Merrick Garland Gets Absolutely Schooled On School Boards
In an explosive hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Senators Cruz, Hawley, Cotton and Grassley absolutely tore into Attorney General Merrick Garland, including direct calls for the disgraced AG to resign. Senator Cotton even went so far as to say, "Thank God you're not on the Supreme Court" as Garland continues to standby his memo targeting concerned parents. This even after the NSBA apologized for writing the original letter to the DOJ. Charlie has the key clips you don't want to miss. Meanwhile, in another example of how Democrats want to criminalize conservatism, Biden stumps for VA gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe, and infers that moderate Republican challenger, Glenn Youngkin, is an "extremist." Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Capitol Hill Grilling00:11:10
Hey, everybody.
Merrick Garland is grilled on Capitol Hill.
We go through it, including some live testimony from Senator Cruz and Senator Hawley.
At the end of the episode, we're just going to play a couple more of the back and forth between Garland and Cruz, Garland and Hawley, Garland and Cotton, and so you guys can listen to it.
So make sure you listen all the way through to this episode.
Make sure you guys come to AmericaFest, tpusa.com/slash A-M-F-E-S-T.
We have Tucker Carlson coming, Kaylee McEniny, Ted Cruz, Jesse Waters, Candace Owens, Jim Jordan, Donald Trump Jr., Madison Cawthorne, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Jack Pasebik, Benny Johnson, Rand Paul, Sean Foyt, Sarah Palin, Michael Chandler, Steve Weatherford, Cameron Haynes, and Jimmy John Leotold from Jimmy John Sandwiches.
We also have special musical performances from Ray Lynn, DJ Silver, Lee Greenwood, Russell Dickerson, Adam Dullock, Brantley Gilbert, and some other big name performers.
Go to tpusa.com/slash a M F E S T tpusa.com slash amfest.
Check it out right now.
Get your tickets before they run out in Phoenix, Arizona, December 18, December 19th, December 2021.
We will see all of you there.
Email me directly.
I love hearing from you.
Freedom at charliekirk.com.
That's freedom at charliekirk.com.
If you want to support our show, you guys can go to charliekirk.com slash support.
I want to thank Marsha from New York.
Thank you for supporting us.
Nancy from Delaware.
Thank you for supporting us.
Kay from Colorado.
Thank you for supporting us.
Frank from Iowa.
Thank you for supporting us.
Caleb from Minnesota.
Thank you for your generous support.
You're a good friend.
CharlieKirk.com/slash support.
Janice from Washington, thank you for supporting us.
Lori Ann from Boca Raton, Florida, thank you for supporting us.
Leslie from Texas and so many others.
Please consider getting behind the work we are doing at charliekirk.com slash support.
Email us your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
That's freedom at charliekirk.com.
And for all the latest news and information, always check out charliekirk.com for those sources.
Merrick Garland gets grilled.
The Craven Attorney General has lost his legitimacy, his integrity, and he is on defense.
Buckle up.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.
Turning point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Hey, everybody.
This episode is brought to you by my friends at ExpressVPN, expressvpn.com/slash Charlie.
Secure your device, anonymize your online activity, protect your action online.
Expressvpn.com/slash Charlie.
Help our show out by also helping yourself protect yourself.
Expressvpn.com slash Charlie.
So Merrick Garland is testifying in front of Congress right now.
And not in front of the House, in front of the Senate, though, which is very important.
Let's go to Cut 64.
Senator Tom Cotton has said what we are all thinking, which is praise God and thank goodness that Merrick Garland is not on the United States Supreme Court.
Let's play Cut 64.
This is shameful.
This testimony, your directive, your performance is shameful.
That's not.
Thank God you are not on the Supreme Court.
You should resign and disgrace Judge.
You should resign and disgrace Judge.
I'm a big Tom Cotton fan.
I think he's terrific, and it's exactly right.
Merrick Garland is one of the most despicable, craven, self-righteous, arrogant, and lowlifes ever to serve as Attorney General of the United States.
And we've had some attorney generals.
Trust me.
