Dunno. I’m still trying to wrap my head around this. To paraphrase, Garland was asked what he thought about the domestic terrorism on Federal properties and Federal courthouses this last year. He said something to the effect that whilst the attack at the Capital can be considered domestic terrorism, the attacks by Antifa on Federal Courthouses were likely not ......(.wait for it ). .....because they happened at night. HUH? The difference, he said, was when someone interrupted the democratic proceedings [at the capital] with violence then it’s domestic terrorism. He furthered it with, if the proceedings or judges rulings were interrupted then that too would be terrorism but since it happened at night then by his statutory definition it wasn’t. Okay, let’s go with that. But, even if it happened at night would not the next day’s proceedings be interrupted by the violence of the night before? And since when is a large mob burning down businesses, courthouses and killing people NOT considered domestic terrorism? Is Garland the real deal or is he just past his Federal assistant prosecutor’s prime?