Thread: Loretta Lynch

That Awkward Moment Obama’s Replacement for Eric Holder Came Face-to-Face With Ted Cruz
By Frank Camp - 8 hours ago

Senator Ted Cruz recently questioned Loretta Lynch, Obama’s potential replacement for Attorney General Eric Holder. http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.c...ta-lynch.html/

Lynch didn’t seem pleased with Senator Cruz’s questions.

On whether the President would be able to use his own discretion over tax laws:

Cruz: “If a subsequent president–let’s say President Cornyn is sworn in in January of 2017. And President Cornyn decide that he was going to instruct the Secretary of the Treasury not to collect any taxes in excess of 25%–to exercise prosecutorial discretion, and not collect the taxes. In your legal opinion, would that be consistent with the Constitution?

Lynch: “…before I can render legal opinion on the hypothetical…I want to know the entire scope of the action…”

On expanding the President’s amnesty executive order:

Cruz: “My first question…is in your understanding of prosecutorial discretion, is there anything to prevent that [Obama’s executive amnesty] from being expanded from four, five million people to all eleven or twelve million people who are currently here illegally?”

Lynch: “I think that with respect to any action, I would undertake a very careful legal analysis based on all of the fact presented to me…”

When that didn’t work, he asked about immigration again:

Cruz: “Let me try again…I asked you a pretty straightforward question. Would prosecutorial discretion allow the president to decline to enforce immigration laws against all eleven to twelve million people here illegally?”

Lynch: “Prosecutorial discretion…would focus on which cases to prosecute, and which types of charges to bring. It would not apply to the situation you’ve outlined.”

On the President’s power to choose not to enforce other laws, and whether that would be constitutional:

Cruz: Let me ask about your understanding of prosecutorial discretion. Would it allow a subsequent president… to state that there are other laws that the administration will not enforce – labor laws, environmental laws – would it allow a president to say every existing federal labor law shall heretofore not apply to the state of Texas because I am using my prosecutorial discretion to refuse to enforce those laws? In your judgment, would that be constitutional?”

Lynch: “…Again, I would have to know what legal basis was being proposed for that.”

After about ten minutes, unsatisfied with Lynch’s answers, Sen. Cruz eventually answered his own questions, remarking that “it would be patently unconstitutional” for the President to refuse to enforce the law, whether it be over taxes, labor or immigration.

Obama has been criticized throughout his presidency for ignoring immigration laws and issuing an executive order deferring the deportation of some illegal immigrants.

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/01/2415...unter-ted-cruz

Obama’s Holder Replacement Just Invented a New ‘Right’ for Illegal Aliens

January 28, 2015 By Matthew Burke

Obama’s nominee to replace corrupt Attorney General Eric Holder, the only sitting attorney general in American history to be held in contempt of Congress, addressed senators on Wednesday and was asked about Obama’s illegal amnesty scheme.

Senator Sessions asked nominee Loretta Lynch, the current U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, who should have a right to a job in America, a citizen, an illegal alien, or a legal immigrant.

“Who has more right to a job in this country, a lawful immigrant who’s here — a green card holder or a citizen, or a person who entered the country unlawfully?” Sessions asked.

Lynch apparently doesn’t recognize the difference in status, telling Sessions that illegals should have the same access to American jobs as immigrants in the country legally, or U.S. citizens.

“Well, senator, I believe that, um, the right and the obligation to work is one that’s shared by everyone in this country, regardless of how they came here,” Lynch replied. “And certainly if someone is here, regardless of status, I would prefer that they be participating in the workplace than not participating in the workplace,” said Lynch.

Hmmm…a right for an illegal alien to have a job in America? Which Constitution did Lynch study? It sounds like the same one Obama and Holder studied — Saul Alinsky’s.

video at link http://www.tpnn.com/2015/01/28/video...llegal-aliens/

Senate panel OK's Obama attorney general pick
ERICA WERNER - 8 hrs ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved Loretta Lynch's nomination to be attorney general, sending it to the full Senate.

The vote was 12 to 8, with three Republicans joining all committee Democrats in voting in favor of Lynch.

She is also expected to win approval by the full Senate, though the timing is uncertain.

The 55 -year-old Lynch now serves as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York. She would replace Eric Holder and become the first black woman to hold the nation's top law enforcement job.