The fact that Merrick Garland is now doubling and tripling down on the weaponization of the Department of Justice against moms and dads tells you everything you need to know.
And I am seeing here, as my friend Senator Marshall Blackburn right now is testifying, is asking questions out of Merrick Garland at the testimony.
I'm seeing Republicans start to play offense.
They realize that the rule of law has been temporarily put on life support in our country as Merrick Garland and his cartel of muscle mafia people try to put moms and dads in a headlock saying, you better not show up to school board meetings.
You better not challenge the orthodoxy.
Good old Chuck Grassley.
Now, I will say this: I rail against the establishment a lot on this show.
I rail against old bulls in the Senate that I think do absolutely nothing.
There is one man who is exempt from that: Chuck Grassley.
This guy loves his country.
He loves the Lord.
He fights for Iowa.
I'm a big Chuck Grassley fan.
And don't get on the wrong side of Chuck Grassley.
Let me tell you what.
Play Cut 61.
A vested interest in how schools educate their children.
They are not, as the Biden Justice Department apparently believes them to be, national security threats.
What is a national security threat is things like MS-13.
What is a national security threat is like our open southern borders.
What is a national security threat?
Is the federal government failing to adequately vet individuals from Afghanistan?
And what's a national security threat is the spike in violent crime.
Murders are up 30%.
That would be a good use of the federal Bureau of Investigation.
How about the child sex trafficking happening in our country?
But no, instead, they're worried that the true domestic terrorists are the ones showing up to school board meetings.
Now, this is a developing story, and I don't want to say this too preemptively.
We were planning to go to Eugene, Oregon at a certain event, and we're getting all the information put together, and I don't want to jump the gun here.
But it looks like Antifa and left-wing people were intimidating the actual hotel staff workers of where we were about to do our Turning Point USA event.
This would be the fourth hotel that would cancel us in Eugene, Oregon.
Understand how this works.
So we are doing our campus tour at Turning Point USA.
We go from Burlington, Vermont, to Waco, Texas, to Mankato to Ann Arbor, Michigan.
We're traveling the country.
We are not being deterred.
We wanted to go to Eugene, Oregon.
We're big Ducks fans in our family.
My dad, my uncle, my aunt all went to the University of Oregon.
And so after repeated cancellations, and we have a very strong chapter at the University of Oregon, we finally found a venue to do it.
And this morning, they cancel, and we're getting all the facts and everything put together.
But it looks like that the terrorists, and that's right, they're terrorists on the left.
And by the way, do you notice that Merrick Garland, there's no special committee to try to investigate them, that they were personally intimidating, harassing, and threatening the workers of the hotel.
And the hotel had to pull the plug for the well-being and the safety of the workers.
We're still confirming a lot of these details, but we do know that the venue that we were supposed to do, our campus tour stopped tonight at the University of Oregon, Eugene, canceled just like that.
And this is how it starts to go.
You're not even allowed to step foot in Eugene if you're an outspoken Christian conservative.
Not allowed to happen.
From venue after venue after venue.
So we are not taking this for an answer.
We're not taking no for an answer.
We're reaching out to churches.
We're going to go.
We're going to figure it out.
And Antifa, good luck trying to stop us.
These are degenerates.
These are lowlifes.
But now I have to hear from Merrick Garland, the Attorney General of the United States, lecture me on who the domestic terrorists are.
Meanwhile, these are the people that are going to the maids and the bellhops and the workers, the chefs at the hotel we were going to be hosting the event at, personally threatening, harassing, stalking them, following them home because Turning Point USA wanted to have a student event.
If our ideas were so bad, why do they have to try to go to such incredible means and measures to do this?
Answer, they're afraid of us.
They're so afraid of us that they try to break the back of our movement by going to personal intimidation, threats, and harassment.
The very same thing that the Federal Bureau of Investigation says that they're against.
And we're not going to back down.
That's not the way we do that.
We don't play on the terms of their engagement.
You know, some people say, well, Charlie, where are you going to go?
We'll figure it out.
We'll go to the town square and Eugene if we have to.
You're not going to let these people win.
