In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


Worrisome Questions About Loretta Lynch

Loretta Lynch, President Obama’s choice to succeed Eric Holder as attorney general, has so far been seen as a relatively moderate choice designed not to provoke Republicans while Obama goes about provoking them with other things, like amnesty for illegal immigrants.

But, writing for the conservative Heritage Foundation’s The Daily Signal, legal scholar Hans Von Spakovsky raises some disturbing points about Lynch, an African American who may be in the habit of viewing legal issues through the same prism of race used by Holder.

Lynch seems to share Holder’s view that voter ID laws threaten to undo voting rights achieved in the 1960s for minorities.

Van Spakovsky writes:

Lynch . . . has made it clear that she would continue Holder’s war on election integrity. In a speech at the Long Beach Martin Luther King Center in New York in January, Lynch claimed that efforts to improve the integrity of the election process were an attempt “to take back” what Martin Luther King, Jr. had fought for and that state legislatures were trying to “reverse” the gains made in voting.

Lynch made it clear she approved of the Justice Department’s lawsuits against states such as North Carolina to stop voter ID laws and changes in early voting and same-day registration rules, saying such suits “will continue.”

The death penalty, it seems, must not be employed because it applies to too many minorities:

She is cited as saying in a 2002 roundtable discussion that she had to repeatedly “explain decisions not to seek the [death] penalty” when she was a prosecutor.  She claimed that the relative ease with which the death penalty was applied against blacks and Hispanics suggested a systematic disregard for minority citizens.

Lynch would not apply the death penalty even if all of the “problems” with it could be fixed, according to the article, simply because of its supposed disparate impact on minorities: “You can be as fair as possible in a particular case, but the reality is that the federal death penalty is going to hit harder on certain groups.”

Lynch, Von Spakovsky notes, has been a member of the attorney general’s advisory committee of U.S. attorneys and should detail for the Senate what advice she gave Holder on various issues.

The process of vetting Lynch is just beginning. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were done incompetently by the Obama administration, or if things that would seem like red flags to ordinary Americans too easily passed muster with Obama’s team.

This will be one of the GOP Senate’s first endeavors. They’ll be eager to exercise their newfound power, and Lynch might not have things so easy.

49 thoughts on “Worrisome Questions About Loretta Lynch”

  1. MORE on Lynch:
    Loretta Lynch belonged to a student group that brought Jew-hating Palestinian terrorists to Harvard Law School every year she was a member. Lynch belonged to the Harvard Black Law Students Association (BLSA) from 1981-1984 when she was a student.
    During those years the radical black group brought representatives from the Palestinian Liberation Operation (PLO).

    The Harvard Crimson condemned the response of Lynch’s organization in 1984.

    The Black Law Students Association (BALSA) committed an unjustifiable and discriminatory violation of student liberties last week when it denied Jewish students an opportunity to participate in a campus forum featuring a representative of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO).

    1. BALSA moderator Muhammad I. Kenyatta refused to recognize any of the white hands raised in the audience. BALSA and TWC members were to be given priority, he announced, proceeding to call on a Black student who hadn’t raised his hand. SNIP

      My, oh my. So much for the exchange of ideas.

      1. The ‘white’ people have been the minority for several decades now. Especially white males. It’s frustrating because there is absolutely nothing to be done about this. We are just racist. & I am a female.

  2. If they live, work and breathe on the land which they care for. Then they are a citizen. Tell me, where in the constitution does it actually define what a citizen is? I don’t see anything about photo identification on defining a citizen. Any law making us get an ID to vote is silly.

    1. You have to be kidding right? The idea is to keep the invaders from other countries from voting. The fact they came in and stole a citizens job does give them the right to vote.

      Only people who want illegals to vote want to stop voter id.

      Oh and they hate white people. I have been called an F#$%ing gringo many times here in Mexico North as described by our governor Jerry Brown.

      1. @Von Ebb. No I am not kidding and I would hardly describe those I helped to vote as “invaders.” They were mothers and fathers of children who went to the elementary school where I ensured all who had registered to vote from that precinct had that right when they walked into those doors. Keep in mind that we live in a bilingual society. The voting machines were in spanish and english.

        I am not a troll

    1. An Imam has been sentenced to life in prison for joining a failed plot to firebomb John F. Kennedy Airport in 2007 by blowing up jet fuel supplies with the help of a notorious al-Qaida explosives expert.

      A federal judge in Brooklyn gave Kareem Ibrahim, the leader of the Shiite Muslim community in Trinidad and Tobago, the life term on Friday after a jury found him guilty last year of conspiracy.

      On tape, Ibrahim told Defreitas that the attackers must be ready to ‘fight it out, kill who you could kill and go back to Allah.’
      Ibrahim, from Trinidad, ‘abandoned the true tenants [sic] of his religion’ by participating in the plot, U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch said in a statement. SNIP

        1. Well, you know, Snark, I actually was violently attacked in 1981–and to this day do not know if I could have fired had I had a firearm. Revenge is a funny thing–when you live with the idea for 30 plus yrs as I have (the four men were never caught). It seems like it would be closure or satisfying, but it’s not enough—so better to move on and not have another atrocity somewhere on your conscience.