Several Republicans said that Lynch's support for the legality of the president's executive actions on immigration disqualified her. But GOP Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who voted in her favor, said those critics were ignoring Lynch's long record of distinction.


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...id=ansnewsap11

Obama speech this afternoon on Senate not confirming Loretta Lynch.

Obama thinks that not confirming Loretta Lynch for Attorney general is unfair and part of a dysfunctional Congress. Well, this was the strategy of Harry Reid for 6 years and it was done at the behest of Obama to not bring things to the floor for debate. Too bad Obama. You never learned to play nice in the sandbox and share your toys.Just because you want Congress to play nice with you now means you are going to have to give something up, which you don't want to do.

And, "qualified" for the job doesn't mean she gets the job. Maybe she is out of step with the Country on other issues. Bork was qualified to sit on Supreme Court but they (Dems) didn't like his positions.

I think the GOP Senators are holding out for the wording in a trade bill banning abortions for illegal immigrants that the Dems didn't see until it went to Obama's desk and he is refusing to sign.

‘Embarrassing’: Angry Obama Blasts Senate Republicans Over Loretta Lynch Nomination

Apr. 17, 2015 1:57pm Fred Lucas

President Barack Obama on Friday blasted Senate Republicans for holding up the nomination of Loretta Lynch to be the next attorney general, calling it “embarrassing” and dysfunction that “goes too far.”

“What we still have is this crazy situation where a woman who everybody agrees is qualified — who has gone after terrorists, who has worked with police officers to get gangs off the streets, who is trusted by the civil rights community and by police unions as being somebody who’s fair and effective, and a good manager, nobody suggest otherwise, who’s been twice confirmed by the United States Senate — for one of the biggest law enforcement jobs in the country has been now sitting there longer than the previous seven attorney general nominees combined, and there’s no reason for it,” Obama said, breaking from his calmer tone to a more indignant one during a joint news conference with Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi at the White House.

“Nobody can describe a reason for it beyond political gamesmanship in the Senate on an issue that’s completely unrelated to her,” Obama said.

Senate Republicans are seeking to ensure language prohibiting public funding for abortion is part of a human trafficking bill.

“What are we doing here? I have to say, that there are times where the dysfunction in the Senate just goes too far. This is an example of it,” Obama said. “It’s gone too far. Enough. Enough. Call Loretta Lynch for a vote, get her confirmed. Put her in place. Let her do her job. This is embarrassing, a process like this.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015...ch-nomination/

comments

“…This is embarrassing, a process like this.”

Obama can’t make his disdain for America’s Constitution, it’s laws, and the role of it’s Congress any more apparent.

..

This isn’t dysfunction, this is precisely how our federal government was designed to work. They are a check on each other, so you can pull your head out, sir, or deal with the fact that they can grind everything to a halt (which is incidentally the best possible thing).

..

Of course Obama fails to mention that Lynch thinks Obama’s criminal / unconstitutional actions / policies are perfectly acceptable / legal. Of course to Obama, that is a badge of courage that should be rewarded with the appointment being confirmed by a senate that finally shows a bit of backbone.

...

Can you blame them – if the shoe was on the other foot the Democrats would do the same thing. Only someone with alzheimers could forget “Fast & Furious” and Government getting into the middle of people getting married. The biggest thing that Eric Holder did was pick sides on race. All of a sudden they were a branch of the NAACP.

..

Maybe if he didn’t nominate someone that said that she would not enforce our immigration laws, she would be in the office by now. Why should they confirm the nomination of a lawless attorney general. We already have one.

..

She has all but sworn that she will keep covered up all the illegal stuff the President and his cabinet has been doing………..why in the world would you vote yes for her……………..she will just be a puppet for them

..

Waaaaaaah, cry me a river. What, give you another AG appointment that keeps your government criminal thugs from prosecution, who will not only cry racism but sexism when critcized for not doing her job??...NOT!!!

Senate confirms Loretta Lynch as attorney general
4 hrs ago

WASHINGTON, April 23 (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate voted on Thursday to approve Loretta Lynch as President Barack Obama's next attorney general, ending a five-month deadlock that made Lynch wait longer for confirmation than the last seven attorneys general combined.

