Merrick Garland, Joe Biden's wingman

When Charles Manson was tried for murder, he took the stand. The prosecutor asked him if he gave one of his "family" an order to murder someone. Manson didn't flinch in saying "I didn't have to." Implicit in his testimony was that the people in his family knew what he expected of them.

Merrick Garland doesn't need orders from Joe Biden. He knows what Biden expects of him. Biden expects Garland to be Biden's wingman like Eric Holder was Barack Obama's wingman. Further, Biden expects Garland to keep Biden's son out of prison, no easy task considering Hunter's history.

Garland isn't that talented at carrying out Biden's orders. Obviously, Biden has it in for Donald Trump. In his raid of Mar-a-Lago, as Dan Henninger notes in this column, Henninger wrote "Mr. Garland issued a brief, no-questions-allowed statement about the Mar-a-Lago intervention asserting that 'where possible' it is the Justice Department’s practice to 'narrowly scope' any search. This week the department returned to Mr. Trump three passports swept up by the FBI in an obviously unlimited raid."

Late this week, President Trump hinted that he's "considering filing a court motion which calls for the appointment of a 'special master' to review and return evidence collected during last week's FBI search of his Mar-a-Lago estate."This isn't good news for Garland's DOJ:

Trusty told Levin the filing will claim the FBI's seizure was "overbroad," violating the law's requirement that there be "narrowness" in a search.

Trusty said Trump's legal team will argue a special master is necessary to review the seizure to guard against the possibility that material covered by executive privilege or attorney-client privilege has been seized.

"We have privilege issues that are extremely important here," Trusty told Levin. "We do think that one of the benefits of the special master, if the master agrees, is we can stop DOJ in their tracks when it comes to inspecting these documents."

Here's Jim Trusty's interview with Mark Levin:

Here's the text of the 4th Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I'm being a little sarcastic with this but this is essentially what the warrant permits:
  • Where to search: Anywhere at Mar-a-Lago
  • What can be seized? Anything you see.
  • Probable Cause: Donald Trump. Isn't he always guilty of something?
Merrick Garland bit off more than he could chew. That's why he should be impeached.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio
Read more