Some might see US Attorney General Merrick Garland getting quite involved in campaigning ahead of the November election – albeit indirectly so, as a public servant whose primary concern is supposedly how to keep Department of Justice (DoJ) staff “safe.”
And, in the process, he brings up “conspiracy theorists” branding them as undermining the judicial process in the US – because they dare question the validity of a particular judicial process that aimed at former President Trump.
In an opinion piece published by the Washington Post, Garland used one instance that saw a man convicted for threatening a local FBI office to draw blanket and dramatic conclusions that DoJ staff have never operated in a more dangerous environment, where “threats of violence have become routine.”
It all circles back to the election, and Garland makes little effort to present himself as neutral. Other than “conspiracy theories,” his definition of a threat are calls to defund the department that was responsible for going after the former president.
Ironically, while the tone of his op-ed and the topics and examples he chooses to demonstrate his own bias, Garland goes after those who claim that DoJ is politicized with the goal of influencing the election.
The attorney general goes on to quote “media reports” – he doesn’t say which, but one can assume those following the same political line – which are essentially (not his words) hyping up their audiences to expect more “threats.”
“Media reports indicate there is an ongoing effort to ramp up these attacks against the Justice Department, its work and its employees,” is how Garland put it.
And he pledged that, “we will not be intimidated” by these by-and-large nebulous “threats,” with the rhetoric at that point in the article ramped up to refer to this as, “attacks.”
Garland’s opinion piece is not the only attempt by the DoJ to absolve itself of accusations of acting in a partisan way, instead of serving the interests of the public as a whole.
Thus, Assistant Attorney General Carlos Uriarte wrote to House Republicans, specifically House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, to accuse him of making “completely baseless” accusations against DoJ for orchestrating the New York trial of Donald Trump.
While, as it were, protesting too much, (CNBC called it “the fiery reply”) – Uriarte also went for the “conspiracy theory conspiracy theory”:
“The conspiracy theory that the recent jury verdict in New York state court was somehow controlled by the Department is not only false, it is irresponsible,” he wrote.
Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray recently discussed plans to counter election threats during a DoJ Election Threats Task Force meeting. Critics, suspicious of the timing with the upcoming election, cite the recent disbandment of the DHS Intelligence Experts Group.