The first black woman to become the top U.S. law enforcement official, Lynch, 55, was approved by a 56-43 vote. Ten Republicans voted for Lynch, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. She is expected to take over as head of the U.S. Justice Department on Monday, replacing Eric Holder.

The voting margin reflected many Republicans' disapproval of Lynch's support for an executive order issued by Obama in November that was meant to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from the threat of deportation.

Before the vote, Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, an outspoken critic of that action, blasted Lynch.

"We do not have to confirm someone to the highest law enforcement position in America if that someone is publicly committed to denigrating Congress, violating law," he said.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid berated Republicans for delaying the confirmation and said Lynch was "as qualified a candidate" as he'd seen in almost 30 years in the Senate.

Lynch has awaited confirmation since November when Obama, a fellow Harvard Law School graduate, nominated her.

Despite the delay, she was widely seen as less controversial than Holder, who often clashed with Republicans. She has said she aims to smooth relations with Congress.

As attorney general, her earliest tests will likely include handling civil rights cases stemming from deadly altercations between police and unarmed black men in several U.S. cities. The Justice Department has said it will look into bringing civil rights charges over the death of a Baltimore man who died after sustaining a spinal cord injury while in police custody.

Lynch will also inherit major financial cases involving allegations that some of the world's largest banks helped clients evade U.S. taxes and manipulated the currency markets.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...d=ansnewsreu11

Attorney General Threatens Jail for ‘Hate Speech’ Against Islam…
See Former Rep’s EPIC Response

By Gina Cassini on December 5, 2015 in

On Thursday, Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch gave a shocking speech to a Muslim audience in which she did not even mention the San Bernardino attack that her own FBI called a “terrorist act”– but rather threatened to prosecute Americans who engaged in “hate speech” against Islam.

Lynch told the audience at the Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner that, despite an Islamic terror attack that left 14 Americans dead, her greatest concern has been the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric … that fear is my greatest fear.” Lynch then incredibly told the Muslim crowd: “We stand with you.”

Lynch went further, and threatened to “prosecute” anyone guilty of what she deemed “violence-inspiring speech” against Muslims that “edges towards violence.”

Well a former U.S. congressman just posted an epic video challenging Lynch to arrest him as he unleashed a torrent of politically-incorrect truth-speech about Islam.



“What the hell does that mean? I have a 1st Amendment right, Ms Lynch, to say whatever I want about Muslims.” Former Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh said in a video posted to his Facebook page. “There is a cancer in Islam, and if they’re not going to learn to assimilate, I don’t want them in this country.”

“You got a problem, Loretta Lynch, with me saying that? Then throw me in jail,” Walsh, a conservative talk show host, argued. “I think Islam is evil. I think Islam has a huge problem. I think most Muslims around the world are not compatible with American values. I don’t want them here.”

Rep. Walsh represented the 8th District of Illinois until 2013

Walsh continued to slam Lynch in his video for the comments she made at Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner one day after law enforcement officials say two people opened fire at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California, leaving 14 people dead and more than one dozen injured. According to reports, the wife pledged allegiance to the Islamic State on her Facebook page just moments before the attack.

In text that included some stronger language accompanying his video, which has been viewed more than 110,000 times as of Saturday morning, Walsh continued to argue that “most Muslims around the world are terrorists, support terrorism and/or support Sharia Law,” a fact borne out by numerous surveys.

“Any Muslim that is a terrorist or supports terrorism should be killed,” Walsh wrote. “If ‘Moderate’ Muslims don’t speak out against terrorism, they are our enemy and we should call them out and kick them out of this country.”



“Is that ‘anti-Muslim rhetoric’ that ‘edges toward violence,' Go ahead and prosecute me. I dare you.”

http://toprightnews.com/attorney-gen...epic-response/

comments


So, we have a major terrorist attack on US soil, and the Dem response is to call for more gun control.

Meanwhile, concurrent with the attack, the President is preparing to A) close Guantanamo and bring its inmates here, B) bring Syrian refugees here, despite the fact that the FBI says they cannot be well vetted, and C) says he will use "Executive Action" on gun ownership if Congress does not.
Are you kidding me? I'm beginning to sympathize with the tinfoil hat, 'conspiracy 'round every corner' crowd. This President's rhetoric and actions could not make him look more like a Trojan Horse if he tried.

