It could be worse: he could be on the Supreme Court. But as attorney general, Merrick Garland can do as much damage or more to our fragile and besieged republic than he could if Barack Obama had succeeded in placing him on the high court. A revealing piece in Yahoo News by “journalist” Alexander Nazaryan Wednesday revealed not only Garland’s frankly troubling agenda, but also how the establishment media runs interference and sells that program to a largely unsuspecting American public.
Garland, according to Nazaryan, “told Congress on Wednesday that violence incited by white supremacists poses ‘the most dangerous threat to our democracy.’ That assertion reflects near-universal consensus among national security experts, including those who worked for the Trump administration.”
Yeah, just like those seventeen intelligence agencies that had come to a consensus that Russia had hacked the 2016 presidential election. In both cases, they had a consensus, they just didn’t have any evidence.
But asking for evidence is likely white supremacist now as well. Nazaryan notes that “Garland’s warning came during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, which was conducted by supporters of then-President Donald Trump and incited by white supremacist groups like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys. Five people died as a result of the attack.”
This is false and severely misleading in numerous ways: neither the Oath Keepers nor the Proud Boys are white supremacist groups, and while Nazaryan tries to create the impression that the “white supremacist Trump supporters” killed five people, that’s not what happened.
But Merrick Garland apparently thinks evidence is for the proles. He intoned sententiously: “In my career as a judge and in law enforcement, I have not seen a more dangerous threat to democracy than the invasion of the Capitol.” He said that the Capitol incident was an “attempt to interfere with a fundamental element of our democracy, the peaceful transfer of power.” Consequently, “there has to be a hierarchy of things that we prioritize. This would be the one we’d prioritize.”
Nazaryan then tells us that Garland is an old hand at hunting down and neutralizing those evil white supremacists: “In 1995, Garland investigated the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City by white supremacists, an attack that killed 168 people, including 19 children. The bombing came at a time when militants were galvanized by violent encounters with federal authorities in Waco, Texas, and Ruby Ridge, Idaho.”
That was 26 years ago, but apparently Garland hasn’t managed to completely eradicate the white supremacist threat, which now dwarfs the jihad terror threat in magnitude: “The threat of domestic terrorism receded in the public imagination after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, which were carried out by Islamic fundamentalists from Saudi Arabia and other nations. But as that threat has diminished in recent years, militant white nationalism has returned as a top concern.”
And so at the hearing, Garland declared that “the horror of domestic violent extremism is still with us” in the course of his discussion of “his work on the Oklahoma City bombing and the Unabomber case.”
As far as Nazaryan, and likely Garland as well, is concerned, the white supremacist threat is still with us all these years later because of (who else?) Donald J. Trump, who “infamously told one such group, the Proud Boys, to ‘stand back and stand by’ during a presidential debate when a moderator confronted him on the topic. But instead of taking meaningful steps to address the white supremacist threat, Trump urged officials in his administration to focus on antifa, a loosely organized network of leftist radicals that is not widely considered a threat to national security.”
Nazaryan explains it all for us yahoos: “Republicans continue to insist that antifa and Black Lives Matter are as great a threat to national security as white supremacy, though research has shown that most of last summer’s Black Lives Matter-inspired protests were peaceful. While some violence and looting did occur, intense media coverage — in particular by conservative outlets like Fox News — may have provided a distorted image of those protests.”
Yeah, that’s it. It’s all right-wing media bias. That’s it. Antifa and BLM would be positively cuddly were it not for Fox News.
The realities bear restating: the January 6 Capitol riot was not an insurrection. The protesters were unarmed. There was no plan to overthrow the government, no ringleader, no actual incitement or call to violence from Trump. Nothing. And aside from that, they have to go back to Oklahoma City, Waco, and Ruby Ridge, all of which took place over two decades ago, which in itself demonstrates that they don’t have any recent incidents of “white supremacist terrorism” to invoke. The Proud Boys are not white supremacists. They aren’t terrorists, either; if they had been responsible for any actual terrorist act, you can be sure Alexander Nazaryan would have mentioned it.
Meanwhile, there has been the Boston Marathon jihad attack, and the Orlando and Fort Hood and San Bernardino jihad massacres, and numerous others that have gotten little or no media attention, and no demonstration of concern from Merrick Garland.
So this is what we get from Yahoo News: actual violence from jihadis is not mentioned. Actual violence from leftists is dismissed as minor or unimportant amid “mostly peaceful” protests. The fact that there is virtually no violence from white supremacists is glossed over with claims that groups that aren’t white supremacist actually are, and assertions that they’re terrorist, with no evidence offered at all.
This is not just Yahoo News’ scenario; it’s clearly Garland’s and the Biden administration’s as well. This is deception and deflection at the highest level of government. The agenda of Garland and his colleagues is obvious and insidious: they’re going to find those white supremacist terrorists, and they’re going to prosecute and destroy them. If they don’t find any white supremacists in sufficient numbers, they will claim that law-abiding conservatives are white supremacists, and defame and destroy them accordingly. Garland’s spurious assessment of the domestic terror threat must be seen against the backdrop of the left’s increasingly common habit of referring to virtually anyone who opposes the hard-left, socialist agenda of Biden’s handlers and the establishment media as a white supremacist. This isn’t just a smear. It’s a smear with a definite purpose, and is heading us straight to the persecution of dissidents. That would be us.