On Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland gave his promised speech about the “Justice” Department’s investigation into the Capitol Hill riot, and it was just what we expected from such a partisan shill. (Yes, those are harsh words, but we’ve seen this man in action.)

They Mean Trump

I’d like to examine just the latter part of his speech, starting with these words:

The actions we have taken thus far will not be our last. The ‘Justice’ Department remains committed to holding all January 6 perpetrators, at any level [emphasis mine], accountable under law, whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy.

Wednesday on MSNBC, former Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill made it clear who he means. President Trump has been demonized so frantically by the left, they are set on prosecuting him for treason. The dangerous fictional Trump she describes bears no resemblance to the Trump we know. But make no mistake — when they say “at any level,” they mean Trump, along with any Republican members of Congress they can possibly unseat.

They Will Never Stop

Merrick clearly will never stop:

Because January 6 was an unprecedented attack on the seat of our democracy, we understand that there is broad public interest in our investigation. We understand that there are questions about how long the investigation will take and about what, exactly, we are doing. Our answer is, and will continue to be, the same answer we would give with respect to any ongoing investigation: as long as it takes, and whatever it takes, for justice to be done, consistent with the facts and the law.

Later:

Investigating the more overt crimes generates linkages to less overt ones. Overt actors and the evidence they provide can lead us to others who may also have been involved. And that evidence can serve as a foundation for further investigative leads and techniques.

He insists they are “not following an agenda or an assumption,” but the facts. This is where the speech starts to become amusing.

There is Only One Rule?

It goes from amusing to screamingly funny as he builds on that theme:

[Our] central norm in our criminal investigations: there cannot be different rules depending on one’s political party or affiliation. There cannot be different rules for friends and foes. And there cannot be different rules for the powerful and the powerless. There is only one rule. We follow the facts, and enforce the law in a way that respects the Constitution and protects civil liberties.

I’ll pause while you pick yourself up off the floor after rolling around laughing.

Garland goes on to cite numerous egregious examples of hateful letters and actions taken against people for political reasons. Certainly, these are NOT funny, and I condemn them just as forcefully as he did and hope you do as well, but his “Justice” Department ignores the multitudinous examples of vicious hate and violence coming from the left.

Garland says this:

These acts and threats of violence are not associated with any one set of partisan or ideological views. But they are permeating so many parts of our national life that they risk becoming normalized and routine if we do not stop them.

Congratulations to the AG for saying something I agree with 100 percent. How I wish I thought he meant the first part.

Mr. Selective Prosecution

He goes on:

The Department has been clear that expressing a political belief or ideology, no matter how vociferously, is not a crime. We do not investigate or prosecute people because of their views.

What Mr. Selective Prosecution fails to mention is the extremely violent behavior of those on the left who, month after month, trash cities, loot businesses, burn buildings and commit violent assault and go unpunished. What about the civil liberties of their victims? And what about the civil liberties of those Trump supporters charged but not convicted of any crime, detained without bail while awaiting trial for over a year? For him to talk about civil liberties and equal justice is a joke.

“Election Integrity” Reform

Predictably, Garland moves to the need for “election integrity” reform.

In recent years, he says, …the protections of the Voting Rights Act have been drastically weakened…[since certain court decisions] there has been a dramatic increase in legislative enactments that make it harder for millions of eligible voters to vote and elect representatives of their own choosing.

In true Marc Elias style, Garland cites voting rules, redistricting plans, and “abnormal post-election audits that put the integrity of the voting process at risk.”

I beg to differ; audits preserve the integrity of the voting process at a time when over half the country has doubts.

Some have even suggested permitting state legislatures to set aside the choice of the voters themselves, Garland says. …Many of those enactments have been justified by unfounded claims of material vote fraud in the 2020 election. Those claims, which have corroded people’s faith in the legitimacy of our elections, have been repeatedly refuted by the law enforcement and intelligence agencies of both the last administration and this one, as well as by every court, federal and state, that has considered them.

True, the courts refused to examine the evidence. But that has corroded people’s faith in elections. And the evidence continues to grow.

The “Voter Fraud Legalization Bill”

Garland then moves to election “reform” legislation: “It is essential that Congress act to give the Department the powers we need to ensure that every eligible voter can cast a vote that counts.”

So, what’s in this bill, the one we like to call the “Voter Fraud Legalization Bill”? In a must-see segment with Tucker Carlson, Victor Davis Hanson explains very simply what it does and why it’s blatantly unconstitutional.

Legal analyst Andrew McCarthy, speaking with Martha McCallum after Garland’s speech, noticed how coordinated it seemed to be with the administration’s legislative agenda: “…the Justice Department is very much in sync with the administration and the congressional Democrats, who seem to be turning the page…on to voting rights…And they are going to try to inject January 6 into every item of their agenda.” He doubts they’ll be successful with this; maybe the strategy is just too obvious.

Former acting AG Matt Whitaker said, “This speech was below the office of attorney general. I was not impressed with his update. I think it’s inconsistent with the Department of Justice’s position of not speaking about evidence and not speaking about cases and letting the filings and the trials speak for themselves.” Whitaker also made this important point: “I would have liked to have him also have named the 59 other officers that nationwide have given their lives in the line of duty.”

But our current AG isn’t thinking about those officers. I would imagine, though, that Garland — as the partisan ideologue he so clearly has shown himself to be — truly believes it when he says he and the Department are committed to “equal justice.” It’s just that with the pretzel logic they use, they don’t know what equal justice is. Thankfully, this is becoming obvious to more and more Americans who are treated as second-class citizens when it comes to their own civil rights. Garland is in such a leftist bubble, he would never understand why over half the people watching his speech were, if not throwing things at the screen, at least looking around for something to throw.

 

Mike Huckabee is the former governor of Arkansas and longtime conservative commentator on issues in culture and current events. A New York Times best-selling author, he hosts the weekly talk show Huckabee on TBN. 

Originally published at MikeHuckabee.com. Reprinted with permission.