...

So this woman has no problem with all of the anti-Christian, anti-Jew, and anti-anyone else speech, but once you try and paint muslims in a negative light she's ready to take a stand? F-her. Muslims are killing us around the world and we're worried about backlash? Stop shooting, stabbing, bombing, and beheading people and maybe, just maybe there won't be an issue

...



Quotes from — King Samir Shabazz of the Black Panthers:

"Our lessons talk about the bloodsuckers of the poor. It's that old no-good Jew, that old imposter Jew, that old hooked-nose, bagel-eating, lox-eating, Johnny-come-lately, perpetrating-a-fraud, just-crawled-out-of-the-caves-and-hills-of-Europe, so-called dam Jew… and I feel everything I'm saying up here is kosher."— Khalid Abdul Muhammad, one of the party's future leaders, Baltimore, Md., Feb. 19, 1994

"Kill every god--d*mn Zionist in Israel! God--d*mn little babies, god--d*mn old ladies! Blow up Zionist supermarkets!"—Malik Zulu Shabazz, the party's national chairman, protesting at B'nai B'rith International headquarters in Washington, D.C., April 20, 2002

"I hate white people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate it. We didn't come out here to play today. There's too much serious business going on in the black community to be out here sliding through South Street with white, dirty, cracker whore b_tches on our arms, and we call ourselves black men.…

What the hell is wrong with you black man?
You at adoomsday with a white girl on your d*m arm. We keep begging white people for freedom! No wonder we not free! Your enemy cannot make you free, fool! You want freedom? You going to have to kill some crackers! You going to have to kill some of their babies!"
— King Samir Shabazz, head of the party's Philadelphia chapter, in a National Geographic documentary, January 2009

Lets not forget what Farrakhan says about killing whites.

"Louis Farrakhan: Killing Whites is Justice"

Killing Whites is Justice http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=6B8xytYhFLE

White People Deserve To Die http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZsch...layer_embedded

Calls on Blacks to 'Rise Up and Kill' Whites http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr7Q9...layer_embedded

Eric Holder's Department of Justice sat quiet when the Black Panthers committed Interstate Murder for Hire when distributing Dead or Alive Posters on George Zimmerman.

Not only had they committed a Class D Felony in the State of Florida, they Televised their $10.000 Dead or Alive Bounty on George Zimmerman's Head when being interviewed by a
local News Station...So that in and by itself was damning for the fact that it was Nationally Televised...

In the State of Florida, this is a Class D Felony, and because they crossed 6 States Borders, they committed a count of Interstate Murder for Hire in each of those states, that would had meant, they should had been charged with Six Counts of Interstate Murder for Hire as well as a count for each of the Wanted Dead or Alive Posters they distributed, which were in the thousands.

Yet, the State Department, FBI nor our Department of Justice Chief Eric Holder called for an investigation into what was a clearly a Murder for Hire...

How the 'New York Times' and Loretta Lynch Made Me Join the NRA
By Roger L Simon December 6, 2015

am not a complete stranger to guns. I got my merit badge in riflery when I was a kid and have dropped in on a firing range now and again, learning the basics on Glocks and Berettas. I even went shooting with former Governor Rick Perry of Texas.

But the NRA was always a bridge too far. I interviewed Wayne LaPierre, its CEO, once for PJTV, but I never joined. I'm still a Jewish boy from New York whose mother cringed at buying him a cap gun. It's not in my DNA.

The New York Times and Attorney General Loretta Lynch have finally put an end to all that. Hello again, Mr. LaPierre. Here's my twenty-five bucks. Send me that rosewood knife. I'm in.

I don't know which is worse, Ms. Lynch or the NYT. Actually they're closely related, but let me start with the paper. They published an editorial Friday ("End the Gun Epidemic in America"), contra the 2nd Amendment and calling for the confiscation of arms: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/op...n-america.html

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens

.