Let's go to another cut here of Merrick Garland testifying in front of Congress as we have this developing story of where I'm going after this, because we don't really know, because we're here in Idaho, kind of in a holding pattern, obviously doing our show.
We don't know if we're going to Eugene or Salem, but we are going to, we're not going to back down.
Cut 54, Senator Dick Durbin, who is one of the least impressive people ever to serve in government.
Illinois deserves so much better.
It really does.
Says parents being violent to school boards are the same type of people we saw here on January 6th.
You hear that?
Dick Durbin trying to make the domestic terror argument.
Use the Patriot Act.
Let me ask you, Dick Durbin, the death threats we receive as conservatives, is that domestic terrorism?
Because we get them.
The threats that all of a sudden hotel workers get because they work at a holiday inn or they work at a hotel that we might host an event at?
Somehow that isn't domestic terrorism.
Play Cut 54.
These are not routine people incensed or angry.
These are people who are acting out their feelings in a violent manner over and over again.
The same people we see on airplanes and other places, same people, some of whom we saw here on January 6th.
Yeah, these are not normal people, is what Dick Durbin says.
What an unbelievable smear, lie, libel, propaganda line from a United States senator, a U.S. Senator saying, yeah, these are not normal folks.
These are moms and dads.
These are the most normal people.
I'm sorry, Dick Durbin, if not everyone can be a LGBT transgender flag-waving activist.
What is a normal person to you, Dick Durbin?
He would know a school board uprising if it hit him right on.
I would encourage Senator Dick Durbin to go show up to the District 214 and District 211 meeting.
For those of you listening on AM560, the answer in the suburbs of Chicago, go tell me if those are real voters of yours or not, Dick Durbin.
No, what's really happening here is the clampdown from the federal government of political dissidents and the allowance of legitimate domestic terrorists like Antifa that we're having to deal with now at Turning Point USA every single day.
We're not going to back down, and that's a lesson for all of you right now.
You hold the line.
You be strong and courageous.
Our students are the most courageous students in the country.
And we're not going to back down because some basement dwelling degenerates are threatening minimum wage workers at hotels.
It's not the way this works.
Good Ranchers Support00:02:08
I want you to imagine over 100,000 Americans losing their jobs.
You can stop imagining because it's a reality.
Since 2015, over 100,000 independent farms and ranches in the United States have shut down completely.
Why?
Because foreign meat is stealing their business and robbing you of the quality and flavor you deserve.
That's why Good Ranchers is here.
They exist to support local American farms and help you make great American meals.
Together, they want you to restore the American ranch and your meals to their former glory.
Get the beef, chicken, and seafood that cannot be imported or matched at goodranchers.com.
Check it out right now, everybody.
Goodranchers.com/slash Charlie.
American meat, it's terrific.
Do not buy foreign meat.
Did you know the product of USA TAG has been stolen by foreign countries that hate us?
They process their meat here and they label it like it came from America.
Because of these labeling laws that favor foreign imported meat, over 100,000 independent American farms and ranches have closed since 2015.
Good Ranchers is here to put America first at the dinner table and the farmers that worked to raise the meat that we enjoy.
So go to goodranchers.com slash Charlie right now and get 10 free bistro fillets.
And even better, subscribe to save $25 off each box of mouthwatering American meats for life that will show up on schedule right to your door.
That's right.
10 free bistro fillets, $100 value and free express shipping.
If you go to goodranchers.com/slash Charlie or use code Charlie at checkout.
That's 10 free bistro fillets, free express shipping and a $25 off your subscription for life.
Goodranchers.com slash Charlie.
Check it out, everybody.
They do a wonderful job.
Goodranchers.com/slash Charlie.
I see on television, Garland, Al-Qaeda continues to present a threat.
And then, of course, picture of Lindsey Graham just pops up.
Of course, he's asking the Attorney General about Al-Qaeda.
Can we invade Iran this afternoon?
Are you willing to say that we can get an authorization to invade the entire region?
Equating Moms to Terrorists00:03:21
No, I'm kidding.
Lindsey, he goes both ways with me as far as good and bad.
