Categories
1995 oklahoma city bombing Intelwars Merrick Garland President biden's attorney general nominee merrick garland

Glenn Beck: THIS is why Biden nominated Merrick Garland as attorney general

Many will remember President Biden’s attorney general nominee Merrick Garland as the man Republicans refused to hold a Supreme Court confirmation hearing for back in 2016. So, was Garland’s AG nomination just meant to be a slap in the face to Republicans? Glenn Beck thinks there’s a lot more to it.

Given how focused Democrats are on rooting out vaguely defined “right-wing extremism,” Garland’s work in supervising the prosecution of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing suspects gives us a hint, Glenn suggested on radio this week. He said he’s “all for” stopping dangerous extremists, but couldn’t help noticing how Garland isn’t talking about any of the destruction that happened over the summer.

“I am all for justice. I am all for making sure we catch the bad guys, as long as the bad guys are not defined to be on only one side,” Glenn said. “Merrick Garland said [Monday] that there was no comparison between what happened on January 6th and what happened over the summer. That is because the Washington elites see themselves as better than somebody who owns a taco stand. I don’t. The Constitution doesn’t. They are the same crime.”

Watch the video clip below to hear more from Glenn:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Share
Categories
gun control guns Intelwars Joe Biden Merrick Garland mike lee Second Amendment

Merrick Garland admits his DOJ would ‘advance’ Joe Biden’s gun control agenda: ‘Entitled to pursue’

Merrick Garland, the nominee for attorney general, admitted Monday that the Department of Justice would most likely enforce President Joe Biden’s gun control agenda.

What did Garland say?

Garland revealed his philosophy toward the Second Amendment during questioning from Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R).

Lee asked, “Do you support banning of certain types of firearms?”

“Well, as I’m sure you know, the president is a strong supporter of gun control and has been an advocate all his professional life on this question,” Garland responded.

“The role of the Justice Department is to advance the policy program of the administration as long as it is consistent with the law,” he continued. “Where there is room under the law for the president’s policies to be pursued, then I think the president is entitled to pursue them.”

Garland, however, conceded the Supreme Court has given “a little indication” about the extent of the Second Amendment, a reference to
D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, two landmark Supreme Court cases affirming the fundamental nature of Second Amendment rights.

Garland later said his view is “totally controlled” by those Supreme Court precedents.


Senate holds Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearing

youtu.be

What about Biden’s gun goals?

Biden has made gun control a central concern of his political agenda, both throughout his presidential campaign and since taking office last month.

Biden’s aggressive gun control agenda includes, among other promises:

  • Banning the manufacture and sale of “assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,” which Biden calls “weapons of war”
  • Restricting Americans to one firearm purchase per month
  • Ending online firearm and ammunition sale
  • Putting “America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns”
  • Requiring “gun owners to safely store their weapons”

While the constitutionality of assault weapons bans have yet to be determined by the Supreme Court — the high court rejected hearing 10 gun-related cases last year, which included cases involving assault weapons bans — the court has already ruled on at-home safety restrictions.

While many states require gun owners to keep firearms out of access for minors, there is no federal law mandating the safe storage of firearms.

However, the Supreme Court ruled in D.C. v. Heller that a portion of D.C.’s firearm regulations that required all firearms in a home be “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock” was unconstitutional.

Still, the Supreme Court has affirmed that some restrictions on the Second Amendment are not unreasonable, and therefore permissible. Where the proverbial line in the sand exists, though, has not been made clear, and will likely be established in due time.

Anything else?

The White House confirmed last week that Biden may use executive action to enact his gun control agenda.

Biden earlier used the third anniversary of the Parkland, Florida, tragedy to push for gun control.

“Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets,” Biden said on Feb. 14.

Share
Categories
confirmation hearing Intelwars Merrick Garland Trans athletes Transgender sports Who is merrick garland

AG nominee Merrick Garland sidesteps question on letting trans women compete in women’s sports: ‘Difficult question’

Merrick Garland, President Joe Biden’s attorney general nominee, refused to commit to an answer during Monday’s confirmation hearing whether biologically born males should be permitted to compete in women’s sports as transgender women.

