The more I see Attorney General Merrick Garland in action the more I count America’s lucky stars that the then-Senate Majority Leader kept this guy the hell away from the United States Supreme Court — which no doubt still angers the chief law enforcement official of our country. The thought is terrifying.
Before we continue, let’s get one thing straight.
While the Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the president of the United States and is the chief legal counsel of the President, the Attorney General is not the president’s personal lawyer nor that of the president’s party; the Attorney General is the federal government’s chief lawyer. That applied to Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr under Trump — much to Trump’s chagrin — and it applies to Merrick Garland, as he has admitted. Garland does not practice the things he preaches. And now “the rest of the story.”
As reported by Fox News on Saturday, four out of the eight members of the U.S Commission on Civil Rights have penned a letter to Garland, ripping the Attorney General for his recent ridiculous memo in which he labeled parents who protest at school board meetings over the indoctrination of their kids with the disease of so-called “critical race theory,” child vaccination mandates — and whatever the hell else their First Amendment rights guarantee — as “domestic terrorists.” Hilarious on its face; ominous in practice.
SPEECH NOT ‘TERRORISM’
Members Kirsanow, J. Christian Adams, Gale Heriot and Gilchrist of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights sound the alarm over Attorney General Merrick Garland’s response to parents’ school protests#MerrickGarland @TheJusticeDept #DOJ https://t.co/bfCODiwPcV
— Linda Marie Lovison (@lilo623) October 17, 2021
The letter was signed by Commissioners Peter Kirsanow and J. Christian Adams as well as Gail Heriot and Stephen Gilchrist. In part, they wrote (emphasis my):
Your memorandum did not cite any specific examples of ‘harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence that would provide any basis for law enforcement action by the Department.
We are concerned that much of what the NSBA (National School Board Association) calls threats and acts of intimidation—and compares to “domestic terrorism and hate crimes”— It can only be considered political speech.
The members were also adamant about Garland’s insistence that protesting parents represent a national security threat — again, a preposterous notion.
The internet is full of signs that petitioning parents to school boards could be a problem. We searched the web for such evidence. We are proud Americans because almost everything we’ve seen thus far is impressive. Parents are concerned about their children’s education and won’t allow them to indoctrinate them into radical ideologies.
Merrick Garland, Joe Biden and the whole Democrat Party could not be reached for comment.
This scorching letter was wrapped with blistering questions.
Sometimes, it is possible for some parents to get out of line and make threats they shouldn’t have. In this instance, it is perfectly appropriate to call for law enforcement. Is there any evidence to suggest that both state and local law enforcement are not capable of the task?
Is federal intervention necessary in this case and not for thousands of cases that overheat exchanges occur all across the country? This case calls for federal intervention.
Is it surprising to you that concerned parents across the country view your memorandum as an endorsement of the NSBA’s description of their protests as comparable to “domestic terrorism”?
And finally, the Civil Rights Commission members asked Garland to provide specific examples of so-called “domestic terrorism” committed by parents protesting for the wellbeing of their children:
We now ask you to provide us with specific examples of “harassment, intimidation and threats of violence” that you purport allow for law enforcement action and an explanation of why this is a situation that calls for federal intervention in particular.
U.S. Civil Rights Commissioners: 1, Merrick Garland: 0. Final score. Set, match, game.
Thank you for your efforts, Mr. Garland. Now, put up or down.