PARENTS ON TERROR LISTS: Who Do You Believe, AG Garland Or The FBI Whistleblower?

Written by Wes Walker on November 17, 2021

Become a Clash Insider!

Don’t let Big Tech pre-chew your news. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we’ll keep you in the loop.

When called before Congress, AG Garland was asked about the meaning of the Memo he sent out in response to parents loudly objecting to the agenda being pushed on their children.

A memo by AG Garland may have paved the way for massive Democrat electoral losses in Virginia and elsewhere. It was that NSBA memo equating concerned parents with domestic terrorists.

The attorney general revealed last month that the DOJ and the White House communicated about the September NSBA letter just before he issued his memo , with the NSBA letter urging the DOJ to look into deploying the Patriot Act. Garland’s memo directed the FBI “to convene meetings” with law enforcement “in each federal judicial district” to help “open dedicated lines of communication” for threat reporting.

That memo was allegedly issued in response to the NSBA letter, which in turn, was traced back to earlier communications with certain White House officials. (oops).

Garland himself now disputes that letter as having triggered his memo, saying it was in issued in response to something only vaguely described as ‘the news’. Even with the NSBA now disavowing their own letter, he has not revoked the memo.

When asked about the issue in oversight hearings, he affirmed the right of parents to exercise their First Amendment rights in the most strenuous of ways. He denied that ordinary non-violent parents had any reason to fear being caught up in Domestic Terrorist investigations.

That’s not how an FBI whistleblower tells the story.

And he ‘brought the receipts’ so to speak.

Here’s what the terse letter sent by Jim Jordan to Merrick Garland says:

Dear Attorney General Garland:

Last month during your testimony before the Judiciary Committee, you testified that the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation were not using federal counterterrorism tools to target concerned parents at local school board meetings. We are now in receipt of a protected disclosure from a Department whistleblower showing that the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division is compiling and categorizing threat assessments related to parents, including a document directing FBI personnel to use a specific ‘threat tag’ to track potential investigations This new information calls into question the accuracy and completeness of your sworn testimony.

On October 21, 2021, you testified that the Department and its components were not using counterterrorism statutes and resources to target concerned parents at school board meetings. Specifically, you testified that you could not ‘imagine any circumstance in which the Patriot Acto would be used in the circumstances of parents complaining about their children, nor … a circumstance where they would be labeled as domestic terrorists.’ You also testified ‘I do not think that parents getting angry at school boards for whatever reason constitute domestic terrorism. It’s not even a close question.’

Later in the hearing, however, you were questioned about the Department’s press release touting the inclusion of the National Security Division — the Departmental Component responsible for enforcing federal terrorism laws, including the Patriot Act – in a task force you created to ‘address the rising criminal conduct directed toward school personnel’ You appeared surprised to learn about the National Security Division’s involvement in the task force, but you avoided a direct answer to the question and offered no clarification or explanation for the National Security Division’s role in the task force.

We have now received a disclosure from a Department whistleblower calling into question the accuracy and completeness of your testimony. The whistleblower provided an FBI email dated October 20 — the day before your testimony — and sent ‘on behalf of’ the FBI’s Assistant Director for the Counterterrorism Division and the Assistant Director for the Criminal Division. The email, which is enclosed, referenced your October 4 directive to the FBI to address school board threats and notified FBI personnel about a new ‘threat tag’ created by the Counterterrorism and Criminal Divisions. The email directed FBI personnel to apply this new treat tag to all ‘investigations and assessments of threats specifically directed against school board administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.’ The email articulated the purpose as ‘scop(ing) this threat on a national level and provid(ing) an opportunity for comprehensive analysis of the threat picture for effective engagement with law enforcement partners at all levels.

The disclosure provides specific evidence that federal law enforcement operationalized counterterrorism tools at the behest of a left-wing special interest group against concerned parents. We know from public reporting that the National School Boards Association coordinated with the White House prior to sending a letter dated September 29 to President Biden labeling parents as domestic terrorists and urging the Justice Department to use federal tools — including the Patriot Act — to target parents. Just five days later, on October 4, you purported ‘disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence’ at school board meetings. As the whistleblower’s disclosure shows, the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division quickly effectuated your directive. The FBI’s actions were an entirely foreseeable — and perhaps intended — result of your October 4 memorandum.

The NSBA Board of Directors later apologized for its letter to President Biden writing ‘On behalf of NSBA, we regret and apologize for this letter.’ (emphasis in original). You, however, have stubbornly refused to rescind your directive, even though you testified that the NSBA letter was the basis for your October 4 memorandum. Your directive to the FBI therefore remains in effect.

The whistleblower disclosure calls into question the accuracy and completeness of your testimony before the Committee. At best, if we assume you were ignorant of the FBI’s actions in response to your October 4 memorandum at the time of your testimony, this new evidence suggests that your testimony to the Committee was incomplete and requires additional explanation. If, however, you were aware of the FBI’s actions at the time of your testimony, this evidence shows that you willfully misled the Committee about the nature and extent of the Department’s use of federal counterterrorism tools to target concerned parents at school board meetings.

To allow us to assess the accuracy and completeness of your sworn testimony, we invite you to ament yout testimony as to whether the Department or any of its components has used or is using counterterrorism resources or tools for the purpose of investigating, tracking, or prosecuting threats relating to school board meetings. In addition, to independently verify the truthfulness of your testimony and to investigate this matter further, we reiterate our outstanding document requests to the various Departmental components and ask that you produce this material immediately. Finally, we remind you that whistleblower disclosures to Congress are protected by law and that we will not tolerate any effort to retaliate against whistleblowers for their disclosures.

Sincerely, Jim Jordan.
Ranking member.

That’s one heck of a letter to receive just days after Garland himself made the call to press criminal charges against Steve Bannon for Contempt of Congress.

You Might Like