The utter failure of Merrick Garland
Category: Op/Ed
Via: vic-eldred • last year • 48 commentsBy: Jonathan Turley, Opinion Contributor (The Hill)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Merrick Garland began his tenure as attorney general with the stated intention of restoring faith in the Justice Department and the rule of law. By that standard, Garland has been a failure.
In fact, if anything, the crisis of faith surrounding his department has only deepened on his watch, and he bears some of the blame.
Polls show that half the country distrusts the FBI. A recent poll by Harvard CAPS-Harris found that 70 percent are either very or somewhat concerned about election interference by the FBI and other intelligence agencies. An additional 71 percent agreed that changes post-2016 had not done enough to prevent further interference and that "wide-ranging" reform was still required. Another poll showed 64 percent view the FBI as "politically compromised."
During the term of his predecessor, Bill Barr, 50 percent of the public viewed the department favorably, and 70 percent had a favorable view of the FBI. The public trust of the department appears to have declined under Garland. At the very least, it has not dramatically improved.
There is variation in these polls, but they show a deep-seated distrust of the Justice Department that continues to taint all of the department's work.
For example, the recent indictment of former President Donald Trump contains extremely damaging elements, including an audiotape that directly contradicts Trump's assertions that he declassified all of the documents in his possession. Yet even the Justice Department's release of an unusually detailed indictment, with pictures designed to sway public opinion, appears to have had little effect. While 48 percent of the public believes that the charges are justified, 47 percent believe the charges are "politically motivated."
The response to this indictment shows the gravitational pull of public perceptions of the Justice Department. That perception of bias is well earned. Various officials were removed from the Department by career officials for their express bias and misconduct during the Russia-collusion investigation. That investigation was recently found by Special Counsel John Durham to have been launched with the backing of the Clinton campaign and without the minimal evidence ordinarily required by the department.
The Justice Department and the media kept the investigation going for years despite the lack of credible evidence.
When Biden gave the nod to Garland, I thought it was a brilliant move. Garland had been an affable, principled and moderate judge. Many of us criticized the Senate's refusal to give him a vote after his nomination to the Supreme Court. I now believe that he would have made a great justice for all the reasons he has proven to be a poor attorney general.
He is affable but not influential or effective in changing the department. He is the very symbol for maintaining a status quo that the public rejects.
Garland leads the department with the same judicial temperament and persona. Predecessors such as Barr came to the department as former prosecutors with a clarity of purpose and mission. That would put Barr in conflict with Trump, but he was a hands-on manager who penetrated every level of the department. While some opposed Barr's priorities, no one doubted who was in control of that department.
Garland's reputation is more like that of a supervising judge who defers to the views and decisions of his agency. The result has been disastrous for the department. Even FBI Director Christopher Wray admitted that the past scandals demanded fundamental changes in the department's operations.
Yet Garland allowed the culture to remain unchanged. He remained largely reactive to new scandals like the task force quickly assembled at the request of the teacher's union and school board officials to investigate parents challenging school boards.
Garland remained largely silent as the FBI cracked down on conservative groups across the country in the wake of the Jan. 6 riot. He said nothing as his subordinate prosecutor Michael Sherwin bragged on in a television interview how they sought to unleash "shock and awe" on those who supported the election challenge to ensure that certain "people were afraid to come back to D.C."
While most of us supported the tough punishment of rioters, the Justice Department was criticized for its draconian treatment of people charged with relatively minor offenses such as trespass and unlawful entry into the Capitol.
The controversies continue to pile up, from the seizure of the phone of a member of Congress to alleged disparate treatment in investigations of pro-life over pro-choice groups. Some of these and other controversies are legitimately debatable; others are not.
Garland could have taken steps to assure the public that there is not a two-tiered system of justice but repeatedly refused to do so. For example, Garland has continued to refuse to appoint a special counsel in the investigation of Hunter Biden. By doing so, Garland has removed the president's greatest threat in the form of a report that would detail the scope of the Biden family's alleged influence peddling and foreign contacts.
Garland is now looking at a new inflammatory situation after Special Counsel Jack Smith has leveled 37 charges against Trump while Robert Hur, "the other special counsel" investigating Biden, has largely disappeared from sight.
There is also the notable absence of any decision by Smith on another part of his mandate: crimes associated with Jan. 6th. Some of us have argued that Trump's controversial speech was constitutionally protected. While Smith was swift to charge on the documents matter, he has not resolved the other part of his mandate even though the Jan. 6th matter has widely investigated by the Justice Department and Congress. The concern is that the Justice Department does not want to undermine the widespread claims in the media and Congress that Trump committed crimes in supporting an "insurrection."
Garland has also supported the appointment of controversial officials such as Kirsten Clarke and Rachael Rollins, deepening the distrust of conservatives.
Time and again, Garland could have made decisions to seek to assure the public with more moderate and transparent decisions. He has repeatedly failed to do so.
Garland is not solely at fault. Biden took office promising to be a unifier and a moderate. He immediately adopted far left policies and fueled divisions by denouncing millions of "MAGA Republicans" and his political opponents as "semi-fascist" extremists.
Garland repeatedly pledged that political considerations would hold no sway with him as attorney general. He has certainly refrained from Biden's style of divisive rhetoric. However, he has done little prospectively to assure the public that the department is pursuing cases without political bias. He continues to repeat the mantra of "trust us, we're the government," long after that trust has been lost with many citizens.
The failure of Merrick Garland is becoming more and more evident by the day. The public continues to distrust the Department, and his assurances of fair dealing have been overwhelmingly rejected by Republicans and independents.
It is hard to dislike Merrick Garland as a man. But as an attorney general, there is little to like about his last two years.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
Tags
Who is online
511 visitors
Everybody sees it except for those on the far left.