On his first day in office, Biden signed an executive order calling on schools to permit trans female athletes to compete on girls’ sports teams.

What are the details?

During Monday’s hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Garland said that the question — which he did not answer — was a “very difficult societal question.”

In remarks, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said, “In my last 20 seconds, I’m going to ask you, if you agree with this statement, allowing, and I’m not suggesting the answer one way or the other, I just want to know what you believe, allowing biological males to compete in an all-female sport, deprives women of the opportunity to participate fully and fairly in sports, and is fundamentally unfair to female athletes.”

Garland responded, “This is a very difficult societal question that you’re asking me here. I know what underlies it.”

Undeterred, Kennedy responded, “I know, but you’re going to be attorney general.”

Garland explained that he might well be attorney general, but he’s not the one “who has to make policy decisions like that.”

“But it’s not that I’m adverse to it,” he countered. “Look, I think every human being should be treated with dignity and respect.”

Placing his hand over his heart, Garland added, “And that’s an overriding sense of my own character, but an overriding sense of what the law requires. This particular question of how Title IX applies in schools is one and in light of the Bostock case, which I know you’re very familiar with, is something that I would have to look at when I have a chance to do that. I’ve not had the chance to consider these kinds of issues in my career so far, but I agree that this is a difficult question.”

From Outsports:

The Bostock case Garland referred to was last summer’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that provided guarantees to the LGBTQ community that we cannot be discriminated against in matters of employment. Legal scholars have debated whether that right could be applied beyond employment, but writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch — who filled the seat that President Barack Obama had nominated Garland to fill — seems to have answered that question: “Whether other policies and practices might or might not qualify as unlawful discrimination or find justifications under other provisions of Title VII are questions for future cases, not these.”

Share
Categories
Andrew Cuomo Attorney General Doug jones Intelwars Joe Biden Merrick Garland Sally Yates

Report: Joe Biden considering Gov. Andrew Cuomo for attorney general

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, oversaw the infamous coronavirus nursing home scandal in the Empire State, resulting from an executive order he issued during the height of the pandemic. The directive resulted in thousands of nursing home patients dying because such facilities were prohibited from turning away COVID-positive people. Cuomo has not taken responsibility for the scandal, instead choosing to blame Republicans for an order that had his name on it.

Now Joe Biden, the media-declared president-elect, is reportedly considering Cuomo for a top government post in his administration.

What are the details?

According to the Associated Press, Cuomo is one of a handful of officials being considered for attorney general, one of the most senior Cabinet positions.

More from the AP:

It was also not immediately clear how seriously Cuomo was being considered or how any nomination of him would be greeted by either Republicans, given Cuomo’s antagonistic relationship with President Donald Trump, or by civil rights activists who have encouraged Biden to build a diverse cabinet.

Cuomo has been asked in recent weeks about his interest in the attorney general spot. Just this week, he said in a public radio interview in New York, “I have no intention to run for president or vice president, or go to the administration.” But he said the attorney general job “is really critical, especially now.”

The New York Times later confirmed that Cuomo is on the shortlist.

However, as the Times noted, Cuomo said last month, just days after the election, that he was not interested in working for Biden’s administration, expressing his desire to “finish the job” as governor.

“I said to New Yorkers when COVID first started my only agenda is New York. I’m not running for president, not running for vice president, not going to Washington,” Cuomo told local media. “This is going to be a long road for New Yorkers. I want them to have total trust in what I’m saying. I have no agenda but being New York governor and I’m going to stay here and finish the job.”

Who else is being considered?

According to the AP, there are three other top contenders for the job: former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, federal appeals court judge Merrick Garland, and Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.), who lost re-election to the Senate last month.

