Did Merrick Garland Commit Perjury?

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  vic-eldred  •  2 weeks ago  •  29 comments

By:   By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY

Did Merrick Garland Commit Perjury?
Congressman Jordan surmises that this new “threat tag,” in whose creation Langan, the top FBI counterterrorism official, collaborated, constitutes “specific evidence that federal law enforcement has operationalized counterterrorism tools at the behest of a left-wing special interest group against concerned parents.” Presumably, by “left-wing special interest group,” Jordan means the National School Boards Association, some of whose members colluded with the Biden White House on the now...

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



A ttorney General Merrick Garland  has been shamefully disingenuous , with the public and Congress, regarding his mobilization of the FBI — under the guise of a  nonexistent spate of violent attacks  on public-school administrators — to  harass and intimidate parents  who are protesting against progressive indoctrination of their children.  Garland’s October 4 memo  on this subject was obviously the result of a Biden administration political gambit, in which the  White House recruited progressive operatives of a school-board association  to collaborate on a letter to the president, almost immediately after which Garland issued the memo that directed the FBI and  U.S. attorneys’ offices  to conduct investigations the federal government has no business conducting.

But did Garland go beyond the usual bobbing and weaving when confronted by Congress on the Biden administration’s threats? Did he commit perjury when he insisted that the government has not and would not employ anti-terrorism investigative measures against America’s parents?

Well, it depends on the meaning of “threat tag.”


In a letter to the attorney general  on Tuesday, Congressman Jim Jordan (R., Ohio), the Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, recounts Garland’s congressional testimony to the effect that the Justice Department and the FBI were not — as Jordan put it — “using counterterrorism statutes and resources to target concerned parents at school board meetings.” Jordan then quotes Garland’s assertion that he could not “imagine any circumstance in which the Patriot Act would be used in the circumstances of parents complaining about their children, nor . . . a circumstance where they would be labeled domestic terrorists.”
By alluding to the Patriot Act here, the attorney general was referring to  a set of investigative techniques  that the FBI and Justice Department attorneys are permitted to use in counterterrorism investigations. Initially enacted 20 years ago, right after the 9/11 attacks, the Patriot Act empowers the FBI’s national-security agents to use many of the same tools that have long been available to the bureau’s criminal investigators — on analogous terms, which reflect that the principal task of the FBI’s  National Security Branch  (which used to be referred to as its Foreign Counterintelligence Division) is to safeguard the nation from the plots and machinations of terrorists and hostile foreign agents, not to investigate and prosecute criminal offenses.
So to be clear, Garland’s reference to the Patriot Act is shorthand for  investigative measures  — e.g., the secret collection of business and financial records, pen registers and “trap and trace” orders to monitor phone-calling activity (often the lead-up to an eavesdropping warrant), sharing of intelligence information between national-security and criminal investigators, some tweaks to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and monitoring of suspected “lone wolf” terrorists.

With that as background, Jordan’s letter reports that committee Republicans have received information from a “ whistleblower” from within the Justice Department . This person provided them with an October 20 email sent “on behalf of” the heads of the FBI’s Counterterrorism and Criminal Divisions — since identified in  Wall Street Journal  reporting  as Timothy Langan and Calvin Shivers (the latter has since retired). Purporting to act pursuant to Garland’s October 4 memo, these top officials instructed FBI personnel that the bureau would henceforth use a new “threat tag” created by the two divisions.
The “threat tag” is to be applied to all “investigations and assessments of threats specifically directed against school board administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.” Its purpose is to “scope this threat on a national level and provide an opportunity for comprehensive analysis of the threat picture for effective engagement with law enforcement partners at all levels.”

Congressman Jordan surmises that this new “threat tag,” in whose creation Langan, the top FBI counterterrorism official, collaborated, constitutes “specific evidence that federal law enforcement has operationalized counterterrorism tools at the behest of a left-wing special interest group against concerned parents.” Presumably, by “left-wing special interest group,” Jordan means the National School Boards Association, some of whose members colluded with the Biden White House on the now infamous NSBA letter that triggered Garland’s memo — and that, as Jordan elaborates,  the NSBA board has disavowed  (and evidently scrubbed from its website).

Jordan is right to be disturbed, but he is reading too much into the term  threat tag . A threat tag is not a set of investigative techniques, nor does it necessarily imply the use thereof.

