OPINION

The Case Against Merrick Garland Is Very Simple

Larry O'Connor
Larry O'Connor  |  Jun 27, 2023
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

I heard some moronic talking heads on cable news the other night saying something like, "Republicans are following a crazy, complicated conspiracy theory to justify an attempt to impeach Attorney General Merrick Garland." I also heard, "The argument against Merrick Garland is very convoluted and hard to understand." 

Actually, no, it's not convoluted or hard to understand. It's actually very simple. 

Merrick Garland should be impeached because he obstructed justice and perjured himself trying to cover up his obstruction. 

See? That wasn't crazy or complicated, was it? 

To be specific, Garland obstructed the investigation into the Biden crimes, then he lied about it to Congress. 

Recommended

Liberal Media Is Already Melting Down Over Pam Bondi Sarah Arnold
Conservative Activist to PA Dems: We're Coming for You Matt Vespa

Impeach him. It isn't at all convoluted or confusing. It's simple, good ole corruption and abuse of power. 

Here are the very easy-to-understand details. 

Merrick Garland testified, under oath, that he would not, in any way, impede the investigation of the Biden family led by U.S. Attorney David Weiss. He told Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) that Weiss had full reign to bring charges against anyone he desired, even if crimes were committed in other jurisdictions. 

Here's the exchange: 

"The U.S. attorney in Delaware has been advised that he has full authority to make those kind of referrals that you're talking about or to bring cases in other jurisdictions if he feels it's necessary. And I will assure that if he does, he will be able to do that," Garland said in March.

Grassley pressed: "Does the Delaware US attorney lack independent charging authority over certain criminal allegations against the president's son outside of the district of Delaware?" 

"If it's in another district, he would have to bring the case in another district, but as I said, I've promised to ensure he's able to carry out his investigation and that he be able to run it and if he needs to bring it in another jurisdiction, he will have full authority to do that," Garland said. 

But, we've now learned from IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley that last fall, Mr. Weiss claimed he did not have the authority to bring charges, and when he asked for more sweeping authority (including to bring charges in other jurisdictions), he was denied. 

Shapley testified to congressional investigators about an October 7, 2022, meeting with Weiss and investigators from the IRS, FBI, and U.S. attorney's office. At the meeting, Weiss told the team, "I am not the deciding person on whether charges are filed," according to Shapley. 

Margot Cleveland at The Federalist has a detailed breakdown of these events. 

Shapley also said Weiss claimed he couldn't bring charges against Biden in Washington, DC, or Southern California, directly contradicting the Attorney General's testimony.  

Earlier this month, knowing the whistleblower testimony would be released, Weiss issued a sworn statement to Congress backing up Garland's claims. 

"I want to make clear that, as the Attorney General has stated, I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of the prosecution, consistent with federal law, the Principles of Federal Prosecution, and Departmental regulations," the letter asserted. 

So, it's pretty clear what we have here. 

Someone is lying. 

Garland and Weiss, who have every reason to lie, claim Weiss had full authority to investigate and prosecute anyone for any crime anywhere. Shapely, who could have stayed in blissful obscurity at the IRS for the rest of his career, claims Weiss asserted the very opposite. 

Someone is lying. 

How will we ever know? 

Well, it turns out Shapely sent an email to all parties who attended the infamous October 7 meeting. He sent it that very day when details were very fresh in his mind. Here's a look at the email.

This would be a little thing called corroborating evidence. 

Furthermore, one of the email recipients, an FBI Special Agent in Charge named Darell Waldon, replied to the email saying, "Thanks, Gary, you covered it all." 

Please note, FBI Special Agent in Charge Waldon did NOT reply to the email saying, "Thanks, Gary, but I don't remember Mr. Weiss saying that he was not the deciding person on whether charges could be filed, etc." 

That would also be corroborating evidence. 

Meanwhile, a second IRS whistleblower confirmed Shapley's account of the October 7 meeting, where Weiss apparently said he was not the person in charge of making charging decisions in this case. 

Here's the report from Fox News: 

That's a third person corroborating this account. All three have literally no reason for lying. Both Garland and Weiss, whom they contradict, have every possible reason to lie. 

So... again: Someone is lying. The evidence points to the Attorney General. 

So, there you have it. Very simple. 

Garland obstructed the investigation and stood in the way of serious felony charges against Hunter Biden, the son of the president. He then lied about his obstruction to cover up his crime. 

Obstruction. Perjury. Abuse of power. 

Impeach Merrick Garland.