Thursday, Attorney General Merrick Garland was grilled by the House Judiciary Committee. Here’s a pretty dispassionate recounting of who said what.
And here are a few more conservative-oriented assessments:
The major points we learned from this are that Garland denies ever referring to angry parents at school board meetings as “domestic terrorists” (to be a stickler for accuracy, that’s just how someone else described it, based on the way he proposes treating them.) He claimed only to have learned from the media about that letter from the National School Board Association that was the alleged catalyst for him calling for federal action against parents.
If so, then he’s not very well-connected at the White House, since they apparently knew about it before it was even sent.
I noticed something interesting about the questions: Republicans focused on current issues and things Garland might do in the future, like the school board memo and parental rights, Garland’s potential conflict of interest with his son-in-law making millions selling Critical Race Theory materials to schools (he insists there is no conflict of interest, so that’s that), and whether there will be an investigation of Hunter Biden’s art sales.
Democrats’ questions were mostly attempts to keep past issues on life support, like whether Trump will be indicted for paying hush money to Stormy Daniels (Google it.) One actually complained that the DOJ was going too easy on Trump supporters arrested back on January 6th. You know, those people who were held for months, some in solitary, or under abusive conditions such as delayed medical care, before they were even charged. If that’s “going easy,” what do you call letting people go free after they loot cities, attack police and try to burn down a federal courthouse with people inside it?
And if the January 6th arrestees are ever charged with anything, what will it be? One thing we learned yesterday is that it probably won’t be “insurrection.”