Mr. Garland took over the legal side of things the next morning. The Simpson case was still fresh in his mind. In that unfolding drama, the defense had pointed to a series of gaffes by Los Angeles police and prosecutors. The issue of law enforcement incompetence and misconduct was much in the air, and Mr. Garland knew the public—and future jurors—would view the bomb case through that filter. He didn’t want officers to risk a judge later finding their searches illegal and withholding the evidence found. So he drafted search warrants for nearly every step the officers took in their investigation. It was annoying and maybe unnecessary, but Mr. Garland made sure the rules were followed.
The pattern was set for the rest of the investigation – and the rest of Mr. Garland’s career: painstaking behind-the-scenes work and extreme rhetorical restraint in public. A few days after arriving in Oklahoma, Mr. Garland as prosecutor in the bail hearing of Mr. McVeigh. Given the seriousness of the charges, there was no chance that Mr. McVeigh would be released, but Mr. Garland did his very best to talk about the case in an almost willfully dull manner. “You have heard evidence, Your Honor,” he said in court, “more than sufficient to establish that the defendant used and carried a destructive device – that is, a bomb – during and in connection with a violent crime.” Of the bail he said: “Your Honor, as everyone knows, in this case he risks the death penalty and a huge incentive to flee. The government claims that no condition would prevent a person from fleeing in that situation.”
Mr. Garland became so involved in the bombing that he thought about asking Mrs. Gorelick if she could remain the courtroom’s chief prosecutor. But his boss had other plans, because the Unabomber investigation was floundering. Beginning in 1978, a series of bombs had been sent to various university and airline targets across the country. From 1987 to 1993, the bombings stopped, but then they started again, including one that killed a Sacramento man on April 24, 1995, five days after the Oklahoma City bombing. The Justice Department was embarrassed that it had failed to catch the mysterious culprit, and Mrs. Gorelick told Mr. Garland to take over, which he did. (Ted Kaczynski was arrested for the bombings at his small cabin in Montana on April 3, 1996.)
For the trials of Mr. McVeigh and Terry Nichols in the Oklahoma City bombing, Mr. Garland helped select a prosecution team led by Joseph Hartzler and Larry Mackey, who never became as famous as the OJ prosecutors, but who delivered convictions. won in court. (Mr. McVeigh was executed in 2001; Mr. Nichols is serving life without parole.) Garland received a wonderful consolation prize for missing the trials. In September 1995, President Bill Clinton nominated him for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the nation’s second most important court, although he was not confirmed until March 1997. judge reinforced the tendencies he identified in the bombing investigation: scrupulous in collecting facts and reticent in expressing opinions.
Such has been the case with Mr. Garland’s turn as attorney general, especially when it comes to the Trump investigation. Since taking office, Mr. Garland has been criticized for the slow pace of the investigation and for failing to prosecute those who inspired or instigated the attack on the Capitol, targeting instead those who invaded the building. This criticism seems unjustified, or at least premature. Mr. Garland has hardly backed down for the post-Jan. 6 research. He approved the prosecution of the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers on the rarely filed charge of seditious conspiracy; approved the search of Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s Florida home; and appointed Jack Smith, an aggressive prosecutor, to lead the investigation. A fair judgment on Mr. Garland would have to await the outcome of Mr. Smith’s work.
