Senate Judiciary hearings reveal more proof of the blatant bias of Biden’s DOJ

Yesterday during a hearing  before the Judiciary Committee, we saw ample evidence of the blatant dual standards and the deep politicization of the Department of Justice.

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) led the charge, challenging Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland on many fronts.

Cruz asked Garland about the inaction over the past 10 months after pro-abortion protesters threatened and harassed Supreme Court justices outside their homes following the leaked Dobbs decision.

Cruz reminded Garland of the federal law that bans “picketing or parading” near a judge’s residence.

Cruz chided Garland for his inaction when ‘rioters descended on the homes of six Supreme Court justices, night after night after night' and when far-left “groups posted online information about where the justices worship, or their home addresses, or where their kids went to school.”

“But did you bring even a single case against any of the protesters threatening the justices, under 18 USC Section 1507 … or did the Department of Justice decide this law doesn’t apply it if it is harassing justices for an opinion that we don’t like?”

Cruz rightly called it a case of political bias by Garland.

“Your failure to act to protect the safety of the justices and their families was an obvious product of political bias. You agree with Roe v. Wade. You disagree with the Dobbs decision, and the Department of Justice, under this president, was perfectly happy to refuse to enforce the law and ­allow threats of violence.”

Garland eventually conceded there had been no cases against protesters. He then hid behind the excuse that it was up to local law enforcement, not him, to decide whom to prosecute.

Cruz disagreed with that comment.

“You spent 20 years as a judge and you’re perfectly content with justices being afraid for their children’s lives. And you did nothing to prosecute it.”

Cruz contrasted that inaction with the DOJ’s prosecution of a Pennsylvania anti-abortion protester, Mark Houck, despite  Houck being acquitted by a jury earlier this year for charges under a federal law that makes it a crime to engage in certain behaviors at abortion clinics.

Cruz reminded Garland about the dawn raid on Houck’s residence where over “two dozen agents clad in body armor and ballistic helmets and shields and a battering ram showed up at his house pointing rifles at his family.”

Next, Cruz challenged Garland regarding the DOJ’s targeting of President Trump.

Cruz pressed Garland over leaks following the FBI's search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate last August. Cruz said he believed the leaks were "to set a predicate" for an eventual indictment of Trump.

Next, it was Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Montana)'s turn.

He returned to the Houck issue. Hawley reminded Garland that the dawn raid was conducted despite a “Philadelphia DA, who is a Democrat, very progressive, declined to prosecute” Houck, and the fact that a private suit against Houck was dismissed.

Hawley asked Garland about the rationale of his DOJ for deploying between 20 to 30 FBI agents in the early-morning hours to arrest Houck when Houck had offered to turn himself in voluntarily.

Garland said it was his practice to defer to FBI agents in the field to make that decision.

Hawley contrasted that claim with the raid on Mar-a-Lago.

Hawley challenged Garland about a Washington Post report that FBI agents initially resisted the idea that a court-authorized search of Mar-a-Lago should be necessary to retrieve the classified documents in President Trump's possession, but Garland overruled their concerns and approved the raid. 

We see two instances of blatant dual standards.

Conservative vs. Liberal.

A dawn FBI arrest by heavily armed agents broke into the home of an acquitted pro-life activist but no action at all against those who threatened the lives of conservative Supreme Court Justices and their families with violence.

A Republican President vs. A Democrat President.

An FBI raid on President Trump’s home was devoid of basis because Trump's attorneys were negotiating the return of the documents with the authorities. FBI agents were against the raid yet Garland seems to have effectively ordered them to do it anyway. When classified documents dating back to Biden’s days as vice president were discovered, the DOJ allowed Biden’s lawyers to take the lead and return documents based on Biden's wishes. Biden’s home was searched, but not raided.

For all of these questions Garland either meekly issued denials or declined to comment regarding the criminal investigation. These are standard ploys of concealment and falsification when under oath.

This was nothing short of a disgraceful display by Garland. He was brazen and unapologetic regarding the blatant dual standards at the DOJ.

This is undemocratic.

Only under totalitarian regimes are individuals and groups targeted for their political or religious or ideological beliefs.

A perfect instance of this style of the regime is East Germany around 1950 under the rule of German communists aided by the Soviet Union. 

In East Germany, it was customary to relentlessly and baselessly persecute dissidents or anyone who wasn't a total conformist. The regime forcibly drafted and co-opted law enforcement, the courts, and the media to conduct their reign of terror. There were surveillance operations without warrants and unannounced raids and arrests to target opponents. 

Legal egalitarianism where all citizens are equal before the law is a fundamental tenet of any functioning democracy. The law must be enforced based on the violation and not based on who committed the crime or the motive behind the crime.

The goal behind this overreach is to silence all dissenters. 

The Biden regime knows that most people neither have the time, patience, nor most importantly, the means to take on the government. So they remain silent and live their lives privately while the loudest liberals with access to the media try to convince everyone that their preposterous far-left beliefs are the consensus.

The Democrats are gnawing at the very roots upon which America was founded.

The hearing today is an important step, but it must not be conflated with action. If there are no consequences for these instances of judicial hypocrisy and overreach, these hearings become hollow theatrics devoid of any meaning.

Image: Screen shot from Senator Josh Hawley video, via YouTube

If you experience technical problems, please write to