On Monday, Attorney General Merrick Garland dispatched a memo to FBI Director Christopher Wray in which Garland ordered the FBI to work with local leaders nationwide to help address what he called a “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence’ against educators and school board members over highly politicized issues such as mask mandates and interpretations of critical race theory,” according to the Washington Post.
Translation: “We don’t like these unruly parents defending their children against radical curriculum, so we are going to unleash the FBI on them.”
The Garland memo seemed fishy from the start. Garland based his order to the FBI on a September 29 letter from the National School Board Association in which they asked that Garland act against the “domestic terrorist” parents.
Translation: “We don’t like parents being mean to us, so we need your help!”
It now appears that this was a Biden Administration plot against the parents that originated from inside the White House.
That is the allegation according to the America First Legal Foundation, which this week sent a letter to Inspector General Michael Horowitz—of Trump-Russia fame—to investigate Merrick Garland, the DOJ, and the Biden White House for acting to deny the parents their constitutional rights to speech and association.
Oh, and Attorney General Garland has a conflict of interest he needs to answer for: His son-in-law makes his living off critical race theory-based curriculums.
According to the Washington Examiner, “Alexander ‘Xan’ Tanner, who married Garland’s daughter Rebecca in 2018, is the co-founder and president of Panorama Education, a major player in the teacher training and curriculum industry. Panorama pushes race-focused surveys and conducts trainings on systemic oppression, white supremacy, unconscious bias, and intersectionality — all under the rubric of “Social-Emotional Learning.”
Yeah, IG Horowitz might want to investigate that little conflict of interest, don’t you think?
Read for yourself the important passages from the America First Legal Foundation, as they lay out their case of a Biden Administration plot against the parents in the following passages:
“Key Biden Administration stakeholders, including the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, and others, have combined to oppress, threaten, and intimidate parents to chill and prevent them from exercising the rights or privileges secured by the Constitution.5 To date these efforts, though extensive, have generally proven ineffectual.
- In early September, Biden Administration stakeholders held discussions regarding avenues for potential federal action against parents with a key Biden Domestic Policy Council official (Jane Doe #1) and White House staff (John Doe #1). Stakeholders also held discussions with senior department officials, including at least one political appointee in the department’s Civil Rights Division (Jane Doe #2). Jane Doe #1, John Doe #1, and others in the White House separately expressed concern regarding the potential partisan political impact of parent mobilization and organization around school issues in the upcoming midterm elections.
- Upon information and belief, at the express direction of or with the express consent of Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2 and other Biden Administration officials developed a plan to use a letter from an outside group (“not the usual suspects”) as pretext for federal action to chill, deter, and discourage parents from exercising their constitutional rights and privileges
Upon information and belief, in or about mid-September work began on development of what became the Attorney General’s Memorandum. Concerns expressed by department staff included (1) the absence of federal law enforcement nexus and authority, and (2) the constitutionally protected nature of parent protests. However, Jane Doe #2 made it clear this was a White House priority and a deliverable would be created.
- On or about September 29, citing legal authorities including the Patriot Act, the “National School Boards Association” made public a letter demanding federal action against parents citing authorities including the Patriot Act.
The justification for federal action included, inter alia, parents were “posting watchlists against school boards and spreading misinformation (sic) that boards are adopting critical race theory curriculum and working to maintain online learning by haphazardly attributing it to COVID-19.”6 It is not yet clear whether and to what extent drafts of this letter were shared with Biden Administration officials, including Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, and whether changes were suggested or made by them, prior to the ostensible public release date.
- On October 4, the Attorney General’s Memorandum was made public.
The short time frame between the September 29 letter and the Attorney General’s Memorandum suggests that either the entire matter was precoordinated and the September 29 but pretext, or that the normal clearance process and standard order both within the department (including legal sufficiency review by the Office of Legal Counsel, the Civil Rights Division, the Criminal Division, the Office of Legal Policy, and other components), and between the department and the White House Counsel’s Office and the Office of Management and Budget, were bypassed or corrupted. • On October 5, there was a follow up call involving, inter alia, the White House Counsel’s Office, Jane Doe # 2, and many other Biden Administration political and career officials.
The briefing included how to talk about “equity” initiatives, to avoid liability for violating discrimination laws, and, critically, to hide “equity” measures, initiatives, and action from Freedom of Information Act disclosure. The intention, it seems, is to evade public scrutiny of these Biden Administration activities. 6 Nat’l School Board Ass’n, Letter to Joseph R. Biden.”