AG Garland Brags About J6 Prosecutions and Issues Veiled Election Threat

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.”

BREAKING: AG Merrick Garland just made it clear anyone interfering with the transfer of power after any U.S. election will end up like J6 political prisoners

Is interfering defined as peacefully protesting?

Notice how he does not clarify

pic.twitter.com/9fvOlMWST0

— Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) August 25, 2024

Certainly, the concept of “democracy” has taken on a vague connotation in recent times. Will there be an inquiry into the alleged maneuver to oust Joe Biden in favor of Kamala Harris, who garnered no votes in the 2024 Presidential Primary?

Garland fails to acknowledge that a significant portion of those prosecutions resulted from plea deals made to evade substantial legal costs and severe sentencing. These individuals then faced trial in a predominantly Democratic district that overwhelmingly supported Joe Biden, after their requests for a jury of their peers were uniformly denied. He also neglects to mention that a prominent felony charge related to accounting laws stemming from the ENRON scandal was rejected by the Supreme Court this year.

In any case, Garland’s stance on the January 6th protests is unmistakable: do not engage.

Numerous questions persist regarding the events of January 6th.

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

Nancy Pelosi admitted she was responsible for the National Guard on January 6th:

“I take responsibility for not having them just prepare for more”pic.twitter.com/92RZQUEues

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) June 28, 2024

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?

NEW: Recently discovered video from Jan 6 shows an individual believed to be police carrying a bag toward the location where "pipe bomb" was found at DNC.

This is about 15 minutes before another officer "discovered" the device.

Another shady moment in this unsolved "mystery" pic.twitter.com/OeZZsKw1hs

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) August 14, 2024

🚨MASSIVE J6 DISCOVERY🚨

Timelapse video of the West Side of the Capitol shows the crowd move past police lines at 2:27 PM EST

You know what happened at 2:26 PM?

Bodycam footage shows a cop shooting a tear gas grenade *into police lines* causing them to retreat for air

Watch! pic.twitter.com/NeCiNY3VqR

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) February 23, 2023

Many unanswered questions persist regarding the withholding of exculpatory evidence, including the involvement of government assets, the potential impact of increased law enforcement presence, and the fairness of the prosecutions mentioned by Garland. These concerns arise in light of hearings held by an illegitimate J6 committee and media coverage that repeatedly labeled the events as an “insurrection,” despite no one being charged under 18 USC 2383.

Jamie Raskin has indicated his intention to challenge the legitimacy of President Trump’s election on January 6th, suggesting that he anticipates provoking another “insurrection.”

It is also a subtle warning to lawyers who might file election-related cases and to the substitute electors currently facing legal action in Georgia, Michigan, and Arizona, as well as lawsuits or investigations in Wisconsin, Nevada, and other states.

According to an expert affidavit from Todd Zywicki, the George Mason Foundation Professor of Law at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, and echoed by Politico’s Kyle Cheney, the judge overseeing the 1960 election case between Kennedy and Nixon considered it a “crucial step” that preserved the option to install substitute electors if litigation succeeded.

Before the 2020 election, CNN’s Van Jones (also mentioned in the previous article) discussed sending “competing electors.” This raises questions about potential interference in an election.

I wonder if #FaniWillis has seen this

Even CNN apparently agrees that state legislators and governors can chose not to certify slates of electors

Hence the legitimacy of the a legal strategy that relies on alternate electors

pic.twitter.com/Hhkij1MLpV

— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) April 25, 2024

In 2016, a group of influential figures in Hollywood released a video urging electors to disregard their responsibilities and vote for the opposing candidate. Is this considered election interference?

Furthermore, several lawyers, including Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Kurt Olsen, Jenna Ellis, Sidney Powell, and Jeff Clark, have faced disbarment or prosecution for representing President Trump and others in cases related to election fraud. Jeff Clark’s involvement was limited to drafting an unpublished letter. What about attorney-client privilege?

When Merrick Garland warns of prosecuting anyone who interferes with the peaceful transfer of power, is he only referring to peaceful protesters exercising their First Amendment rights? Or is he also addressing those who question the legitimacy of mass mail-in ballots sent to every registered voter without proper legislation and then processed by black-box voting machines without public oversight?

All of this while discussing a lawsuit involving the federal government’s attempt to use legal tactics against a company for price control.

Karl Marx would be so proud…

ICYMI: Kamala Harris Caught Using Trump’s Border Wall in TV Ad, Social Media Replies Are Savage