unique visitors counter GOP Rep Tom Tiffany Asks Merrick Garland Million-Dollar Question: “Do you support more crime?” – Washington News

GOP Rep Tom Tiffany Asks Merrick Garland Million-Dollar Question: “Do you support more crime?”

Sharing is caring!

Wisconsin Republican Rep. Tom Tiffany asked Attorney General Merrick Garland the million-dollar question as crime spirals out of control in Dem-controlled cities and at the border.

Tiffany asked Garland to his face if he supports more crime. Garland was left stammering. 

TIFFANY: Mr. Attorney General, do you support the consent decree that I believe was put in place in the city of Minneapolis?

GARLAND: I’m sorry? Do I support the…

TIFFANY: Do you support the consent decree that was put in place with the police department of Minneapolis?

GARLAND: The one that was put in place by the federal government?



TIFFANY: Do you support fewer cops on the street?

GARLAND: Do I support…

TIFFANY: Fewer cops on the street?

GARLAND: No, I don’t support fewer cops on the streets.

TIFFANY: So that’s what’s happening as a result of that.

GARLAND: I don’t think that’s a consequence of the consent decree. Minneapolis has been losing police officers for many years.

TIFFANY: Do you support more crime?

GARLAND: Do I support more crime?


GARLAND: No, I don’t.

TIFFANY: So there was just a hearing in Minnetonka, Minnesota, a tony suburb of Minneapolis, just I think this last week, where they were just, they’re beside themselves with the amount of crime that continues in Minneapolis since the riots of 2020. And I would point out to you that I had an officer in my district — I live right across the border in Wisconsin, or that’s where my district begins. A police officer was shot to death as a result of a weak on crime prosecutor in St. Paul and Minneapolis, Minnesota. Guy served only four years for a violent crime. Do you think that that’s a problem?

GARLAND: An officer was shot to death? That is not that is certainly not an appropriate sentence, that’s outrageous. Let me be clear, we are doing everything we can to assist Minneapolis. We have a very aggressive U.S. attorney who’s brought a number of RICO and VICAR cases…

TIFFANY: Let me continue…

GARLAND: .. And has been extraordinarily successful.

TIFFANY: … I got a real short period of time here. In regards to disrupting drug networks. Why do you think there’s so much fentanyl coming into the country?

GARLAND: Because it costs $0.10 to make and it can be sold for $30.

TIFFANY: So Sheriff Mark Daniels from Cochise County, Arizona, sat right where you were at a few months ago, and under oath he said the reason there is such a drastic increase in fentanyl coming into the country is because on January 20th of 2021, open borders policies were announced by President Biden. Have you expressed concern about those open borders policies that have led to this rapid increase in the amount of fentanyl coming into our country?

GARLAND: I can’t associate myself with the conclusion reached by the sheriff, although I can certainly commiserate with the concern.

TIFFANY: So the sheriff is incorrect?

GARLAND: Look, the cartels in Mexico are bringing this, are causing this drug to be transmitted into the United States. And we are doing everything we can to eliminate that incentive.

TIFFANY: Terrifc. Yeah, you’re not going to do it doing that. Mr. Chairman, just so we’re real clear here. This is the same answer we received from Secretary Mayorkas a couple of months ago when he was in denial about a sheriff who lives — one of the most reputable sheriffs you’ll find in the United States of America, sitting down there on that southern border. He sees it every day. He saw it working in 2020 because he told me when I was down there. And now he says it is not working, and it started January 20th of 2021. You can pretend that you’re dealing with fentanyl. You’re not. Because the borders are wide open. Do you believe — I’m going to shift to combating gun violence? Do you believe that a prohibited person that acquires a gun illegally, and disposes it in a dumpster where a criminal or an innocent child could gain access to it should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

GARLAND: This is no longer a hypothetical question here, referring to a specific case which is now in judicial determination before a court of law. It’s not appropriate for me to comment on that case.

TIFFANY: So for the record, Mr. Chairman, let’s understand that the same prosecuting attorney who is now the Special Counsel, gave a sweetheart deal to that person. And yes, you are correct. We are referring to the president’s son. He got a sweetheart deal. And the judge was smart enough to smell a rat when she saw it. And she said, you guys go back to the drawing board. That same Special Counsel is in charge of this investigation. Isn’t that correct, Mr. Chairman? Absolutely.

TIFFANY: I’m going to close real quickly with this. There is a World Naked Bike ride in Madison, Wisconsin, just a couple months ago. And I sent you a letter two months ago asking if you had a problem with that because it exposed a ten-year-old girl, by the race organizer with the bike organizers, to pedaling around Madison, Wisconsin, naked. Do you think that’s a problem? And why did you not answer our letter from two months ago?

GARLAND: I’m sorry. I’ll have to get ask the Office of Legislative Affairs to get back to you about this.

TIFFANY: Does it typically take two months to be able to answer questions like this?

GARLAND: It sounds like you’re asking about a question about state and local law enforcement. We get hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of letters. I’ll ask the Office of Legislative Affairs where that letter is.

TIFFANY: State and local law enforcement would not act. We were hoping you would. It’s obvious you’re not. I yield.