He's just kind of like, I don't know.
He's a weather vein.
I go good cop, bad cop with Lindsey Graham.
Some people go so anti-Lindsay.
And that's not what we do here.
But I'll tell you, I couldn't disagree more with Lindsey Graham's foreign policy at times.
It's just all over the place.
All right.
So, well, thank you, Merrick Garland, for admitting Al-Qaeda's still a threat.
So are you now equating moms and dads showing up to school board meetings to Al-Qaeda?
And by the way, breaking news, I think we have a venue in Oregon.
I'm not going to tell you what it is, Antifa, because you degenerates will show up and try to smash the windows there.
We've never had an issue like this before where they threaten the maids and the hotel workers when we're thinking of showing up.
And I'm not going to tell you what the university is or what the place we're going to is.
Okay.
Let's go to so many cuts here I want to get to Cut 57.
Merrick Garland does not back down from his memorandum, even though the National School Board Association has backed down Cut 57.
Presumably, you wrote the memo because of the letter.
The letter is disavowed now.
So you're going to keep your memo going anyway, right?
Is that what you're telling me?
Senator, I have the letter from NSBA that you're referring to.
It apologizes for language in the letter, but it continues its concern about the safety of school officials and school staff.
The language in the letter that they disavow is language was never included in my memo and never would have been.
And look, it's more clear than ever that Merrick Garland is just doing the bidding and is doing the work of some staffers within the Department of Justice that want to clamp down on the most exciting grassroots political movement happening in America right now.
Let's go to Cut 56, Senator Chuck Grassley asking how Biden has inserted himself in the Department of Justice.
Remember, this used to be a huge thing with Trump.
Trump is obstructing justice.
Bill Barr is his attorney general.
All this nonsense.
Play Cut 56.
President Biden has politicized and inserted himself into the Department policymaking, notably directing the end of compulsory process for reporter records and criminal leak investigations,
and most recently, inserting himself when he said the department should prosecute anyone who defies compulsory process from the January 6th committee.
So, is Joe Biden inserting himself into the Department of Justice?
Remember, we learned under Obama that Loretta Lynch and Lois Lerner and Eric Holder were always in constant collusion with the Obama White House.
That Obama used the Department of Justice as a political enforcement tool of the Democrat Party.
Law Versus Politics00:15:12
Remember the Internal Revenue Service, the IRS scandal where they targeted conservative and Christian groups, held their nonprofit status in jeopardy, audited them unnecessarily.
The weaponization of the centralization of government through this autocratic, tyrannical worldview is more present than ever under this current regime.
What is the difference between Obama and Biden?
We've talked about this before.
Is the regime moving too fast?
And why has this regime and the Biden group, why have they been so impatient?
And they're starting to get serious backlash against this.
That they realize that any sort of coalition that they put together is collapsing underneath them.
Meanwhile, I have to be lectured by this 14-year-old named John Ossif, who shouldn't be a U.S. Senator at all, never held public office prior to U.S. Senate bid.
That whole thing was because of Zuckerberg, mail-in balloting, signature verification, and bad candidates that we ran up against John Ossif.
Never should have been a U.S. Senator.
It makes me sick to my stomach that that's the case.
Did you know that if you shop at Nike, they turn around and give your hard-earned dollars to pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and the Population Council?
Did you know that Airbnb gave $500,000 to the Marxist Black Lives Matter organization?
Your first vote is at the ballot box, but that isn't enough to defend our traditional Judeo-Christian values.
Left-wing corporations are subverting our democracy by taking money from conservative customers and giving it to radical organizations that support abortion, gun control, and critical race theory.
You have another vote, a second vote at the checkout line.
And that is where massively important organizations called Second Vote come in.
The courageous people at Second Vote are exposing corporations for how they spend your money.
Check out secondvote.com today.
Second Vote is developing incredible tools and engaging the smartest minds in the country to help inform Americans' purchasing decisions.
What if I told you Chick-fil-A is not all that you might think it is?
Well, their work is arduous, complex, and exhaustive.
It doesn't happen for free.