In FBI jargon, a  tag  is simply a  category  created so that investigations with a common subject-matter — here,  threats  to school officials — can be grouped together. This enables supervisors and analysts to develop patterns of offender behavior that may be helpful to agents assigned to individual cases — telling them what to look for. The fact that the National Security Branch (at the counterterrorism level) worked with the Criminal Division to establish the category so that all FBI agents could organize a set of investigations (just as they have categories for organized crime, political corruption, narcotics trafficking, and so on) does not mean that the FBI is exploiting Patriot Act investigative measures in cases in the “school threat” category.


The problem here is not that the FBI is organizing (or “tagging”) investigations categorically — that’s what bureaucracies do. The problem is that the FBI is being mobilized to open such investigations in the first place.

To repeat points I’ve made before, the  federal government has no jurisdiction to prosecute threats of violence , or even  actual incidents of violence,  that do not involve violations of federal law. The claim by self-interested Education Inc. progressive activists that there is an unusual surge of violence against school administrators is false; but even if there were more incidents than usual (and there are always incidents in a country of our size), it would not mean  federal  crimes were being committed. It would be nothing state and local police could not handle.

It is thus egregious for the Justice Department to intimidate parents by overtly announcing that the FBI and federal prosecutors would be dispatched to conduct investigations. Garland’s Justice Department and the Biden White House are obviously scheming to appease their hard-left base by floating the suggestion that parents could find themselves under investigation for engaging in political dissent — i.e., by implying that parental threats to take  legitimate action against school boards  would be interpreted by the feds as  violent  threats.

In this context, moreover, it was outrageous for the attorney general to invoke and involve the components of the FBI that investigate terrorism. We must observe, though, that Garland’s doing so was entirely consistent with the pattern of Democratic administrations to  use legal processes punitively against their political opposition . It is also in harmony with partisan theme music ( often warbled by our attorney general ) about the grave “ domestic terrorism” threat from white supremacists  — the Democrats’ rote response to any objection to their radical, socially destructive, economy-busting agenda.

But this does not mean that the FBI is using Patriot Act provisions or other U.S. counterintelligence investigative tools (such as the FISA) against America’s parents. Again, it is ridiculous that Garland directed the FBI to involve itself in a category of non-federal investigations in the absence of both cause (other than advancing a partisan political narrative) and jurisdiction. But  the FBI maintains  that the term  threat tag  simply means they are grouping any investigations they open under this heading.

The bureau is adamant that it is not actually investigating parents or using counterterrorism techniques against them. The whistleblower apparently does not say otherwise. Sadly, in recent years the FBI has forfeited the “take it to the bank” credibility it once had; but at least so far, there is no evidence that it is treating parents as if they were al-Qaeda.

I will end by repeating what I thought was the defining tactic of the Obama–Biden administration because it has become the MO of the Biden administration:  threats to take unconstitutional actions  and  exploitation of investigative processes .

When the president and his minions warn that they are about to do something they are not allowed to do — essentially saying, “We dare you to stop us,” because they calculate that Congress has no such will and courts have no such means — it changes the facts on the ground. It paralyzes people in the exercise of their rights — which are  rights  rather than  aspirations  because they are supposed to be immune from government abuse. Presidential administrations don’t actually have to follow through on their threats most of the time. They know you have to assume they’re serious, and, if called on their machinations, they still want to be able to say, in high dudgeon, “How could you accuse us of such a thing?”

This is how progressive government suffocates a vibrant society.


R.f290824e9fe3246ea0311e81fed0d521?rik=2QI4EsfrmJAvbA&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

ANDREW C. MCCARTHY  is a senior fellow at National Review Institute, an NR contributing editor, and author of  BALL OF COLLUSION: THE PLOT TO RIG AN ELECTION AND DESTROY A PRESIDENCY .











Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, Representative Jim Jordan (R., Ohio), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote that the whistleblower email “provides specific evidence” that federal law enforcement employed counterterrorism tools “against concerned parents."

I think McCarthy's point is well taken. All that was needed was the threat of FBI surveillance to intimidate parents. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 weeks ago

Vic, you couldn't support the BS in this seed 3 days ago and you can't support it now. 

