The Republicans are back at their dirty tricks and Merrick Garland let them have all the ammunition they wanted. Jim “who needs to pass a bill just because I’m a lawmaker” Jordan and the rest of the Republican lackeys on the Hill plan to hold hearings featuring their new favorite Trump fluffer Robert Hur.
Apparently this could have been avoided, because Biden’s lawyers forcefully protested the travesty that is the Hur report, according to the Washington Post.
President Biden’s top attorneys exchanged confrontational letters with top Justice Department officials before and after last week’s explosive report from special counsel Robert K. Hur, contending that Hur’s comments “openly, obviously, and blatantly violate Department policy and practice.”
Garland did not directly respond to these letters. Instead, he charged Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer with defending the report.
“The identified language is neither gratuitous nor unduly prejudicial because it is not offered to criticize or demean the President,” Weinsheimer wrote to Biden’s legal team. “Rather, it is offered to explain Special Counsel Hur’s conclusions about the President’s state of mind in possessing and retaining classified information.”
Well, that aged like milk, didn’t it Brad? But what is the real reason Garland let the report language stand?
Under the department’s regulations, Garland would have had to notify Congress if he made changes to the report.
That’s right—Merrick Garland would have had to go to Congress to change the report, and that would have been a whole thing. Seems to me Biden’s attorneys had it right when they wrote directly to Garland, comparing it to Comey’s statement on not charging Hillary Clinton:
“Mr. Hur’s criticism of President Biden mirrors one of the most widely recognized examples in recent history of inappropriate prosecutor criticism of uncharged conduct,” Biden’s lawyers wrote. “The FBI and DOJ personnel’s criticism of uncharged conduct during investigations in connection with the 2016 election was found to violate ‘long-standing Department practice and protocol.’”
The buck stops with Garland on this, but spare some ire for Garland’s career lackey Brad. He truly deserves it:
Weinsheimer called the comparison between Hur and Comey “inapt” in part because they held different government positions with different powers. “Special Counsel Hur’s report is readily distinguishable from Director Comey’s press conference,” he asserted.
The only comfort in this situation is that the Republicans currently running the Judiciary Committee lack the skills needed to fully seize this opportunity Garland’s DOJ has handed them on a silver platter.