Please support their work so we can defend our future from the woke Marxist mob.
So here's what I want you to do: go right now to secondvote.com and subscribe.
It's just $50 a year.
But if you use promo code Charlie, you get 50% off.
It's literally $2 a month, everybody.
And you get 50% off the information you need to have before you make your next purchase.
Do not buy products from people that hate you.
Don't buy products from people that are funding the downfall of America.
Join me.
Go to secondvote.com and subscribe with promo code Charlie today.
The education issue is one Democrats used to own, and we've been very involved in the education issue from Turning Point USA for quite some time.
This is how the regime will be best challenged.
You look at Merrick Garland, you look at all the people testifying, you look at the Virginia governor's race, you look what's happening.
They don't know how to handle a reignition of involvement and concern from moms and dads and parents that, by the way, otherwise they might not have actually been the biggest Trump fans in the world.
That's what's so interesting, is that the activation of the suburban woman voter against this regime is a stunning turn of events.
And it's just starting, by the way.
And Merrick Garland and Senator Ted Cruz, God bless him, cross-examining it, I think, had the line of the day where he said to Merrick Garland, if I would have, as a lawkirk for Rehnquist, put what you put in the memo as Attorney General of the United States, I would have been laughed at and I would have been thrown out of the room.
Escalation and violence.
We actually read the National School Board Association memo.
We're listed in the National School Board Association memo, turning point USA school board watch list.
And we saw very early on, we weren't the only ones, and credit to Tucker Carlson and so many other people, school board, school board, school boards, front lines for the fight for liberty.
Always peaceful, obviously, always being very respectful of the laws and the regulations.
But you better believe you're going to complain.
You're going to make some noise.
You're going to use protected, the First Amendment protected rights you have given to you by God, not by government, to speak your voice, to speak out.
In Virginia, the governor's race is super tight.
I want all of you to know next Tuesday, this coming Tuesday's election night in Virginia, we will be streaming live from the Charlie Kirk show.
I will be traveling.
I'll be in South Carolina.
We're going to have a whole setup at the Charlie Kirk show, Mission Control.
You guys can count on us for Virginia election night coverage.
Let's play Cut 53 of Yunkin's response to Biden.
So let's go actually first 52.
Biden says that extremism can come in a smile and a fleece vest going after Yunkin.
Look, Biden and this whole group, this whole coalition right now that is running the country, they don't know how to push back.
Here you got Maisie Hirono, who's probably arguing for a highway to Hawaii or something, the abolition of airplanes, or what?
Men just have to sit down and shut up.
That's Maisie Hirono.
She's now testifying.
I'm going to spare you all of that.
But for the first time in the 10 years I've been doing this, I have seen the Democrats unable to mount a counter response to a successful Republican culture war.
I want you to think about that.
Usually when we get good at one of these things, it's like they mount a counteroffensive.
The more they attack, the stronger this movement gets.
Children are the line parents will not allow to be crossed.
But Joe Biden says, well, they could be an extremist.
Cut 52.
Extremism can come in many forms.
It can come in the rage of a mob driven to assault, driven to assault the Capitol.
It can come in a smile and a fleece vest.
Either way, the big lie is still a big lie.
All they have is that one line.
That's it.
Youngkin has responded for the now battleground state of Virginia, used to be a comfortably blue state.
Education has changed that.
And we see that playing out in real time with Merrick Garland's testimony.
Play Cut 53.
Well, I just take this as the standard rhetoric from a failing campaign.
And what they're not focused on is what's really happening in Virginia.
I mean, we have parents trying to stand up for their children in school boards all over Virginia.
I mean, we saw students walking out of the classroom yesterday trying to actually just please ask school boards across Virginia to look out for their safety.
I mean, this is what this race is about.
And Terry McAuliffe can't talk about any of these things because he's on the wrong side of every issue.
Virginia, legitimate battleground state, all because of the issue of parent rights, sovereignty, choice in education.
And Merrick Garland is not backing down from this.
He says, oh, it's all because of threats of violence towards school board members.
He didn't even read the memo.
Cruz exposed that.