BTW, Gym Jordon is an idiot. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
1.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @1.1    2 weeks ago

BTW, a lot of people in Ohio and the rest of the country disagree with that assessment of Jordan 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.1    2 weeks ago

Jordon's electoral vote is only 2% of the population of Ohio so we obviously have a differing definition of 'a lot of people'.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
1.1.3  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @1.1.2    2 weeks ago

Lol so are you in his district?   Yes?   No?   Doesn't matter.   Last election he got 67% of his districts vote.   Over double his Democrat opponent.  I think he is safe in his district no matter what people outside his district think.   All that matters is that he represents the constituency that elected him.   Not the bat-shit crazy fringe mob out there on the left and east coast ..... constantly hammering away at him .....

That said, Ohio currently has 16 congressional districts but according to the 2020 Census they are losing one.   Most of that population is leaving liberal districts.   Four of those16 district elected democrats, three of those four have lost the most population in Ohio.   And by a lot.

People are bailing on the liberal shit-holes in Ohio just like everywhere else in the country

Smart people ......

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.4  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.3    2 weeks ago
Lol so are you in his district?   Yes?   No?   Doesn't matter.  

Wow, you came to the same conclusion about your question as I did. 

I'd add that it's a strawman. 

All that matters is that he represents the constituency that elected him.   

Yet YOU are the on that set the predicate of the STATE of Ohio, weren't you Sparty.

I merely did the math. 

Speaking of math, per the 2020 census, liberal Columbus, OH has the LARGEST population increase of any city in the Midwest.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
1.1.5  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @1.1.4    2 weeks ago
I'd add that it's a strawman. 

Guess you shouldn't have brought the topic up then .......

Yet YOU are the on that set the predicate of the STATE of Ohio, weren't you Sparty.

Nah Dulay, his district lost less population than those three liberal shit-holes .... a lot less.

I merely did the math.

Do "the math" all you want.   Math, improperly applied, is useless so in this case.   The math in question is completely useless.

Speaking of math, per the 2020 census, liberal Columbus, OH has the LARGEST population increase of any city in the Midwest.

Makes sense, since Columbus's homicide rate is the highest it's been in decades and still going higher.   Helping to insure their slide into total shit-holedom

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.5    2 weeks ago
Guess you shouldn't have brought the topic up then .......

I didn't say fucking thing about living in his district Sparty. 

FAIL.

Nah Dulay, his district lost less population than those three liberal shit-holes .... a lot less.

What 'three liberal shit-holes' are you talking about and WTF does it have to do with the FACT that Jordon only represents 2% of Ohio's population, which doesn't qualify as 'many' of over 11 MILLION. 

Do "the math" all you want.   Math, improperly applied, is useless so in this case.   The math in question is completely useless.

So YOU want to argue population while insisting that the 2% of that population that Jordon represents is irrelevant. Ridiculous. 

Makes sense, since Columbus's homicide rate is the highest it's been in decades and still going higher.   Helping to insure their slide into total shit-holedom

Wow, talk about pretzel logic. jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
1.1.7  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @1.1.6    2 weeks ago
I didn't say fucking thing about living in his district Sparty. 

I didn't say you did, so looks like you are:

FAIL.

Losing once again ....

What 'three liberal shit-holes' are you talking about and WTF does it have to do with the FACT that Jordon only represents 2% of Ohio's population, which doesn't qualify as 'many' of over 11 MILLION.

Do you own homework if you want to prove it wrong but don't waste your time.   It's 100% true.   One rudimentary google search fleshed that much out.   Personally most of urban Ohio is shit-hole territory IMO but especially Columbus.

So YOU want to argue population while insisting that the 2% of that population that Jordon represents is irrelevant. Ridiculous.

Never said that, those are your words not mine.   Mine are clear, concise and not full of partisan hatred.

 

Wow, talk about pretzel logic.

Only to the addled mind Dulay, only to a very addled mind.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.8  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.7    2 weeks ago

You don't seem to understand what a strawman is. 

Do you own homework if you want to prove it wrong but don't waste your time.  

I'm not trying to prove anything wrong Sparty. 

YOU cited 3 'liberal shit-holes'. I asked you hat 'three liberal shit-holes' are you talking about. You seem incapable of answering a simple question. YOU are wasting MY time.

Personally most of urban Ohio is shit-hole territory IMO but especially Columbus.

Your personal opinion is irrelevant. 

YOU claimed that 'people are bailing on the liberal shit-holes in Ohio' yet the FACTS show that isn't true for Columbus, OH or most of urban Ohio for that matter. 

BTFW, the largest population loss for a district in Ohio is a RURAL district represented by Republican, Bill Johnson.

Oh and Jordon's district it in the top 5 in population loses. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
1.1.9  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @1.1.8    2 weeks ago

The only opinion here that is irrelevant here is yours.

You seem to be operating under the impression that i care what you think.

I do not, not in the least

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.10  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.9    2 weeks ago
The only opinion here that is irrelevant here is yours.

I haven't posted an 'opinion' Sparty, I posted FACTS. 

You seem to be operating under the impression that i care what you think.

Your comments illustrate that you don't care about FACTS either. 

I do not, not in the least

Then don't ask me any questions Sparty. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
1.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @1.1.10    2 weeks ago
I haven't posted an 'opinion' Sparty, I posted FACTS.

Except the really cogent fact in this case.   The fact that your question was already answered

Your comments illustrate that you don't care about FACTS either.

They do no such thing

 

Then don't ask me any questions Sparty.

I do what i please.   You've got no say in that.

None.

 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.12  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.11    2 weeks ago
Except the really cogent fact in this case.   The fact that your question was already answered

Since I haven't asked you a question, your 'cogent fact' isn't cogent OR a fact. 

Your comments illustrate that you don't care about FACTS either.
They do no such thing

Again, I invite 'our readers' to come to their own conclusion. 

I do what i please.   You've got no say in that. None.

Yes you do what YOU please and I will continue to call you out for it. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
1.1.13  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @1.1.12    2 weeks ago

Right back at ya Dulay, right back at ya on all accounts

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.13    2 weeks ago

Oh the 'I'm rubber, you're glue' equivocation. How mature. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.2  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 weeks ago

I'm still waiting for you to provide some evidence that parents are being targeted Vic. Your article only contains innuendo and unfounded assumptions. 

Please proceed. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @1.2    2 weeks ago

Do you understand what McCarthy is saying? 

Do you understand the comment in post # 1?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.2.2  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    2 weeks ago
Do you understand what McCarthy is saying? 

Yes. It's bullshit. 

Do you understand the comment in post # 1?

Yes and I also understand that you STILL can't support the posit of either of your seeds Vic. 

Show me some evidence that parents are being targeted Vic. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
2  Sparty On    2 weeks ago

Thank God this partisan didn’t get on the SCOTUS.    

It’s actually pretty scary how close he got.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @2    2 weeks ago
Thank God this partisan didn’t get on the SCOTUS.  

Thank God for that, on the other hand if the DOJ once again gets involved in something it shouldn't, they have a rabid white hating racist running the Civil Rights Division.

Many independents who drank the media Kool-aid are now drowing in remorse for their disgusting vote!

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    2 weeks ago

Delusional. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2.1.1    2 weeks ago
Delusional. 

Read it and weep:

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    2 weeks ago

Spot on.

The dude is a joke of an AG.

Fits right in with this Administration.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

I'm sure you get it.  I don't want to tell the others yet.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.5  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
Read it and weep:

So you think that 14% = MANY.

We obviously aren't working from the same dictionary Vic. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3  seeder  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

"Even as the Department of Justice Inspector General released a report this week criticizing the politicization of the department, the FBI on Tuesday raided the homes of a Republican election official and several of her associates in Mesa County, Colo., in connection with a dispute about efforts to preserve 2020 election files."




They don't care how it looks because they have the media on their side.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @3    2 weeks ago
Republican election official and several of her associates in Mesa County, Colo., in connection with a dispute about efforts to preserve 2020 election files."

That 'dispute' includes the 'Republican election official' allowing unauthorized people illegal access to election machines and data. ALL of the voting machines for Mesa Co. had to be replaced at taxpayer expense. 

The NEXT paragraph from YOUR link:

In collaboration with state and county law enforcement, the FBI raided the homes of Mesa County Clerk and Recorder Tina Peters, Colorado Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert's former campaign manager Sherronna Bishop, and two others.

Ya, it looks like ever YOUR media choice is 'on their side'. jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4  Jeremy Retired in NC    2 weeks ago
When the president and his minions warn that they are about to do something they are not allowed to do — essentially saying, “We dare you to stop us,” because they calculate that Congress has no such will and courts have no such means — it changes the facts on the ground. It paralyzes people in the exercise of their rights — which are  rights  rather than  aspirations  because they are supposed to be immune from government abuse.

And on the occasion people do stand up for those rights, they are targeted as "domestic terrorists" for simply not giving in.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online




34 visitors