Loretta Lynch’s Non-Recusal Recusal

Tags

Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Jonathan Capehart, the fix

Breitbart News by Joel B. Pollak

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is reportedly planning to defer to the FBI in deciding whether or not to prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, corruption, and other potential transgressions.

The move, responding to bipartisan criticism of Lynch’s private meeting with former president Bill Clinton earlier this week, is being described by some sources as a recusal. However, it is not.

Lynch retains control of the case, effectively. She has merely, according to reports, decided whose recommendation to follow in making a decision — and has not formally ceded the power to decide. It is a non-recusal recusal.

All Lynch’s move actually does is punt the political responsibility for the decision to the FBI. Though the FBI prides itself on its professionalism and independence, there is no guarantee that it, too, will not be subject to political pressures, or agendas from within and without…

Continue Reading – Loretta Lynch’s Non-Recusal Recusal

Below is an excerpt of a conversation this morning between Jonathan Capehart and AG, Loretta Lynch at the The Aspen Institute: A Conversation on 21st Century Policing, Civil Rights, and Criminal Justice Reform.

Partial transcript as follows:

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Having the highest integrity, utmost solid judgment, so when people heard what went down in Phoenix, a lot of people are like, I mean, friends, supporters, backers, are saying what on earth was she thinking? Talking to Bill Clinton. So what on earth were you thinking? What happened?

LORETTA LYNCH: Well that’s the question of the day, isn’t it. I think that’s a perfectly reasonable question. I ts the question that is called by what happened in Phoenix because people have also wondered and raised questions about my role in the ultimate resolution of matters involving the investigation into the state department e-mails. and to the extent that people have questions about that, about my role in that, certainly my meeting with him raises questions and concerns. And so believe me, I completely get that question, and I think it is the question of the day. But I think the issue is again, what is my role in how that matter is going to be resolved. So let me be clear on how that is going to be resolved. I have gotten that question a lot also over time and we usually don’t go into those deliberations but I do think it’s important that people see what that process is like. As I have always indicated, the matter’s being handled by career agents and investigators with the Department of Justice. They have had it since the beginning. they are —

CAPEHART: Which predates your tenure as Attorney General.

LYNCH: Predates my tenure as attorney general. It is the same team. And they are acting independently. They follow the law, they follow the facts. That team will make findings, that is to say, they will come up with a chronology of what happened, the factual scenario. They will make recommendations as to how to resolve what those facts lead to. The recommendations will be reviewed by career supervisors in the Department of Justice and in the FBI, and by the FBI director, and then as is the common process, they present it to me and I fully expect to accept their recommendations….

Below is the full videotaped conversation. At approx. 22:27 of video, Jonathan Capehart revisits the question, “What were you thinking question;” and while Lynch says that she would “certainly not do it again,” she does a poor job of convincing anyone that she wouldn’t do it again or that the system is not rigged.

How the politics of the next nomination will play out

Tags

2016 Presidential Election, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Barack Obama, Hillary Clintion, Justice Antonin Scalia, Kamala Harris, Obama nominee, Senator Ted Cruz, Supreme Court of the United States, U S Senate

 

Barack Obama, Department of Labor, photo courtesy of Flickr

SCOTUS Blog by Tom Goldstein ( (Feb. 14, 2016, 5:47 PM))

This post substantially revises and supersedes my earlier one on how the political parties will likely approach the Scalia vacancy, in which I had concluded that Ninth Circuit Judge Paul Watford was the most likely nominee.  On reflection, I think that Attorney General Loretta Lynch is more likely.  I also think that the Republicans will eventually permit the nomination to proceed on the merits and reject it on party lines.

In thinking about how to respond to the vacancy on the Supreme Court, the administration has two priorities.  First, fill the Scalia seat by getting a nominee confirmed.  The stakes could not be higher:  the appointment could flip the Supreme Court’s ideological balance for decades.  Second, gain as much political benefit as possible and exact as heavy a political toll as possible on Republicans, particularly in the presidential election.  Precisely because of the seat’s importance, this is the rare time that a material number of voters may seriously think about the Court in deciding whether to vote at all and who to vote for.

Those priorities reinforce each other.  The Republican Senate leadership has staked out the position that no nomination by President Obama will move forward.  Because Republicans hold the Senate majority, they have the power to refuse to hold confirmation hearings before the Judiciary Committee and/or a floor vote on the nominee.  So, any effort to replace Scalia is dead on arrival unless the political dynamic in the country forces Republicans to change their minds and allow the nomination to proceed.

Not surprisingly, Republican priorities are the exact opposite.  Fundamental conservative legal victories over the past two decades hang directly in the balance.  To take just one example, Ted Cruz is exactly right to say that a more liberal replacement for Justice Scalia is very likely to overturn the Supreme Court’s recent recognition of a Second Amendment right to possess firearms or at least render it a nullity as a practical matter.  There are dozens of other examples.  Conversely, a Republican appointee would not only preserve those victories but continue the Court’s steady move to the right.