He believes that the greatest threat that deserves federal involvement and surveillance is parents.
And yeah, you better believe that's going to animate parents to vote against this current power structure.
And here's what is so amazing to see in real time, how imprudent this has been for them.
Let me just put this more simply and bluntly.
This has been one of the dumbest calculations I've seen by the Democrat Party in my 10 years of doing this.
They control every single chamber institution.
Now you're going to go declare war on the one constituency you guys were actually doing better with?
Be our guest.
It's backfiring and it's not going back anytime soon.
They're doubling down into oblivion.
Every once in a while, a coffee company comes along that changes the way we think about our morning routine.
Are you looking for a conservative coffee company that shares your values of freedom and liberty and not feel like you've been thrown under the bus because of your beliefs?
Minutemen Coffee is that company.
Bold, smooth, and never bitter, roasted in small batches and shipped to order.
Minutemen Coffee never fails to deliver on time and with the freshest roasts available.
Minutemen Coffee supports our first responders, our constitutional sheriffs, and our veteran and military service women and men throughout the country of various charities.
I am proud to partner with Minutemen Coffee and excited to share them with you.
Minutemen Coffee subscription plans are top-notch and easy to manage on your terms.
The coffee is so delicious, everybody.
You won't believe it.
So give them a try and use Charlie at checkout for 15% off your order.
Go to minutemencoffee.com and get your freedom-loving coffee today.
You will not be disappointed.
Josh Hawley is grilling Merrick Garland.
You cannot miss this.
Cut to that if you can.
For the District of Montana.
I have not seen a memo from the District of Montana.
Not high enough priority for you?
That's not the question.
I don't.
It is the question.
Answer my question.
Is it not a high enough priority for you when you're threatening parents with 13 different federal crimes?
These aren't crimes of violence.
You've testified today you're focused on violence.
That's not what your U.S. attorneys, they work for you.
That's not what they're saying.
You haven't seen it because it's not a high enough priority or what?
Question of priority.
No one has sent me that memo, so I haven't seen it.
What do you mean no one has sent you the memo?
You run the United States Department of Justice, do you not?
There are 115,000 employees of the Department of Justice.
Indeed, and you are in charge of every one of them.
And this was a sufficiently important case that you issued a memo.
You, over your signature, issued a memo involving the FBI and the Department of Justice in local school boards, local school districts.
Your U.S. attorneys are now threatening prosecution with 13 different crimes, but it's not a high enough priority for you.
It got lost in the mix.
I'll send again.
I've never seen that memo.
That's what concerns me, General Garland.
Well, it wasn't sent to me.
I hope you will assure your constituents that what we are concerned about here is violence and threats of violence.
That only leads me to conclude.
General Garland, all I can conclude from this is either that you're not in control of your own department or that more likely what I think to be the case is that you knew full well that this is exactly the kind of thing that would happen.
When you issued your memo, when you involved the Department of Justice and all of its resources and the FBI and all of its resources in local school boards and local school districts, you knew that federal prosecutors would start collecting crimes that they could use against parents.
You knew they would advise state and local officials that these are all the ways parents might be prosecuted.
You knew that that was the likely outcome.
And that's exactly what's happened.
And we're talking about parents like Scott Smith, who's behind me over my shoulder.
This is a father from Loudoun County, Virginia.
Here he is at a school board meeting.
He was forcibly restrained.
He was assaulted.
He was arrested.
Why?
Because he went to an elected school board meeting.
He's a voter, by the way.
He went to an elected school board meeting to raise the fact that his daughter was assaulted, sexually assaulted in a girl's restroom by a boy.
This is what happened to him.
Now, you testified last week before the House that you didn't know anything about this case.
I find that extraordinary because the letter that you put so much weight on, the letter that's now been retracted, it cites this case.
It cites Mr. Scott's case directly.
There's a news article cited in the letter.
It's discussed in the letter, but you testified you just couldn't remember it.
Maybe this will refresh your memory.
Do you think people like Scott Smith, do you think parents who show up to complain about their children being assaulted ought to be treated like this man right here?
