AG Garland is Savaged Over Dem Response to Crime Rates

0
457
YTV

As you well know, crime rates nationwide have been on the rise for a while now, basically ever since the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in May of 2020. The issue sparked a massive national conversation about law enforcement and how it is handled in most areas. And thanks to loud and rather violent groups like Black Lives Matter, the political left won that conversation, for the most part, getting cities like New York City, Chicago, Minneapolis, and Los Angeles to defund their police departments and demonize the officers who had sworn to serve and protect.

Of course, since then, the rising crime, violence, and destruction caused by those who are anti-police have made the topic into pretty much a no-fly zone as far as politicians go. While someone might agree with defunding the police, it’s been made clear that those at the polls aren’t very fond of its effects.

On the other side, though, those who don’t agree are also in a rough position, especially if they are on the political left.

Take those like U.S. attorney general Merrick Garland, for example.

As the attorney general under Biden, he is officially the highest law enforcement official in the country, which should mean that lowering crime rates and violence is at the top of his list. However, thanks to the dichotomy of keeping the Biden administration in power and supported enough to do so, he can’t really do his job without angering either one side or the other, i.e., the progressive left or the American people.

And that playing both sides and yet neither is exactly what Garland was called out for in a recent Senate Appropriations Committee hearing.

On Tuesday, Garland was brought before the Committee to discuss the Department of Justice’s recent request for an additional $2.63 billion in funding for the upcoming year, a seven percent raise. And it was here that he was heavily questioned and, then, criticized by one of the right wing’s most formidable heavy hitters.

Enter GOP Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana.

Now, if you’ve heard of Kennedy before, it’s probably because he has a unique reputation for getting people to essentially dig their own graves. And this is exactly what he does with Garland.

Kennedy made it clear that he isn’t sure that the money the department already has, as well as the additional requested funding, would be going to the right places.

He uses crime as one of his reasons why.

As Kennedy put it, the Department is “losing on crime,” as they are with immigration, drugs, etc. According to him, they might not be if they implemented already legal policies that wouldn’t need additional funding, such as the controversial “stop, question, and frisk.”

And so he wants to know why Garland, as head of the Justice Department, isn’t using that method.

He started by asking what the percentages of “racist” or “bad” cops existed, you know, who don’t follow the Constitution. Garland responded that the number was very minimal.

The question is, then, why, if the vast majority of cops are not going to display racist tendencies at work, would departments not use the stop and frisk method.

At first, Garland didn’t have an answer, even claiming that he didn’t know what his department’s position on it was. Kennedy called his bluff and asked again, this time pointing out that crime rates in places like Chicago had risen drastically and yet, no “inroads” had been made in stopping that, despite the fact that both local police and federal agencies know exactly which gangs and individuals are causing a lot of these problems.

So the question, again, is why aren’t these departments using a method that would impede crime from happening at these rates.

Garland made another excuse, saying that they were there really just for “technical expertise.” Again, Kennedy called him out.

“You are asking in the middle of raging inflation for 7 percent more money, $2.63 billion, to provide technical increase, technical advice?”

Needless to say, Kennedy never really got a real answer. And he had to know that he wouldn’t. But that wasn’t really the point, was it? Instead, that was to show just how political the Biden administration had become, that they care more about keeping their precious power than doing what is actually needed.

No one, especially Garland, can be endorsing what the left would call racist policing policies. But neither can he do his job without them.

And now, everyone knows it.