Turley is too kind. Garland has been an an unmitigated disaster. He’s a quieter version of Eric holder, but has the same mission of being the presidents wingman.
To be perfectly honest, Jonathan Turley sucks MAGA ass. The idea that he has become anything other than a shill for the right wing fantasies about the FBI is laughable.
One of his main points is that the public has grown distrusting of the FBI. Of course, the vast majority of the untrusting are either MAGA themselves, or are people who have caved in under years of unrelenting right wing attacks on the FBI and the DOJ.
Gee i remember back when liberals were whining about the FBI interfering with an election !!
These are all headlines at the top of Jonathan Turley's web page, and there is little else. There are a few articles about the Trump indictment that take a somewhat neutral position, but almost without exception, the rest of the content is a paean to the right wing of American politics. He even gets in on bashing Ukraine so just so MAGA knows what side he is on.
so we all get you don't like Turley and are not surprised.
of course you wouldn't as he has the balls to criticize the inept Biden Admin.
The point is that Turley is not an objective law professor. He is a MAGA sympathizer who makes his living now pandering to the right.
you think that is a valid point to dismiss anything Turley says?
Alrighty then!
[Deleted]
it is all related.
had something been seeded by some left wing hack it would be accepted as gospel.
All they have is NOTHING John. But, but Hunter Biden. All these years and all these alleged witnesses and alleged audio - and what?
All these years of pee tapes, all these years of claiming collusion, all these years of everything you leftists have claimed Trump has done....and what?
Let me help you...
Absolutely nothing.
PD&D and delusion
Yes because Turdley has never provided anything of substance or any proof of crimes by the 'Biden Crime Family' lol!
All PD&D from the former 'president' and the actual trump crime family/and the leader/lifelong thug/grifter/crook
[Deleted]
So now Turley is a part of an investigative unit?
Fucking hilarious.
it is hard to debate someone when the topic changes on a whim.
I confused the Turdley ass kisser with the Durham loser - all these years and still nothing because there is nothing!
now isn't that a deflection???
Suuuuuuuuure ya did.
Why yes.....yes it is.
Links to polls and facts are "paeans to the right wing"
I guess that's an argument.
Turley knows where his bread is buttered, and it is with MAGA.
Oh, Professor Turley is no good because he stated the obvious.
That piece of shit Garland is protecting Biden, not to mention abusing our justice system.
The entire implication that the FBI is persecuting Republicans is made up nonsense, and Turley is going along with it.
I'm glad you straightened that out./ S
Maybe that is because there is nothing to report.
Maybe he is the change that people sought as Trump was firing AGs that did not lie for him. I mean, Barr did stretch the limits of credulity, but even he wouldn't play when asked to corroborate the election nonsense, the whole instigation of which was and is Trump's alone.
Wait for it.
ok we can wait like you can wait for the Biden Family investigation to run its course.
How many years has that been going on now?
Still nothing!
two and a half years waiting on Trump charges for Jan 6
FBI seems to be slow walking the Biden investigation
No, no...we can't do that.
The loon left mantra is to claim everything negative about the Bidens over the past 50 years are to be parotted that those accusations have been debunked.
Hell, I can claim that Hunter Biden has pictures on his laptop, and now ll over the internet, that show him smoking crack and leftists would claim those pictures have been debunked.
With tons and tons of evidence provided by the 'tourists' themselves.
Be patient.
In the end - the former 'president' and a lot of his criminal enterprise of an 'administration' will be behind bars for a long, long time! Except those who roll on the former 'president' for leniency in sentencing.
I am much more patient than leftist loons who think nothing happened in the Biden drama.
sure Hunter had zero experience in the energy field, as did his girlfriend but that didn't stop a Ukrainian company from raining millions on them for doing NOTHING!
Deflection.
There is nothing to investigate regarding the Bidens
then why are leftist loons so worked up?
Deflection??
Perhap reading the article would help you see that the article (not just a headline!) talks specifically about it so it is CLEARLY not a deflection.
Why did Hunter redact his financial report in Arkansas? Everything is on the up and up, right?
because he didn't want to pay child support!
Maybe that is because it is exactly what it seems to be.
Maybe he is the change that people sought.
Only if one is a Marxist or named George Soros.
Wait for it.
I don't think even Smith could contort the law that much.
It is the 'right' who are shitting their pants right now, not the 'left'.
We're enjoying the daily shit show coming from the former 'president' and the maga'ts!
doesn't really seem like you are enjoying it.
Pretty hard to enjoy a shitty pants ….
Many of our friends on the left have had shitty pants since 2016.
TDS driven, shitty pants
Clueless
true that IS what they say about folks who don't reside in reality and swear Joe has never done anything wrong.
I look at Garland and see one thing.
A dodged bullet on SCOTUS.
Importantly, Turley recognizes that the document charges are quite serious and very well supported by evidence.
Garland's inability to influence the perceptions of the DoJ in a positive way may be true, but Turley clearly has no complaint about the fact that the DoJ has issued the indictment or that the indictment is in any way bogus.
I am more concerned about the DoJ focusing on justice and less concerned about public perception (which is often naïve).
Turley is only relevant because The First Amendment allows lie speech to pervert and denigrate The First Amendment.
As far as Garland. When he has the evidence with no bs he will bring it. If the MAGA has evidence to refute his findings then have at it. And good luck with that.
Turley might be a great legal mind; but we dodged a bullet by Garland not being named to the Supreme Court. Garland is an overly partisan POS as AG; he would have been an overly partisan POS on the Supreme Court. At least as AG he can be removed in 2024 if the Republicans retake the White House. Garland should never hold a position of power again in the government. Republicans need to take every step necessary to make sure that happens.