Parents who show up to complain about school boards are protected by the First Amendment.
Do you think that they ought to be prosecuted in the different ways that your U.S. attorneys are identifying?
If what they're doing is complaining about what the school board is doing, policies, curriculum, anything else that they want to, as long as they're not committing threats of violence, then they should not be prosecuted, and they can't be.
Let me ask you about this.
Several of my Democrat colleagues have today, just today in this hearing, multiple times have compared parents who show up at school board meetings, like Mr. Smith here, have compared them to criminal rioters.
You think that's right?
You think that a parent who shows up at a school board meeting who has a complaint, who wants to voice that complaint, and maybe she doesn't use exactly the right grammar, you think they're akin to criminal rioters?
Do you agree with that?
I do not, and I do not remember any senator here making that comparison.
Oh, really?
These people are just like the folks who came here on January 6th in the riot at the Capitol?
I don't think they were referring to the picture that you're showing there.
Well, I certainly would hope not.
They were referring to parents who go to school board meetings.
Mr. Smith is a parent who went to a school board meeting.
I'll leave it at this, General Garland.
You have weaponized the FBI and the Department of Justice.
Your U.S. attorneys are now collecting and cataloging all the ways that they might prosecute parents like Mr. Smith because they want to be involved in their children's education and they want to have a say in their elected officials.
It's wrong.
It is unprecedented, to my knowledge, in the history of this country.
And I call on you to resign.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Cruz.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
For eight years under Barack Obama, the Department of Justice was politicized and weaponized.
When you came before this committee in your confirmation hearing, you promised things would be different.
I asked you specifically: quote, will you commit to this committee that under your leadership, the Department of Justice will not target the political opponents of this administration?
Here was your answer: quote, absolutely.
It's totally inappropriate for the Department to target any individual because of their politics or their position in a campaign.
That was your promise just a few months ago.
I'm sorry to say you have broken that promise.
There is a difference between law and politics.
And General Garland, you know the difference between law and politics.
Law is based on facts.
It is impartial.
It is not used as a tool of political retribution.
This memo was not law.
This memo was politics.
On Wednesday, September 29th, the National School Board Association wrote a letter to the president Asking the president to use the Department of Justice to target parents that were upset at critical race theory, that were upset at mask mandates in schools, to target them as domestic terrorists.
On the face of the letter, the letter was in repeated consultation with the White House, in explicit political consultation with the White House.
That was on Wednesday, September 29th, five days later, on Monday, so right after the weekend, boom, you pop out a memo giving them exactly what they want.
Seeking Ethics Opinions00:07:07
Now, by the way, I understand that.
In politics, that happens all the time.
An important special interest wants something?
Sir, yes, sir.
We're going to listen to them.
Let me ask you something, General Garland.
In the letter, which you told the House of Representatives was the basis for this abusive memo targeting parents, how many incidents are cited in that memo?
I have to look back through the memo.
I can count it.
You don't know.
How many of them are violent?
Again, the general report.
How many of them were violent?
Do you know?
I don't know.
You don't know.
And there's a reason you don't know.
Because you didn't care, and nobody in your office cared to find out.
I did a quick count just sitting here during this hearing.
I counted 20 incidents cited.
Of the 20, 15 on their face are nonviolent.
They involve things like insults.
They involve a Nazi salute.
That's one of the examples.
My God, a parent did a Nazi salute at a school board because they thought the policies were oppressive.
General Garland is doing a Nazi salute at an elected official.
Is that protected by the First Amendment?
Yes, it is.
Okay.
15 of the 20 on the face of it are not violent.
They're not threats of violence.
They're parents who are unhappy.
Yet, miraculously, when you write a memo, the opening line of your memo, in recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence.
You know what?
You didn't look, and nobody on your staff looked.
Did you even look up the 20 instances?
As I testified, the decision to make send the memo is for an assessment.
Did you look up the 20 instances?
I did not read them.
Did anyone on your staff look them up?
I don't know the answer, but it's but of course you don't.
In general, there's a reason.
Look, you started your career as a law clerk to Justice Brennan.