          1. That’s horrible, Star. I’m very sorry to hear that you went through that. I can’t even imagine the frustration over them never being caught.

            Of course, we never really know how we would react in such a situation, but I tend to think I’d easily fire upon anyone entering my home. To be honest, I’ve thought about it a lot and I would shoot the second I encountered a stranger in my home, without waiting for the intruder to draw a weapon or attack me or my family. Then, before calling the police, I’d go get the biggest butcher knife I have in my kitchen, and put it in the dead guy’s hand just so it would clearly be viewed as self defense. As far as I’m concerted, if someone has the nerve to break into my home then he has chosen to take the risk and will suffer the worst consequences. Frankly, I highly doubt I’d feel any remorse over it. One less criminal in the world.

  3. What is it about these people that they think they don’t have to have ID to do what Whites and Asians do?
    Are Blacks so out of modern society that they never cash a check, never got a driver’s license, never visited a government agency, never enrolled in school or any of the million other things we need ID.
    They never fly anywhere, never sign up for a phone, credit cards, buy an auto, nothing, nada?
    The voter ID issue is a bogus as the ‘war on women’ and is insulting to Blacks.
    Shame on them for insisting Blacks can’t or don’t know how to get IDs.

      1. The true racists are the democrats who insist that Blacks are too stupid to be able to get an ID. What’s even worse is that they don’t want them to get an ID in order to keep them helpless and fully dependent on government.

  4. If you recall, Lynch was ‘introduced’ by aka Obama as if she were simply a high-functioning, dedicated prosecutor whose work had caught his – and Holder’s – eye. Careful attention was paid to positioning her as one who not too long ago commenced working with Holder.

    The glaring truth is: she and Holder’s wife have been close friends since the late 1970s, at Harvard.

    Also notable is her return to federal service coincident with Holder’s stated wish to quit as AG.

    How this group thinks they can continue to pull the wool over America’s eyes about who they are, and what they are up to, baffles me.

    1. Given the very small group of radical progressives Obama hangs out with and is comfortable with, there is no possible way he would nominate Lynch for AG unless she was a carbon copy of his political views. Take that to the bank.

    2. Just sickening… Thanks for the information.
      Speaking of sickening, will little insufficient Barry be flying back to our White House this weekend??

  5. Pingback: November 15, 2014 Grumpy Daily Headlines | Grumpy Opinions

  6. I’ve read Lynch was NOT Ø’s first choice. When the list of candidates must (a) be black (b) be against Voter ID and preferably be a gay or transgender, the possibilities aren’t exactly endless.

    It’s tough for Ø when he deems someone’s actual ability to do the job secondary to their race.

  7. OT: I am still very upset that the man who was paid millions to con American Citizens, also called American Citizens stupid.
    Now that the cat is out of the bag. Does anyone think o will slip, the next time he is speaking to the American public? That is by saying, Hey, You stupid people!
    This BS that they were unware of what this man stated many, many times is past ridiculous.
    I keep mentioning that not only does America keep finding out what is being done, said to us, but the whole world.
    We use to be known has a successful Country in so many ways.

  8. I had read previously some negative comments about this attorney, which already made me think of another Eric Holder. This attorney should not be approved at all.
    See what happened to Arizona’s law regarding illegals as another way to allow criminals to stay here. Who are these judges but liberals in charge.

  9. Pingback: Worrisome Questions About Loretta Lynch | Revere Radio Network

  10. Pingback: Worrisome Questions About Loretta Lynch | Illuminatus

  11. Pingback: Worrisome Questions About Loretta Lynch - Walker Ministries | Virginia Beach, VA

  12. I think Lynch should be vetted by the media, and questioned closely by the Senate…but unless there’s some smoking gun we don’t know about, she should probably confirmed.

    why do I think that? because this is BARACK OBAMA we’re talking about! the guy is simply not going to pick someone that you and I would pick. so we have to look at who in that universe of leftwing radicals is going to be the least awful leftwing radical.

    for example: compared to Tom Perez, Obama’s alleged first choice, Loretta Lynch looks like Antonin Scalia. how much better are we likely to get? he’s not going to nominate Andy McCarthy or Trey Gowdy.

    and there’s a political consideration too. the Republicans won big a couple weeks ago, and they have a great opportunity to expand the party. the spin the MSM will doubtless give “the party of no” for turning down someone as qualified as Lynch will not be good for that “rebranding” process.

    frankly, I’d rather give him Lynch and get the Keystone XL pipeline ok’d. we have to pick our battles.

  13. Oh, for the days of MLK’s supporters in suits, ties, and hats for the men and dresses for the women – the burgeoning black middle class struck down by The War on Poverty and liberal slavery off the handout.

Comments are closed.