In addition, blocking President Obama’s nominee is good politics for important subsets of Republicans.  Most directly, the Supreme Court is a signal issue for the conservative Republican base in a way that it is not for core Democratic constituencies.  Since at least Richard Nixon, conservatives have effectively rallied against the Supreme Court as a liberal institution that is out of control.  We see that dynamic today in Republican candidates’ remarkable attempt to frame even Chief Justice Roberts as a failure, based on his votes to uphold the Affordable Care Act and the administration’s implementation of the Act.

Those competing priorities put the political parties in a deadly embrace from which neither will easily budge.  The administration feels a constitutional responsibility to press for the confirmation of a nominee and every political advantage in doing so.  Republicans cannot accede to that effort because their base will not permit it.

In all of this, it is impossible to overstate the importance of Ted Cruz, who will make the appointment a central issue in the campaign and who will drive enormous pressure against proceeding with any nomination.  That pressure is likely to be too great for the Republican Senate leadership to overcome, even if it concludes that it would be better politics to do so….

Continue Reading – How the politics of the next nomination will play out

SOURCE:  Tom Goldstein, How the politics of the next nomination will play out, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 14, 2016, 5:47 PM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/how-the-politics-of-the-next-nomination-will-pay-out/ (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 US)

Attorney General Loretta Lynch Vows to Prosecute Anti-Muslim Speech

Tags

Attorney General Loretta Lynch, blasphemy laws, First Amendment Rights, free speech, Islam, standing

 

Less than twenty-four hours after an Islamic terrorist attack by a Muslim couple in San Bernardino, California that left 14 people dead and approximately 20 progressives wounded, the Obama administration through its attorney general, Loretta Lynch standing with its Muslims terrorists cohorts proclaimed that anti-Muslim speech would not be tolerated throughout the land (sarcasm).

Lynch, the keynote speaker for the Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner fired a shot over the head of Americans vowing to prosecute any American who engages anti-Muslim rhetoric predicated upon violence.

Shoebat.com by Andrew Bieszad

Speaking barely a day after the horrific terrorist attack in California, Obama-appointed Attorney General Loretta Lynch said at the annual Muslim Advocates annual Dinner that critics of Islam “will be prosecuted” if speech about Islam “edges” towards violence:

Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Thursday warned that the Justice Department could take aggressive action against people whose anti-Muslim rhetoric “edges towards violence” and told the Muslim community that “we stand with you in this.”

…

Lynch made it clear that she shares those concerns, but vowed to use the DOJ to protect Muslims from discrimination and violence.

Continue Reading

 

Not only is this an attack on free speech, it is a step toward Barack Obama implementing blasphemy laws against Islam in the United States; efforts of which have been underway for more than a decade by Saudi Arabia, Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood and crew to implement globally through the United Nations.

Breitbart News reported earlier this year that Muslim Brotherhood leader, Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s Qatar-based international Union of Muslim Scholars “called upon the United Nations to make ‘contempt of religions’ illegal. In a statement released on Tuesday, the Union said that there should be ‘protection for ‘prophets’” and urged the UN to issue a ‘law criminalizing contempt of religions and the prophets and all the holy sites….’”

As further reported by the Global Muslim Brotherhood Watch:

…It also called for the West ‘to protect Muslim communities from attacks, whether they are citizens or residents or visitors’.

The union has condemned the publication of a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed holding a ‘Je suis Charlie’ sign under the headline ‘All is forgiven’ in the first Charlie Hebdo edition since Islamist gunmen killed 12 people in an attack on its offices…

In other words, as celebrated by the Islamic State the other night and Loretta Lynch’s threat against an anti-Muslim backlash, it is acceptable for Muslims to slaughter non-Muslims attending their annual Christmas party and who draw cartoons of Mohammad.

All of the above would make the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic State, Boko Haram, CAIR and their fellow Muslim extremists calling for a global caliphate absolute giddy.

One final note, Lynch has advised Muslim parents to contact the feds if their children are bullied in school. Catholics, Jews, Mormons, Protestants, Episcopalians, etc. need not apply. Hell will freeze over before the Justice Department thinks about coming to the aid of non-Muslims.

Lynch is Eric Holder in drag. She’s opening the door to massive abuse by Muslim cry babies who see Islamophobia in every corner.

Our Attorney General Loretta Lynch Lied About Sanctuary Cities

Tags

Attorney General Loretta Lynch, House Judiciary Committee, Illegal Immigration, illegal-aliens, lawlessness, rogue administration, Sanctuary Cities

Independent Sentinel by S. Noble

Loretta Lynch was asked about sanctuary cities yesterday during a House hearing. She pretended she was unfamiliar with the law and said she didn’t know if the DOJ was outlawing sanctuary cities. She is a liar who doesn’t follow the law she is the nation’s top law enforcement officer. Listen to her pretend she would enforce laws if a case comes up.

Sanctuary cities are against the law and she knows it.

Former Assistant Director to the FBI Jim Kallstrom said we shouldn’t only be worried about refugees, we should be looking at sanctuary cities[…]

Continue Reading

An administration of liars.  Somehow I expected better out of Attorney General Lynch.