The amazing, and revealing, aspect of the editorial is that only days after the San Bernardino attack the words "Islam," "ISIS," "jihad" or anything resembling them are not mentioned in this editorial (as if they were complete anathema), only the amorphous "terrorism." To wit:

America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

The amazing, and revealing, aspect of the editorial is that only days after the San Bernardino attack the words "Islam," "ISIS," "jihad" or anything resembling them are not mentioned in this editorial (as if they were complete anathema), only the amorphous "terrorism." To wit:

America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

https://pjmedia.com/diaryofamadvoter...w-i-joined-nra

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

Attorney General Threatens Jail for ‘Hate Speech’ Against Islam…
See Former Rep’s EPIC Response

By Gina Cassini on December 5, 2015 in

On Thursday, Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch gave a shocking speech to a Muslim audience in which she did not even mention the San Bernardino attack that her own FBI called a “terrorist act”– but rather threatened to prosecute Americans who engaged in “hate speech” against Islam.

Lynch told the audience at the Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner that, despite an Islamic terror attack that left 14 Americans dead, her greatest concern has been the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric … that fear is my greatest fear.” Lynch then incredibly told the Muslim crowd: “We stand with you.”

Lynch went further, and threatened to “prosecute” anyone guilty of what she deemed “violence-inspiring speech” against Muslims that “edges towards violence.”

Well a former U.S. congressman just posted an epic video challenging Lynch to arrest him as he unleashed a torrent of politically-incorrect truth-speech about Islam.






Rep. Walsh represented the 8th District of Illinois until 2013

Walsh continued to slam Lynch in his video for the comments she made at Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner one day after law enforcement officials say two people opened fire at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California, leaving 14 people dead and more than one dozen injured. According to reports, the wife pledged allegiance to the Islamic State on her Facebook page just moments before the attack.

In text that included some stronger language accompanying his video, which has been viewed more than 110,000 times as of Saturday morning, Walsh continued to argue that “most Muslims around the world are terrorists, support terrorism and/or support Sharia Law,” a fact borne out by numerous surveys.

“Any Muslim that is a terrorist or supports terrorism should be killed,” Walsh wrote. “If ‘Moderate’ Muslims don’t speak out against terrorism, they are our enemy and we should call them out and kick them out of this country.”




http://toprightnews.com/attorney-gen...epic-response/

comments


So, we have a major terrorist attack on US soil, and the Dem response is to call for more gun control.

Meanwhile, concurrent with the attack, the President is preparing to A) close Guantanamo and bring its inmates here, B) bring Syrian refugees here, despite the fact that the FBI says they cannot be well vetted, and C) says he will use "Executive Action" on gun ownership if Congress does not.
Are you kidding me? I'm beginning to sympathize with the tinfoil hat, 'conspiracy 'round every corner' crowd. This President's rhetoric and actions could not make him look more like a Trojan Horse if he tried.

...

So this woman has no problem with all of the anti-Christian, anti-Jew, and anti-anyone else speech, but once you try and paint muslims in a negative light she's ready to take a stand? F-her. Muslims are killing us around the world and we're worried about backlash? Stop shooting, stabbing, bombing, and beheading people and maybe, just maybe there won't be an issue

...



Quotes from — King Samir Shabazz of the Black Panthers:

"Our lessons talk about the bloodsuckers of the poor. It's that old no-good Jew, that old imposter Jew, that old hooked-nose, bagel-eating, lox-eating, Johnny-come-lately, perpetrating-a-fraud, just-crawled-out-of-the-caves-and-hills-of-Europe, so-called dam Jew… and I feel everything I'm saying up here is kosher."— Khalid Abdul Muhammad, one of the party's future leaders, Baltimore, Md., Feb. 19, 1994

"Kill every god--d*mn Zionist in Israel! God--d*mn little babies, god--d*mn old ladies! Blow up Zionist supermarkets!"—Malik Zulu Shabazz, the party's national chairman, protesting at B'nai B'rith International headquarters in Washington, D.C., April 20, 2002

"I hate white people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate it. We didn't come out here to play today. There's too much serious business going on in the black community to be out here sliding through South Street with white, dirty, cracker whore b_tches on our arms, and we call ourselves black men.…

What the hell is wrong with you black man?
You at adoomsday with a white girl on your d*m arm. We keep begging white people for freedom! No wonder we not free! Your enemy cannot make you free, fool! You want freedom? You going to have to kill some crackers! You going to have to kill some of their babies!"
— King Samir Shabazz, head of the party's Philadelphia chapter, in a National Geographic documentary, January 2009

Lets not forget what Farrakhan says about killing whites.