Share
Categories
2020 Election Intelwars Merrick Garland Ruth Bader Ginsburg SCOTUS Supreme Court

Democrats threaten to expand — and pack — the Supreme Court if the GOP dares fill a high court vacancy this year

Democrats are warning the Republican Senate majority that if President Donald Trump gets a chance to nominate a third Supreme Court justice this year, the GOP-led upper chamber had better not confirm whomever the president sends over.

According to NBC News, Democrats are threatening to expand and pack the high court once they regain power should Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) opt to confirm a Trump SCOTUS pick.

What’s going on?

Democrats remain in a tizzy over the Republican-controlled Senate’s refusal in 2016 to consider President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to fill the seat of the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

At the time, McConnell and his fellow Senate Republicans were invoking the so-called “Biden rule” — a position advocated in 1992 by then-Sen. Joe Biden when he justified delaying President George H.W. Bush’s Supreme Court nomination should the need arise.

Since then, the majority leader has been attacked by Democrats for saying he would fill any Supreme Court vacancy that occurred during the final year of President Trump’s first term.

The left has blasted McConnell as a hypocrite, but he and GOP leadership have countered that there’s a major difference between 2016 and 2020: When President Obama nominated Garland, his party was in the minority in the Senate; but President Trump’s party currently controls the Senate.

And now rumors swirling that President Trump could get a chance make a Supreme Court nomination in 2020 — from speculation about the possible retirement of either Justice Clarence Thomas or Justice Samuel Alito to concerns over the health of the court’s oldest member, Ruth Bader Ginsbur. Democrats are particularly concerned about a possible Republican-tapped replacement for Ginsburg, the court’s most reliably liberal voice, who has had a string of health issues over the last few years, the most recent being that she is undergoing treatment for the recurrence of liver cancer.

With all that’s at stake with the Supreme Court, Democrats are warning Republicans that filling a vacancy in this election year would embolden them to expand the size of the court once the party controls the Senate and the White House.

The prospect of an all-Democrat government is a real possibility this year, based on polling. Democrats, who currently have zero concern over losing control of the U.S. House of Representatives, are feeling fairly optimistic. According to Real Clear Politics’ polling averages for the Senate in 2020, the GOP has a one-seat lead (47-46) should the election be held today, but seven Senate seats are currently ranked as “toss ups” — six of them are currently held by Republicans. And President Trump is having his own struggles: According to the RCP polling averages, Trump trails presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden by 7.4 percentage points nationwide.

Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, told NBC, “We knew basically they were lying in 2016, when they said, ‘Oh, we can’t do this because it’s an election year.’ We knew they didn’t want to do it because it was President Obama.”

Kaine, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 running mate, told NBC that the GOP should not be surprised if his party opts to expand the Supreme Court and fill it with left-wing justices.

“If they show that they’re unwilling to respect precedent, rules and history, then they can’t feign surprise when others talk about using a statutory option that we have that’s fully constitutional in our availability,” Kaine warned. “I don’t want to do that. But if they act in such a way, they may push it to an inevitability. So they need to be careful about that.”

Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono (Hawaii), an outspoken liberal progressive member of the Senate Judiciary Committee who famously lamented the presumption of innocence and due process as she attacked Justice Brett Kavenaugh during his confirmation hearings, said she has been “talking with people who have different ideas about what we can do — including adding to the court, including having certain circuit court judges cycle in and other ideas” like term limits,” adding, “I’m open to those kinds of suggestions,” NBC reported.

The Democratic Party, NBC said, is planning to add language to the 2020 platform calling for structural reforms to the high court “to increase transparency and accountability” and accusing the GOP of having “packed our federal courts with unqualified, partisan judges who consistently rule for corporations, the wealthy, and Republican interests.”

Last year, Hirono and a few fellow Senate Democrats issued a brief to the Supreme Court that it needed to “heal itself” as part of a warning to the court about a then-impending Second Amendment case. They threatened the court with retaliation should it not bend to their will.

“The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it,” the brief said. “Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.’ Particularly on the urgent issue of gun control, a nation desperately needs it to heal.”

Share