.

Garland said he would need to speak with the federal prosecutor before making a decision, though he said he didn’t currently have reason to think it wasn’t the right move to keep Durham on.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the committee, urged Merrick Garland to support Durham’s investigation and to handle the inquiry into Hunter Biden without interference from the White House.

“With respect to special counsel Durham’s investigation, I expect that he will be allowed to complete his investigation,” the Republican senator said. “If confirmed, will you commit to providing special counsel Durham with the staff, resources, funds, and time needed to thoroughly complete the investigation?”

“So Senator, I don’t have any information about the investigation as I sit here today, and another one of the very first things I’m going to have to do is speak with Mr. Durham and figure out how his investigation is going,” the judge replied. “I understand that he has been permitted to remain in his position, and sitting here today, I have no reason to think that that was not the correct decision.”

Grassley asked Garland if he was saying that Durham would only be removed “for cause.” Garland didn’t commit to that either.

“I would have to have an opportunity to talk with him,” Garland said. “I have not had that opportunity. As I said, I don’t have any reason, from what I know now, which is really very little, to make any determination on that ground. But I don’t have any reason to think that he should not remain in place.”

Garland also would not commit to releasing Durham’s full report.

“I am a great believer in transparency,” Garland said. “I would, though, have to talk with Mr. Durham and understand the nature of what he’s been doing and the nature of the report. But I am very much committed to transparency and to explaining Justice Department decision-making.”

Apparently, he isn’t really a big believer in transparency. Actions speak louder than words.

As an aside, Garland is no supporter of the Second Amendment, and he is quite far-left on the question of the green movement. Reason also goes over his troubling record on criminal justice reform.


PowerInbox

2 COMMENTS

  1. The GOP side of the corrupt senate, Mitch’s corrupt RINO gang, will gladly approve of Garland. They spent 4 years covering up the massive crimnal operation, and they will not change now.

    Grassley has made no contributions to the investigations, only coverups. He is pretending again.

    Durham is not actually conducting an investigation. So, here goes the useless senate again, wasting time while the nation burns.

  2. Sen. Hawley: Let me ask you about assaults on federal property in places other than Washington, DC — Portland, for instance, Seattle. Do you regard assaults on federal courthouses or other federal property as acts of domestic extremism, domestic terrorism?

    Judge Garland: 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 the democratic processes. So an attack on a courthouse, while in OPERATION, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases, that plainly is domestic extremism, domestic terrorism. An attack simply on a government property at NIGHT, or any other kind of circumstances, is a clear crime and a serious one, and should be punished. I don’t know enough about the facts of the example you’re talking about. But that’s where I draw the line. One is — both are criminal, but one is a core attack on our democratic institutions.!!!!!!!!!……………………………………..So anything goes after dark … what a stupid thing to say

Leave a Reply