Victor Davis Hanson: Does Merrick Garland actually believe this?

>> OUR NORMS ARE A PROMISE THAT WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS DEPARTMENT TO BE THE USED AS A POLITICAL WEAPON. AND OUR NORMS ARE A PROMISE THAT WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS NATION TO BECOME A COUNTRY WHERE LAW ENFORCEMENT IS CREATED -- TREATED AS AN APPARATUS OF POLITICS. [LAUGHTER] DAVID: HONESTLY, IT'S HARD NOT TO LAUGH AT THAT -- I MEAN, THAT IS OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES TALKING. THAT'S ATTORNEY GENERAL MERRICK GARLAND DENYING THAT THE HIS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE HAS EVER BEEN USED AS A POLITICAL WEAPON DESPITE MANY EXAMPLES OF TWO-TIERED JUSTICE PRACTICED DURING THE BIDEN-HARRIS ADMINISTRATION. JOINING US NOW IS VICTOR DAVIS HANSON, SENIOR FELLOW AT THE HOOVER INSTITUTION. VICTOR, I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE TO START. YOU COULD START WITH THE MAR-A-LAGO RAID WHICH WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD NEVER BEEN DONE TO A FORMER PRESIDENT BEFORE. THAT WAS PRETTY OUTRAGEOUS. THEN YOU HAD THE ATTACKS ON PARENTS DEFENDING THEIR KIDS AT PTA MEETINGS, AN ARMED RAID -- SEVERAL ARMED RAIDS OF PRO-LIFE ACTIVISTS, AND I WANT TO START THOUGH WITH, I THINK, THE MIDWEST SIGNIFICANT WHICH IS WHEN WE SAW THE NUMBER THREE MAN AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, A GUY NAMED -- KOHL ANGLO, THAT'S HIM ON THE LEFT, FOR ALVIN BRAGG'S LAWSUIT AGAINST A FORMER PRESIDENT WHO WAS CHALLENGING THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. IT WAS A VERY POLITICAL LOCAL COURT PROSECUTION BASED ON AN UNCHARGED, EXPIRED MISDEMEANOR THAT MIRACULOUS MIRACULOUSLY TURNED INTO 34 FELONIES. THAT WAS ALL A ALLOWED BY THE JUDGE ON THE RIGHT, MERCHAN. IS THAT NOW THE NORMAL OF AMERICAN JUSTICE? BECAUSE THAT AIN'T JUSTICE. >> YEAH. I MEAN, IF MERRICK GARLAND REALLY BELIEVES THAT,S ALL HE HAS TO DO IS CITE ONE MORE EXAMPLE OF ANY OF THE TOP THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE FEDERAL ATTORNEYS IN THE DOJ IN NEW YORK GOING AND BEING OUTSOURCED OR RESIGNING AND TAKING A LESSER-COMPENSATED JOB AT A LOCAL PROSECUTOR'S OFFICEFUL THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN CALIFORNIA, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN UTAH, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN ANYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES. SO ALL HE HAS TO DO IS SAY WE HAVE A VERY TOP, HIGH RANKING JUSTICE OFFICIAL WHO CHOSE TO, YOU KNOW, STEP DOWN AND GO TO MISSISSIPPI OR WYOMING OR NEW MEXICO TO HELP OUT ON ON A MUNICIPAL PROSECUTION. AND HE CAN'T DO THAT, AND HE KNOWS WHY HE CAN'T DO IT. WE HAVE FANNIE WILL RACE WHO, REMEMBER, NATHAN WADE, HER PARAHOUR, HE MET TWICE WITH -- PARAMORE, HE MET TWICE WITH WHITE HOUSE LEGAL COUNSEL AND HE BILLED THEM FOR THE HOURS THAT THEY MET. THEN WE HAD JACK SMITH IN 2023 WHO WAS INVESTIGATED FOR MEETING WITH WHITE HOUSE AIDES, THE FEDERAL PROSECUTOR. THEN WE HAVE JOE BIDEN IN 2022 KIND OF WALKING AROUND MUTTERING TO THE HIMSELF, WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO GO AFTER TRUMP? AND, OF COURSE, THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO SAID JACK SMITH HAD NO FEDERAL STATUTE, SPECIAL PROSECUTOR LEGISLATION HAD EXPIRED, AND NO ONE IN THE CONGRESS HAD AUTHORIZED THAT SPECIAL COURAGE APPOINTMENT. SO -- AND THEN I COULD FINISH OFF WITH REMEMBER REID HOFFMAN, THE BEING BILL -- BILLIONAIRE WHO DONATES LAVISHLY TO THE BIDEN CAMPAIGN? HE FUNDED THE ENTIRE E. JEAN CARROLL CIVIL SUIT THAT ENDED UP COSTING TRUMP SUPPOSEDLY $73 MILLION. THAT THAT'S ALL IT HAS HAS, IS LAWFARE AGAINST A POLITICAL ENEMY ON THE PART OF MERRICK GARLAND. A. DAVID: IF DONALD TRUMP IS ELECTED PRESIDENT AGAIN, HOW WOULD HE GO ABOUT FIXING THINGS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE? WE HAVEN'T EVEN BEGUN TO TALK ABOUT HOMELAND SECURITY EITHER. I MEAN, THERE'S SO MANY OF THESE BUREAUCRACIES, BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE, I THINK, IS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. HOW WOULD HE BE ABLE TO THE UNTANGLE THAT WEB THERE? >> I