"Louis Farrakhan: Killing Whites is Justice"

Killing Whites is Justice http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=6B8xytYhFLE

White People Deserve To Die http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZsch...layer_embedded

Calls on Blacks to 'Rise Up and Kill' Whites http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr7Q9...layer_embedded

Eric Holder's Department of Justice sat quiet when the Black Panthers committed Interstate Murder for Hire when distributing Dead or Alive Posters on George Zimmerman.

Not only had they committed a Class D Felony in the State of Florida, they Televised their $10.000 Dead or Alive Bounty on George Zimmerman's Head when being interviewed by a
local News Station...So that in and by itself was damning for the fact that it was Nationally Televised...

In the State of Florida, this is a Class D Felony, and because they crossed 6 States Borders, they committed a count of Interstate Murder for Hire in each of those states, that would had meant, they should had been charged with Six Counts of Interstate Murder for Hire as well as a count for each of the Wanted Dead or Alive Posters they distributed, which were in the thousands.

Yet, the State Department, FBI nor our Department of Justice Chief Eric Holder called for an investigation into what was a clearly a Murder for Hire...

"To learn who rules over you,
simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

~~ Voltaire

Attorney General Loretta Lynch was figuratively thrown under the bus by the Obama administration. Certainly the orders to redact the Orlando shooters 911 call recordings did not originate at her level. Like a good soldier, she carried out the bidding of the POTUS or his handlers. The most amazing thing is the outcry that went up from all parties when the redact transcript was released. Do they think we are that stupid? Well, some of their uninformed voters might be. Not you and me. Read more below.


Why did the White House just humiliate Loretta Lynch?
By Post Editorial Board - June 20, 2016

Idiotic: That’s the only word for the Obama administration’s move to scrub references to Islam or ISIS from the transcripts of Orlando terrorist Omar Mateen’s calls.

Under an avalanche of ridicule, the Justice Department on Monday relented and released the full transcripts. But what was the point? Everyone already knew that he’d pledged allegiance to ISIS and its “caliph.”

Fine: President Obama wants to make this about gun control, not terrorism — but ham-handed editing only calls attention to what you’re deleting, and to Obama’s peevish rules against uttering terms like “radical Islam.”

Just look at the redactions:

Mateen: “I pledge of allegiance to [omitted]. “I pledge allegiance to [omitted] may God protect him [in Arabic], on behalf of [omitted].”

All the omissions did was make Team Obama look determined to keep its head in the sand about the nature of the enemy.

Even the “explanations” sounded dumb. Here’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch on ABC’s “This Week”:

“What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda.”

Further his propaganda? Seriously? The answer to Islamist jihad is to black out the words?

Lynch never did anything this absurd in all her years as US attorney here in New York, so you know the order came down from above.

It’s also idiocy déjà vu: Four years ago, Team Obama made then-UN Ambassador Susan Rice tour all the Sunday shows to blame the deadly Benghazi attack on an internet video, rather than on the terrorist plot they all knew it was. She looked a fool once the administration finally admitted the truth, just as Loretta Lynch does now.

It makes you wonder: Who at the White House feels compelled to send women of color out to humiliate themselves on national TV?

http://nypost.com/2016/06/20/obamas-war-on-omitted/

http://allenwestrepublic.com/2016/06...oretta-lynch/#

[IMG][/IMG]

Loretta Lynch represented Clintons during Whitewater

Obama's new nominee for attorney general has career filled with high profile cases

Published: 11/08/2014 at 11:16 PM

(Breitbart) New York federal prosecutor Loretta Lynch, the new nominee for attorney general, has a career filled with high profile cases — and she was a member of Bill Clinton’s defense team during the 1992 Whitewater corruption probe.

As he made his announcement Saturday afternoon, Obama called the two-time U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York a “tough, fair and independent” lawyer. “It’s pretty hard to be more qualified for this job than Loretta Lynch,” Obama said.

Indeed, the prosecutor has a long career built of some high profile cases but there is one case Lynch was involved in that few are talking about. Lynch was a part of Bill Clinton’s Whitewater probe defense team in 1992.


http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/loretta-l...g-whitewater/#!