AG Merrick Garland Brags About J6 Prosecutions and Issues a Veiled Threat Regarding Upcoming Elections

by | Aug 26, 2024 | Aggregate

AG Merrick Garland Brags About J6 Prosecutions and Issues a Veiled Threat Regarding Upcoming Elections
August 26, 2024

During a press conference at the Department of Justice on Friday to deliver remarks about a DOJ lawsuit against a property software management company, RealPage, AG Merrick Garland issued a veiled threat regarding the upcoming 2024 General Election.

A man in the audience, presumably press, took the opportunity to ask Garland about the transfer of power during the upcoming election.  The man mentioned that “prosecutors and judges” in DC are apparently expressing increasing “concerns about the upcoming transfer of power and potential danger of another January 6.”  He asked Garland if he shares those concerns, to which Garland responds:

“I think our prosecutions have made clear what we think about people who try to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power, which is an essential and fundamental element of our democracy.  I quibble about whether we have 1500 or slightly less than 1500, but we have way more than 1400 now, prosecutions.  We have a substantial number of convictions.  I think that’s shown to everybody how seriously we take an effort to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.  The last January 6th, the coming January 6th, and every January 6th after that.  I wanna make clear to anybody whos thinking about interfering with that.  They can see what we’ve done with respect to the January 6th prosecutions and the Justice Department will continue to protect our democracy.”

Of course, the term “democracy” has become quite oblique in recent months.  Will there be an investigation into the soft coup many believe was enacted against Joe Biden to replace him with Kamala Harris, who received precisely zero votes in the 2024 Presidential Primary?

Garland doesn’t mention that a large majority of those prosecutions were plea deals taken to avoid hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expenses and harsh sentencing, only to go to court in a Democrat district that voted 93% for Joe Biden in 2020, after change of venue requests for a jury of their peers were unanimously denied.  He also doesn’t mention that one of the most prominent felony charges, an accounting law from the ENRON debacle, was shot down by the Supreme Court this year.

Either way, the message from Garland is clear regarding the January 6th protests:  don’t.

There still remains a plethora of questions around January 6th.

  1. We still don’t know how many FBI Agents or assets were embedded in the crowd that day.<

    /li>

  2. When were the pipe “bombs” actually planted at the DNC/RNC?
  3. Why do we continue to get more and more evidence that suggests the official narrative peddled by the government is incorrect?
  4. How could a pipe bomb planted the night before detonate when it was outfitted with a 60-minute egg timer?
  5. How did US Secret Service K-9s miss the pipe bombs, allegedly filled with black powder?
  6. Why is so much footage from that street corner missing or incomplete?
  7. How did the cellphone data of that individual turn up compromised or missing while the same data was used to track down J6ers right across the street weeks and months later?
  8. Who is the man getting out of this vehicle and has he been deposed?

What responsibility does Metropolitan Police Department bear for throwing tear gas and concussion grenades into the middle of the crowd, causing an instinctive shoving match to the front to get fresh air?  Or shooting peaceful protesters with pepper balls and spraying them with pepper spray?  Is there any acknowledgement that the police line only broke because of one Metropolitan Police Officers “short round” into the wind that ended up gassing his own front line of officers?

Numerous other questions remain around exculpatory evidence withheld, such as embedded government assets, whether or not it would have escalated with appropriate quantities of law enforcement present, and whether or not the prosecutions Garland bragged about were fair considering the primetime Hollywood-produced hearings from the illegitimate J6 committee and a media that defamatorily parrotted “insurrection!” every chance they could despite not one single person being charged under 18 USC  2383.

Jamie Raskin has already made clear that he will attempt to subvert the Will of the People after the election by disqualifying President Trump on January 6th, inciting what he believes will lead to another “insurrection.”

This is also a veiled threat at attorneys who would bring election cases as well as the alternate electors who are currently being prosecuted in Georgia, Michigan, and Arizona, and have faced either lawsuits or investigations in Wisconsin, Nevada, and other states.

The Gateway Pundit reported on the legitimacy of the electors, according to an expert declaration by Todd Zywicki, the George Mason Foundation Professor of Law at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University.  Politco’s Kyle Cheney was also in agreement, citing the judge presiding over the 1960 election case between Kennedy and Nixon.  Judge Ronald Jamieson said that it was a “key step” that preserved the ability to seat alternate electors if litigation was successful.

Prior to the 2020 election, CNN’s Van Jones (also cited in the above article), discussed sending “competing electors.”  Is he interfering in an election?

In 2016, a consortium of Hollywood elitists made a video calling on the electors to disregard their duty and vote for the opposing candidate.  Is that election interference?

In addition to the alternate electors from 2020 that are being prosecuted, numerous lawyers have been disbarred or are/were facing disbarment for representing President Trump and others in cases involving election fraud, including Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Kurt Olsen, Jenna Ellis, Sidney Powell, and Jeff Clark, who’s only “crime” was drafting a letter that was never sent nor published by him.  Attorney-client privilege??

When Merrick Garland says that anyone interfering with the peaceful transfer of power will be prosecuted, is he only speaking to peaceful protesters exercising their First Amendment Right?  Or is he also addressing anyone who would dare challenge the legitimacy of unprecedently sending mail-in ballots to every single registered voter, sometimes without proper legislation, and then running them through black-box voting machines without any public oversight to their functionality?

All this while discussing a lawsuit over the federal government trying to lawfare a company into price control.

Karl Marx would be so proud.

 

 

The post AG Merrick Garland Brags About J6 Prosecutions and Issues a Veiled Threat Regarding Upcoming Elections appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go to Source
Author: Brian Lupo