You've had many law clerks during the year, during your time as a judge.
I was a clerk to Chief Justice Rehnquist.
I'll tell you what, if I drafted an opinion for the Chief Justice and walked in and it said there's a disturbing pattern of violence, well, Ted, how do you know that?
Well, I got an abicus brief here who claims it.
You would fire a law clerk who did that.
You're the Attorney General of the United States.
This was not a tweet you sent.
This is a memo to the Federal Bureau of Investigations saying go investigate parents as domestic terrorists.
That is not what the memo says at all.
It doesn't.
Is it what the letter says?
That is not what the letter says.
I don't care what the letter says.
You don't care.
You said it was the basis of your memo.
You testified under oath before the House of Representatives.
The letter was the basis of your memo.
Now you don't care about the letter?
The letter and public reports of violence and threats of violence.
My memo says nothing about domestic terrorism, says nothing about parents committing any such things.
My memo is an attempt to get an assessment of whether there is a problem out there that the federal government needs to re-says the actions of the apparents could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and asks the president to use the Patriot Act in regards to domestic terrorism directed at parents.
This was the basis of your memo.
My memo.
The Department of Justice, when you're directing the FBI to engage in law enforcement, you're not behaving as a political operative because a political ally of the president says, hey, go attack these parents because we don't like what they're saying.
Department of Justice, you did no independent research on what was happening, did you?
The memo has nothing to do with partnerships.
Did you do independent research?
Did you do independent research?
The memo has nothing to do with ethics.
You've testified you know nothing about the violent sexual assault that happened in Loudoun County, even though it's one of the bases in this letter.
I read about it since then.
Okay.
You told the House last week you knew nothing about it.
I did not know at the time.
Okay.
This week, the court concluded that a 14-year-old girl was violently raped by a boy wearing a skirt in the girls' restroom.
The school district covered it up, released the boy, sent him to another school where he violently raped another girl.
The father, who Mr. Hawley just showed you, was the father of the first girl.
He was understandably.
Do you understand why a parent would be upset when your daughter is raped at school?
The school board covers it up and then lies to you to apologize and retract what you did.
Let me ask you something else.
A big part of this letter is that they're upset about parents not wanting critical race theory taught.
Your son-in-law makes a very substantial sum of money from a company involved in the teaching of critical race theory.
Did you seek and receive a decision from an ethics advisor at the Department of Justice before you've carried out an action that would have a predictable financial benefit to your son-in-law?
This memorandum is aimed at violence and threats.
I just asked a question.
Did you seek an ethics?
It has no predictable effect.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
It has no predictable opinion.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
Judge, you know how to ask questions and answer them.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
You asked me whether I sought an ethics opinion about something that would have a predictable effect on something.
This has no predictable effect in the way that you're talking about it.
So if critical race theory is taught in more schools, does your son-in-law make more money?
If critical race theory is taught in more schools, does your son-in-law make more money?
Yes or no?
This memorandum has nothing to do with critical race theory.
Will you answer if you sought it ethics?
Will you answer if you sought an ethics opinion?
I am answering the best I can.
Yes or no?
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
This memorandum has no idea.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
This memorandum has nothing to do with critics.
General, are you refusing to answer if you sought an ethics opinion?
I'm telling you that there's no possible concern.
So you're saying no.
Just answer it directly.
You know how to answer a question directly.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
I'm telling you that if I thought there was any reason to believe there was a conflict of interest, I would do that.
But I cannot.
Why do you refuse to answer the question?
Why won't you just say no?
I'm sorry.
You're not going to answer the question?
I'm sorry.
Ask the question again.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
I'm saying again, I would seek an ethics opinion in any way.
So no is the answer, correct?
There was a comment.
Senator, your time is up.
At the record, reflect the Attorney General refuses to answer whether he sought an ethics opinion.
And apparently, ethics are not a terribly high priority in the Biden Justice Department.
I don't think that's a fair reflection of what I said.
Then answer the question.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts, freedom at charliekirk.com.
And if you want to go to AmericaFest, go to tpusa.com/slash amfest.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.