THINK HE'S GOING TO HAVE TOKING HOOK AT ALL THE POLITICAL TO POINT -- APPOINTMENTS AND ASK FOR THEIR RESIGNATION. AND IF I THINK THEY KNOW THAT, AND I THINK THEY'RE PREEMPTIVELY CRITICIZING TRUMP BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT IF THEY WERE TRUMP AND THEY HAD DONE TO THEMSELVES WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO TRUMP, THEY WOULD GO AFTER THEMSELVES. AND THEY'RE PROJECTING. BUT IF HE DOESN'T DO THAT, HE'LL NEVER REACH DETERRENCE. HE'S GOT TO SAY TO THE NATION, THESE PEOPLE MISUSED LAW, I DON'T LIKE POLITICAL APPOINTMENTS ON MY OWN BEHALF, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW THE -- TO REMIND THEM WHAT THAT WHAT THEY DID WAS WRONG OTHER THAN TO RELIEVE ALL OF THESE POLITICAL APPOINTMENTS AND START FROM SCRATCH. AND I THINK HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO DO THAT. WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE LAST ADMINISTRATION IS HE DIDN'T DO THAT ENOUGH WITH POLITICAL -- DAVID: NO, HE DID CONCERN I THINK HE THOUGHT HE'D HAVE ANOTHER TERM TO FINISH THE JOB. I WANT TO SWITCH TO YOUR ANALYSIS OF THE DEBATE WAS POT ON. YOU HAD THE BEST ANALYSIS OF THE DEBATE THAT I'D SEEN. EVEN DEMOCRATS OR SOME DEMOCRATS, VERY FEW, I HAVE TO ADMIT, BUT MARK PENN WAS ON A BROADCAST WITH JOHN SOLOMON, I THINK IT WAS A PODCAST, AND HE'S A DEMOCRAT POLLSTER. HERE'S WHAT HE HAD TO SAY ABOUT THE WAY THE DEBATE WAS HANDLED BY ABC AND WHAT SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT THAT. ROLL TAPE. >> I ACTUALLY THINK THEY SHOULD DO A FULL INTERNAL INVESTIGATION, HIRE AN OUTSIDE LAW FIRM. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF THIS WAS PLANNED IN ADVANCE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY TOLD THE HARRIS CAMPAIGN. I THINK THAT THE DAY AFTER SUSPICION HERE IS REALLY QUITE HIGH, AND I THINK THAT, I THINK A REVIEW OF ALL THEIR INTERNAL TEXTS AND E-MAILS MIGHT REALLY SHOULD BE DONE BY AN INDEPENDENT PARTY TO THE FIND OUT TO WHAT EXTENT THEY WERE PLANNING ON, IN EFFECT, YOU KNOW, FACT-CHECKING JUST ONE CANDIDATE AND, IN IN EFFECT, RIGGING THE OUTCOME OF THIS DEBATE. I THINK THIS SITUATION DEMANDS NOTHING LESS THAN THAT. DAVID: WELL, I HAVE TO BE HONEST, OR I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. I'VE BEEN AROUND THESE NETWORKS FOR MANY A DECADE, AND I'VE NEVER SEEN THEM DO A SWITCHEROO THAT DRAMATICALLY. HOWEVER, IF MARK PENN, A DEMOCRAT POLLSTER, IS SAYING THAT -- AND HE'S KIND OF MIDDLE OF THE ROAD DEMOCRAT. THERE AREN'T MANY OF THEM LEFT. BUT WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE INDEPENDENTS WHO WATCHED THAT? DO YOU THINK THEY ARE HAVING ANOTHER THINK ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED DURING THAT DEBATE? >> OH, YEAH. I MEAN, THAT'S WHY THE DEMOCRATS ARE ASKING FOR ANOTHER DEBATE, BECAUSE IN THE DIGESTION PERIOD OF THE SUBSEQUENT 7 THE HOURS -- 72 HOURS, PEOPLE LOOKED AT THAT A DEBATE THROUGH DIFFERENT LENSES, AND THEY STARTED TO LOOK AT THE SOUND BITES AND THEY STARTED TO REMEMBER THE ASYMMETRICAL QUESTIONING, THE ASYMMETRICAL FACT CHECKING, THE INTERRUPTION OF THE TEMPO OF TRUMP, THE DIRECTION OF DEMANDED FOLLOW-UPS TO TRUMP, NO FOLLOW-UPS, AND THEN THE QUESTIONS THEMSELVES WERE SOFTBALLS TO THE HER. EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD THAT. AND THEIR NARRATIVE HAS CHANGED TOO. RIGHT AFTER THE DEBATE THEY WERE HIGH-FIVING EACH OTHER AND SAID WE FINALLY FACT CHECKED TRUMP, AND NOW FINALLY MS. DAVIS IS ON THE DEFENSIVE AND SAYING, WELL, WE HAD TO BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH BIDEN X THAT KIND OF GAVE THE GAME AWAY. AND NOW I THINK THEY'RE IN THE DEFENSIVE MODE, AND THEY'RE KIND OF APOLOGETIC OR SILENT AT LEAST, BUT THEY KNOW WHAT THEY DID. I THINK THE WORST WAS THEY RUINED THE TEMPO OF THE DEBATE. AS SOMEONE WHO'S DEBATED A LONG TIME, IT'S VERY EASY TO REMEDY THIS, YOU JUST GO BY THE OXFORD, CAMBRIDGE, RULES OF DEBATE. STATEMENT-STATEMENT, ARE REBUT REBUTTAL-REBUTTAL, COUNTER-REBUT TAL, COUNTER-REBUTTAL X THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. DAVID: I WANTED TODAY ASK YOU ABOUT KAMALA'S FLIP FLIP-FLOPPING, BUT THAT'LL HAVE TO WAIT FOR ANOTHER TIME.