The Dangerous Radical Positions of Biden's DOJ Nominees

Biden Administration Attorney General Nominee Merrick Garland has pledged not to follow in the footsteps of the Obama-Biden Administration Attorneys General and act as a “wingman” for the President.  He will almost certainly be confirmed with bipartisan support.

However, the same cannot be said about Associate Attorney General Nominee Vanita Gupta and Civil Rights Division nominee Kristin Clarke.  Arguably, Judge Garland’s toughest moment in the hearing yesterday came when “Garland appeared to lose his composure as he defended Gupta and Clarke.”

Senator Lee was the one who asked the questions that made Garland “lose his composure” and here are some of those questions and a summary:

Lee: Do you believe individuals who advocate for the rights of unborn human beings are rendered unfit for public office by virtue of having engaged in such advocacy?”

Lee: Do you believe that efforts to purge voter rolls of individuals who have either died or have left the state in question or to require voter identification are racially discriminatory and an assault on voting rights?

Lee: Do you believe Republicans in the United States, and by Republicans I mean as a whole, are determined to leave our communities to the mercy of people and institutions driven by hate, bigotry and fear of any threat to the status quo.

Lee: The reason I raise these ones is these are questions that have been drawn from comments made by Vanita Gupta, who’s been nominated to be the associate attorney general, has advocated for each of these positions.

As troubling as Gupta’s nomination may be, Kristin Clarke’s to head Civil Rights may be even more troubling and another example of the Left’s “mainstreaming of anti-Semitism:”

A recent example is President Biden’s nomination of Kristen Clarke to head the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice. You wouldn’t know it from reading the New York Times or watching CNN, but Clarke has a troubling history of advocating for anti-Semites and representing anti-Semitic lies as “fact.”

During her time as the head of Harvard’s Black Students Association, Clarke invited Tony Martin as a guest lecturer. A staunch anti-Semite and Holocaust denier, Martin had written a book called The Jewish Onslaught in which he attacked Judaism and the Jewish people. Clarke supported Martin’s Jew-hatred, writing in the student newspaper, “Professor Martin is an intelligent, well-versed black intellectual who bases his information [anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial] on indisputable fact.”

In 2019, Clarke signed a petition in support of liberal anti-Semite Tamika Mallory. The former co-chairwoman of the Women’s March, Mallory has praised Louis Farrakhan, refusing to condemn that notorious anti-Semite's legacy of Jew-hatred. Mallory has referred to “white Jews” as white supremacists.

If Clarke were a conservative or Republican, would Biden or Nancy Pelosi ignore her past support of hate? Would MSNBC and the Washington Post remain silent over her history of tolerating and excusing bigotry? Of course not. Her recent claim that inviting Martin was merely a “mistake” was an obvious play for cover that the Left is, unfortunately, happy to provide.

Clarke’s apology should ring hollow especially in light of her 2019 support of Mallory. 

As Senator Lee tweeted with a video of his questioning of Garland: