03/4/17

WATCH: Fmr AG Loretta Lynch alludes to blood and death on streets; Says rights being ‘rolled back’ (video)

By: Renee Nal | New Zeal

Loretta Lynch

“…They’ve marched, they’ve bled and yes, some of them died. This is hard. Every good thing is. We have done this before. We can do this again…” – Loretta Lynch, February 28 2017

The official U.S. Senate Democrats Facebook page posted a seriously disturbing video of former attorney general Loretta E. Lynch on February 28, 2017.  The video is less than a minute long, but speaks volumes. Lynch opens with the fear-mongering claim that people are experiencing “great fear and uncertainty.” What is left unsaid, of course, is that the reason for this “great fear” is that Donald Trump was elected as president.

Further and predictably without any specifics, Lynch continues to say that “our rights” are “being assailed, being trampled on and even being rolled back.”

This irresponsible and disgusting allegation hangs there, unspecified.

But even these words are not enough for Loretta Lynch, soon-to-be proud recipient of the Thomas Jefferson Foundation Medal of Law from the University of Virginia. Lynch continues by claiming that “to move this country forward to achieve the great ideals of our Founding Fathers,” people should march, bleed and die. She may not say it outright, but she heavily implies it.

Here is the transcript:

“I know that this is a time of great fear and uncertainty for so many people. I know it’s a time of concern for people, who see our rights being assailed, being trampled on and even being rolled back.  I know that this is difficult, but I remind you that this has never been easy. We have always had to work to move this country forward to achieve the great ideals of our Founding Fathers.

It has been people, individuals who have banded together, ordinary people who simply saw what needed to be done and came together and supported those ideals who have made the difference. They’ve marched, they’ve bled and yes, some of them died. This is hard. Every good thing is. We have done this before. We can do this again.”

Do WHAT again? What rights are being “rolled back”?

The U.S. Senate Democrats introduced the short video on Facebook by saying that it offers “words of inspiration.”

H/T: 100PercentFedUp

07/16/16

“Hope and Change” Becomes “Death and Destruction”

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

Hope

BLM PosterPresident Barack Obama laid the groundwork for the Black Lives Matter movement in his first term when he said that the Cambridge, Massachusetts police “acted stupidly” after an African-American professor was arrested in his own home. It turned out the white policeman was protecting the home from what he thought was a burglary. Although the policeman had an impeccable record and there was no evidence of racial bias, Obama found him guilty of racism and “stupidity.”

Obama was trained by his mentor, Communist Frank Marshall Davis, to consider white people guilty of racism. Davis told a young Barack that black people had “reason to hate.”

Frank_Marshall_DavisOn virtually every occasion involving a police confrontation with black people—except in Dallas when five police officers were shot and killed by a racist black—Obama has sided with the rioters and the mob against law enforcement.

Black Dallas Police Chief David Brown revealed on July 8, 2016 that the sniper who killed five officers and injured another seven “said he was upset about Black Lives Matter,” during the negotiations with police. He meant that the Black Lives Matter protest, which was being protected by police, had inspired him to take action.

“These murders are the predictable outcome of the ‘war on the police’ and the racial polarization that has been fostered in this country,” said former Republican Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore.

Gilmore pointed the finger at America’s first black President. He said, “President Obama’s statement this past Thursday, before the Dallas attack, on police shootings also helped set the stage. The President’s statement condemning the Dallas attack is too late to undo his terrible earlier statement implying that the police are targeting African Americans—an infamous lie.”

He was referring to the fact that, days before the murders, Obama had lectured the nation about “racial disparities that exist in our criminal justice system” and pushed for so-called criminal justice reform—legislation that could empty the prisons and put hardened criminals back on the streets.

When two killings of black men were caught on video and protests erupted throughout the country, Obama could have calmed the nation. Instead, he threw gasoline on the flames of discontent.

As a result, protests across the United States spread from coast-to-coast, not only in Minnesota and Louisiana but in Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Oakland, New York City, Ferguson, Atlanta, Jackson (Mississippi), Baltimore and finally, Dallas.

Obama’s Role in the Violence

Chicago Police Officer Martin Preib says that “…perhaps no president in the United States has politicized and then undermined the federal law enforcement agencies more than Barack Obama. It’s a truth many Americans are slowly realizing in the wake of the decision by the FBI not to indict Hillary Clinton for her illegal actions in the email scandal.”

“What is truly chilling,” he writes, “is how Obama has used federal law enforcement as an instrument of his intense anti-law enforcement ideology, an ideology utterly unique in the history of American presidents, revolutionary even.”

MartinPreibPreib said, “Obama’s knee-jerk response to blaming police in shootings around the country betray this willingness to vilify police, no matter how much evidence indicates the police acted legally and responsibly. It is a tactic by Obama that undermines local law enforcement and rallies public sentiment against the police…”

William Johnson, the executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, said in an interview with Fox, “I think [the Obama’s administration] continued appeasements at the federal level with the Department of Justice, their appeasement of violent criminals, their refusal to condemn movements like Black Lives Matter, actively calling for the death of police officers, that type of thing, all the while blaming police for the problems in this country, has led directly to the climate that has made Dallas possible.”

Attorney General Loretta Lynch actually delivered a message to Black Lives Matters (BLM) activists, advising them to continue their protests: “Do not be discouraged by those who would use your lawful actions as a cover for their heinous violence.”

This wasn’t the first time that the Obama administration had encouraged anti-police protests. FBI Assistant Director and Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund President Ron Hosko noted that the Justice Department’s “ill-timed decision to launch a full investigation into the Ferguson Police Department at the height of racial tensions in that community” amounted to “throwing gasoline on a fire that was already burning.”

He added, “Many officers were disgusted by such a transparent political maneuver at a time when presidential and attorney general leadership could have calmed a truly chaotic situation.”

Nevertheless, we are seeing the pattern repeated, as the national political party conventions get ready to take place. It is as if the White House is screaming, “Burn Baby Burn.” It is their opportunity to paint Donald J. Trump and Republicans as racists.

The 2016 Democratic Party platform appears sympathetic to the agitators, saying, “…We will push for a societal transformation to make it clear that black lives matter and there is no place for racism in our country.”

Hillary ClintonIn addition, both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U. S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have sought support from the group in their respective campaigns for the Democratic nomination.

Earlier in the presidential campaign season, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley backpedaled after declaring during a Democratic forum that “all lives matter.” Actor Justin Timberlake actually apologized to BLM for saying, “we’re all the same.”

Blood on Their Hands

The officers in Dallas were attacked in plain sight of the sniper because they were guarding and escorting 800 BLM protesters. The killer saw this as an opportunity to murder.

David BrownThat the demonstrations would turn violent—or inspire cop-killing—was to be expected.

Black Lives Matter, whose activists met with White House official Valerie Jarrett, is an organization that salutes convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur as a role model. A member of the Black Liberation Army (BLA), a group that worked with the communist terrorist Weather Underground, Assata Shakur, also known as Joanne Chesimard, killed New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster “execution style” by shooting him in the head as he lay wounded by gunfire, according to the State Troopers Association of New Jersey. She was convicted of murder and went to prison, but with the help of the Weather Underground, escaped to Cuba, where she is still being protected by the communist regime.

The BLM website features this quotation from Shakur: “It is our duty to fight for our freedom. It is our duty to win. We must love each other and support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains.”

FBI photo file showing the different appearances of Assata Shakur.Shakur’s notion of “freedom” is to be found in Cuba, where there is no freedom and the dictatorship controls the movements and activities of its citizens. It is a regime that sponsored terrorism and cop-killing on American soil.

“Black Lives Matter, as far as I am concerned, is a radical hate group,” said El Paso County’s black Police Chief Greg Allen. “And for that purpose alone, I think the leadership of this country needs to look a little bit harder at that particular group. The consequences of what we saw in Dallas is due to their efforts.”

“Black Lives Matter, which I have renamed ‘Black Lies’ L-I-E-S Matter, it’s nothing more than an astroturf operation,” Milwaukee’s black Sheriff David A. Clarke told the American Journalism Center’s Alex Nitzberg. “It’s just the latest shallow disguised, confederation if you will, of community organizers and leftists that specialize in fostering disorganization and rebellion in ghettos and other struggling areas throughout the United States of America.”

David ClarkeIt may be astroturf, in the sense that it’s a political organization with shadowy big money backers, but the strings ultimately go right into the White House. After these activists met with Obama, there can be no doubt about that.

In his special AIM Report, “Reds Exploiting Blacks: The Roots of Black Lives Matter,” investigative reporter James Simpson examined the funding and backing of this organization. Back in January, Simpson predicted that the movement could “assist President Obama’s exploitation of racial divisions in society beyond his final term in office.”

It appears Obama couldn’t wait until he was out of office. Perhaps the Trump candidacy caused him to act sooner.

As Obama knows, the incitement of racial protest and unrest leading to the murders of police diverts the attention of the public and the news media from the real problem in black America—the breakdown of the African-American family. Obama’s own family was dysfunctional, as he was virtually deserted by his mother and turned over to his grandparents, who turned him over to his communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis.

At a time like this, Obama could have provided real leadership, convening a special summit to examine the crisis in black neighborhoods and among black families. Instead, he exploited racism for political purposes.

Into this void we see courageous individuals like black Puerto Rican Ismael Hernandez, founder and executive director of the Freedom & Virtue Institute, who says, “By portraying our present family problems as a legacy of slavery and perennial racism, we can relinquish responsibility for the crisis and place it in the hands of whites or in the hands of the state.”

Hernandez is a former member of the Puerto Rican Communist Party who converted to Christ and has written, Not Tragically Colored: Freedom, Personhood, and the Renewal of Black America.

He understands the Marxist agenda—to make blacks into wards of the state, subject to political manipulation and exploitation by Democratic Party politicians.

ismael hernandez 2016“I grew up hating the United States, hating capitalism, and blaming capitalism and America for the poverty we saw around us,” Hernandez said in an interview with Marvin Olasky of World magazine. “And I hated America for the bad marriage that my mom and my dad had, because my father was only interested in revolution.”

Obama grew up the same way, as a result of the influence of black racist Frank Marshall Davis. However, Obama, in his own biography and when he was running for office, didn’t even have the honesty and integrity to acknowledge the role that Davis had played in his own life. Davis was only “Frank” in his book, Dreams from My Father.Hence, Obama adopts the Marxist playbook of treating blacks as victims of white society. His knee-jerk reaction in police confrontations is to blame the police.

Dreams_from_my_fatherIn a story from October 2015, Obama defended the Black Lives Matter movement and claimed that the protests “are giving voice to a problem happening only in African-American communities.” He said, “We, as a society, particularly given our history, have to take this seriously,” thus blaming American history and slavery for current problems.

“I think everybody understands all lives matter,” Obama said. But he went on to defend the racist term, “Black Lives Matter,” saying, “I think the reason that the organizers used the phrase ‘Black Lives Matter’ was not because they were suggesting nobody else’s lives matter. Rather, what they were suggesting was there is a specific problem that’s happening in the African-American community that’s not happening in other communities.”

Obama added, “And that is a legitimate issue that we’ve got to address.”

Yet, in case after case, including the police killing in self-defense of black thug Michael Brown in Ferguson, the evidence (in that case from Obama’s own Department of Justice) vindicated the conduct of the police.

At a White House meeting with Black Lives Matter activists Brittany Packnett and DeRay Mckesson, Obama said they “are much better organizers” than he was at their age, and that he is “confident that they are going to take America to new heights.”

We saw those “new heights” in Dallas, where the sniper’s Facebook page showed him in a dashiki, holding a clenched fist in the air. Johnson’s cover photos are a black liberation flag and a black power fist.

Black Lives Matter marchThis was the inevitable result of the White House rolling out the red carpet to Black Lives Matter. The red turned out to be blood.

The black racist killer told police that he “was upset about the recent police shootings” and “wanted to kill white people, especially white officers.”

The bloody trail from the massacre in Dallas leads to the White House.

Another participant in that White House meeting was the Reverend Al Sharpton, who participated in the Tawana Brawley hoax back in 1987, in which a black girl made false and damaging charges of rape against a group of white men. Sharpton was found guilty of defamation and ordered to pay a financial fine in that case.

Obama consciously decided to treat him as an ally, despite Sharpton’s history of anti-white agitation.

All of this sends a message to black youth—go ahead and agitate and exploit racial differences. The President of the United States is with you, even if you “Blame Whitey” with no evidence.

Bill OReilly 2016A different message should be sent. When black churchgoers were massacred in Charleston, South Carolina, by a white racist, most blacks in the area, even families of the victims, reacted with a message of racial healing and forgiveness. It was a tender and touching moment that brought people of all races together. We have seen none of that from the White House.

Equally offensive, Hillary Clinton has pandered to the mob, begging forgiveness for her husband’s 1994 crime bill that put black “superpredators” in jail and more police on the streets.

As we noted in a column about one particular exhibit at the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Arkansas, both Mrs. Clinton and Senator Sanders “seem to believe that highlighting black crime is now considered racist, and that white racism is actually the real problem in black communities that have been devastated by black criminals.”

The “Making Communities Safer” exhibit of the Clinton Presidential Library highlights the tough-on-crime policies of the Clinton administration, including the building of prisons. Those policies, now considered racist by the Democrats, did far more to keep black families and their neighborhoods safe than the anti-police and racist rhetoric now gushing out of the White House.

The War on Police can only claim more lives.


Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected]View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.

12/13/15

Trump: Mr Right Now/Cruz: Mr Right

By: Lloyd Marcus

Trump-n-Cruz

My 87 year old black dad is a baby conservative. After several years of me printing out my articles and mailing them to him, Dad finally realized his loyalty to Democrats was not only misguided, but was actually destructive to blacks. Thus, I have become Dad’s Conservatism coach.

He phoned me with a chuckle in his voice, “What do you think about Donald Trump?” Dad was referring to Trump’s comment about restricting Muslims from entering our country for awhile.

Despite my efforts to guide him to conservative media, Dad still gets his news from the MSM; a fan of Don Lemon at CNN. Consequently, Dad has been taught by the MSM that all opposition to Leftists implementing their liberal socialist/progressive agenda is racism or hate.

While on the stepping machine at the gym, one of the TVs was on CNN. CNN featured numerous panel discussions purposed to portray Trump as a racist ignorant SOB for suggesting a temporary ban on Muslims entering our country. The truth is there is historical precedent for Trump’s proposal. http://bit.ly/1ORtyKT It is a common sense precaution to protect Americans. Still, the MSM foolishly hoped Trump’s Muslim ban proposal would be the final nail in his presidential hopeful coffin.

I told Dad that despite the MSM’s best efforts to destroy Trump, his poll numbers continue to skyrocket. http://bit.ly/1IH4xkt

I offered Dad a parable. Imagine that you were starving. A gruff burly un-bathed biker comes along and gives you food. You would ignore the biker’s rough-edges and foul odor, right? Dad said, “Yes, I would say praise the Lord.” I said, “Dad, the American people are starving for a renewal of America’s greatness.” I recited a list of Obama’s lies and anti-American policies. I informed Dad to how voters have been betrayed by Republicans, reneging on their vow to push back against Obama’s lawless implementation of his socialist/progressive agenda.

So along comes Donald Trump promising starving Americans a feast of renewed American greatness. Starving excited voters with forks in hand ready to eat, crossing all demographics, have taken a seat at Trump’s table. I explained to Dad that Ted Cruz is Donald Trump without the slightly unpleasant smell. Please do not get me wrong folks. I am not dissing Trump. I am merely interjecting a bit of humor. I would enthusiastically give Trump my vote if he became the GOP presidential nominee.

All I am saying is Ted Cruz is a true conservative who offers all the boldness, fearlessness and promises of Trump but with presidential gravitas and moral authority.

Confronting the arrogance of Obama’s AG Loretta Lynch, Cruz has once again proven he will take no prisoners when standing up for liberty and the American people.

In a nutshell, despite the most recent Islamic terrorist attack in San Bernardino in which 14 Americans were murdered, Lynch has decreed that she will throw anyone in jail who dares to speak badly about Muslims.

The first of several outrages that popped up in my mind is how Lynch and Obama have ignored Black Lives Matter’s bold clarion call to blacks to kill cops and crackers (white people). http://bit.ly/1Kzm6Uf Hundreds at a BLM rally marched down a NY street chanting, “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!” http://bit.ly/1GNXUHV

Well, my man Ted Cruz immediately jumped into Lynch’s case. Cruz scolded Lynch and Obama.

We see Loretta Lynch, the attorney general, promising in the wake of this terrorist attack – does she come out and say, ‘We’re going to track down the terrorists and kill them’?

No, she says prosecute anyone that has the temerity to stand up and speak against radical Islamic terrorism.

Well, let me tell you right now, radical Islamic terrorism is evil.”

Then Cruz jumped into Obama’s case – addressing his absurd arrogant accusation.

Mr. President, there is not a moral equivalence between radical Islamic terrorists and Christians and Jews.

One has a philosophy from day one of murdering those who they consider infidels; the other preach love and forgiveness and standing together as one humanity.

And let me say beyond that in the United States, we will not enforce Sharia Law.

And Madam attorney general, if you wanna come prosecute me for executing my First Amendment rights, come and get me, I’m right here!” http://bit.ly/1IY2Utj

Folks, if that doesn’t get your blood going and have you standing up and cheering, nothing will. Cruz’s rant was bold, and yet, dignified, morally straight and presidential.

Donald Trump is Mr Right Now. Sen Ted Cruz is the real-deal Mr Right; prayerfully our next Mr President.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
LloydMarcus.com

12/1/15

The Media’s Faux Outrage Over “Domestic Terrorism”

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

We don’t remember any outrage from the media over the alleged roles played by Obama associates Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn in the 1970 bombing murder of San Francisco police officer Brian V. McDonnell. In fact, the media peddled the nonsense that Ayers and Dohrn, who helped launch Barack Obama’s political career, were “anti-war activists” who bombed a few buildings and never hurt anyone.

Since “domestic terrorism” is now a topic of concern for the media, in the wake of the attack on the Planned Parenthood facility in Colorado, can we expect the media to pressure Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch to gather new evidence in the McDonnell case? It’s not likely.

Lynch has already seized upon the killings at the Planned Parenthood clinic,saying federal officials “stand ready to offer any and all assistance to the district attorney and state and local law enforcement in Colorado as they move forward with their investigation.” Yet, neither Lynch nor her predecessor, Eric Holder, committed any resources toward solving the McDonnell murder, which is still an open case.

There is no statute of limitations on murder. But because Ayers and Dohrn were associates of Obama and helped launch his campaign for political office in Chicago, the media have shied away from the McDonnell murder story and have distorted the facts of the case.

The double standard proves the media have no interest in exposing alleged “domestic terrorism.”

For more than seven years Accuracy in Media has been calling on the media to join the campaign to get justice for McDonnell’s family. Many news media organizations have falsely claimed the Weather Underground terrorist organization of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn destroyed property but did not kill people. In fact, the McDonnell murder was blamed by the FBI and other law enforcement organizations on the Weather Underground. What’s more, former FBI informant Larry Grathwohl named Ayers and Dohrn as being involved in, or having knowledge of, the plot to kill McDonnell and other police officers. Grathwohl has passed away, but former FBI agents like Max Noel say evidence can still be gathered in the case and that old evidence can be analyzed with new forensic techniques.

When a Planned Parenthood clinic is apparently targeted by a crazy nut living in a shack, the media are determined to link him to conservative Christians and pro-lifers who work through the democratic system to shut down federal funding of these killing centers. Planned Parenthood propaganda about the alleged culprit being inspired by politicians who want to defund the abortion industry is published as if it were established fact.

The media want you to believe that the killing outside Planned Parenthood is more significant than the killing which goes on inside. Yet we have seen in the videos from the Center for Medical Progress that unborn babies are being killed and their baby parts harvested for profit. These, too, are human lives.

In contrast to the Colorado case, the Weather Underground was part of a global network with foreign connections that reached into the Oval Office itself. Yet, for seven years the Obama administration has refused to commit sufficient resources to investigating this network and bringing terrorists who were part of it to justice. Our pro-Obama media simply don’t care.

This is why the left-wing rhetoric from the media about protecting women’s health and women’s lives in the wake of the Colorado killings cannot be taken seriously. They see this violence as a political opportunity to smear conservatives. They don’t care a whit about “domestic terrorism,” except when it serves their political purposes.

In association with the Black Liberation Army (BLA), the Weather Underground carried out the October 20, 1981 armed terrorist assault on a Brinks armored car that left Nyack, New York Police Sgt. Edward O’Grady, Patrolman Waverly Brown and Brinks guard Peter Paige dead. Cheri Laverne Dalton is wanted for her alleged involvement in that robbery. She is on the FBI’s “domestic terrorism” listand is believed to be living in Cuba.

Obama normalized relations with Cuba without demanding the return of Dalton and other fugitives from American justice, such as Joanne Chesimard of the BLA and William Morales of the Puerto Rican FALN. Chesimard killed a New Jersey State Trooper.

Two members of the May 19 Communist Organization, a support group for the Weather Underground, are still on the FBI “domestic terrorism” wanted list. They are Donna Joan Borup and Elizabeth Anna Duke. Our media show no interest in helping to apprehend them. Neither does the Obama administration.

Obama’s first attorney general, Eric Holder, was deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration, where he played a key role in pardons for members of the FALN and the Weather Underground. As attorney general, he approved the early release from prison of communist terrorist Marilyn Buck, a member of the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army.

In the case of Chesimard, who is a member of the “Most Wanted Terrorists List,” Lynch could authorize FBI director James Comey to wiretap Obama’s friends, Ayers and Dohrn, and other members of the Weather Underground, in order to find out where in Cuba she might be living. The Weather Underground had helped Chesimard—a convicted cop-killer—escape from a New Jersey prison in 1979 and flee to Cuba.

Somehow we doubt that Lynch has any interest in bring Chesimard to justice.

But Lynch will use federal resources to go after a nut, who apparently opened fire on a Planned Parenthood clinic and is now in custody.

The Obama administration and its media allies don’t care at all about bringing terrorists to justice. They use terrorism as a partisan political issue.

10/1/15

US Attorney General, US Cities, Join UN to Create Global Police Force Intiative

Yesterday, Loretta Lynch announced before the United Nations that the Attorney General’s Office, in collaboration with several US Cities will for a global law enforcement initiative called the Strong Cities Network. This is the implementation of UN rules and laws on US soil bypassing Congress and circumventing the Constitution.

Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism

04/25/15

Loretta “I Refuse To Answer” Lynch Confirmed As Attorney General After Republican Betrayal

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton


Getty Images

The Republican Party is becoming more and more detached from their conservative base. They seem to vote against anything the conservatives want and do all they can to enable our Marxist president. As Andrew McCarthy put it, “Voting to confirm an attorney general who won’t uphold the Constitution isn’t a way to inspire confidence among conservatives.”

Last Thursday, Karl Rove couldn’t wait to announce that, “The dysfunctional Congress finally appears to be working again as the Founders intended.” Really? Because this isn’t the way I perceive the Founders having intended it at all. They would have impeached and removed a sitting president who acted like a monarch. Then to validate Rove’s proclamation, the GOP-controlled Senate confirmed as attorney general Loretta Lynch who blatantly supports the systematic non-enforcement of federal law. Ms. Lynch also supports President Obama’s boldly unconstitutional usurpations of legislative authority, including Congress’ power to set the terms of lawful presence by aliens in our country. Ted Cruz SLAMMED the Republican majority in the Senate for allowing the Lynch nomination:

On the Senate floor a few moments ago, Ted Cruz SLAMMED the new Senate Republican majority for refusing to block Loretta Lynch’s nomination to attorney general. He said that the Republican majority could continue to block the nomination if they wanted to and it’s something he’s urged them to do because of her admissions to run the DOJ in a lawless fashion just like Eric Holder.

He pointed out that more than a few voters are asking what is the difference between a Republican and Democratic Senate majority when someone promising the exact same lawlessness as Holder will be allowed to get confirmed. He says that’s something each Republican will have to explain to their constituents.

He also adds that not a single Republican can vote for such a nomination and be consistent with their oath of office to support and defend the Constitution.

Unfortunately, Loretta Lynch was just confirmed. Sigh.

Here is a small sampling of Loretta Lynch’s answers at her confirmation hearing:

Q: Will you defend Obama’s illegal Executive Amnesty?
A: Lynch thinks the Administration’s contrived legal justification is reasonable. She sees nothing wrong with the President’s decision to unilaterally grant lawful status and work authorizations that are explicitly barred by federal law to nearly 5 million people who are here illegally.

Q: Who has more right to a job in this country? A lawful immigrant who’s here as a citizen – or a person who entered the country unlawfully?
A: Lynch believes that the right and the obligation to work is one that’s shared by everyone in this country regardless of how they came here. And certainly, if someone is here, regardless of status, she would prefer that they would be participating in the workplace than not participating in the workplace.

Q: Concerning the limits of prosecutorial discretion… the dubious theory that President Obama has put forward to justify his illegal Executive Amnesty; where do you stand?
A: Lynch would give no limits to that theory.

Q: Can a subsequent President use prosecutorial discretion to order the Treasury Secretary not to enforce the tax laws and to collect no more income taxes in excess of 25%?
A: She refused to answer.

Q: Can a subsequent President use prosecutorial discretion to exempt the state of Texas, all 27 million people, from every single federal labor and environmental law?
A: She refused to answer.

Q: Do you agree with the Holder Justice Department that the government could place a GPS sensor on the car of every single American without probable cause?
A: She refused to answer.

Q: Do you agree with the Holder Justice Department that the First Amendment gives no religious liberty protection whatsoever to a church’s or a synagogue’s choice of their own pastor or rabbi?
A: She refused to answer.

Q: Do you believe the federal government can employ a drone to kill a US citizen on American soil if that citizen does not pose an imminent threat?
A: She refused to answer.

Q: Would you be willing to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the IRS’ targeting of citizens and citizen groups for their political views? An investigator that was at a minimum, not a major Obama donor?
A: She refused to answer.

Our ‘functional Congress’ confirmed Loretta Lynch as our new attorney general, replacing Eric Holder, possibly the most lawless, racist and fascist AG this nation has ever seen. Lynch testified brazenly that she endorses and intends to facilitate the president’s lawlessness and constitutional violations. Having heard her testimony during the confirmation hearings, 10 Republican senators decided to vote for Lynch. Remember, the position of attorney general exists to ensure that the laws are enforced and the Constitution is preserved; and… each senator has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. This should have been a no-brainer. Yet, Republicans sided with the Marxist Leftists and Lynch was confirmed. The ten Republicans who voted for confirmation were: Kelly Ayotte, Ron Johnson, Mark Kirk, Rob Portman, Thad Cochran, Susan Collins, Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham, Orrin Hatch and Mitch McConnell. The Senate voted 56–43 in favor of Lynch.

Mitch McConnell bald-facedly lied in October. While he was wooing conservatives for the upcoming midterm election, he stated that any nominee that was going to replace Eric Holder as “the nation’s highest law-enforcement official” must, “as a condition of his or her confirmation,” avoid “at all costs” Holder’s penchant for putting “political and ideological commitments ahead of the rule of law” — including as it “relates to the president’s acting unilaterally on immigration or anything else.” He fibbed big time and betrayed conservatives nationwide. It was his wheeling and dealing that led to the deal that was struck with Harry Reid and that cinched Lynch’s confirmation.

Here’s Mitch McConnell’s deal: If Democrats agree to stop blocking a human trafficking bill over some boilerplate language regarding abortion funding — a position that made them look unreasonable — Republicans, with all the leverage imaginable, will help confirm another attorney general nominee who will rubber stamp the president’s many overreaches. So, you see in the end, the Republicans voted for the continuation of the abuse of Executive power. It’s really just that simple. The reasons given for supporting Lynch included that she was a black woman and the best so far to come out the Obama White House – those are two breathtakingly horrible reasons for Lynch to be confirmed. It’s absolutely shameful politicking.

If you didn’t think Mitch McConnell was a lying, conniving Progressive before… you should now. Once the November election was won and behind him, McConnell went to work behind the scenes to whip up support for Loretta Lynch. He wielded his power from the shadows and strong-armed others into supporting her. By voting for her confirmation, he summarily flipped off any conservative who had been foolish enough to believe his campaign rhetoric. Suckers.

But it is even worse than that. From Andrew McCarthy:

That doesn’t begin to quantify the perfidy, though. In order to get Lynch to the finish line, McConnell first had to break conservative opposition to allowing a final vote for her nomination. The majority leader thus twisted enough arms that 20 Republicans voted to end debate. This guaranteed that Lynch would not only get a final vote but would, in the end, prevail — Senators Hatch, Graham, Flake, Collins, and Kirk having already announced their intention to join all 46 Democrats in getting Lynch to the magic confirmation number of 51.

So, in addition to the aforementioned ten Republicans who said “aye” on the final vote to make Lynch attorney general, there are ten others who conspired in the GOP’s now routine parliamentary deception: Vote in favor of ending debate, knowing that this will give Democrats ultimate victory, but cast a meaningless vote against the Democrats in the final tally in order to pose as staunch Obama opponents when schmoozing the saps back home. These ten — John Thune (S.D.), John Cornyn (Texas), Bob Corker (Tenn.), Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Pat Roberts (Kan.), Richard Burr (N.C.), Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.), Cory Gardner (Col.), Mike Rounds (S.D.), and Thom Tillis (N.C.) — are just as willfully complicit in Lynch’s confirmation and her imminent execution of Obama’s lawlessness.

This is not a Senate back to regular order. It is a disgrace, one that leads to the farce’s final act: On Monday, Loretta Lynch will ceremoniously take the oath to uphold the Constitution she has already told us she will undermine.

This is not about immigration, amnesty, health care, and the full spectrum of tough issues on which reasonable minds can differ. It is about the collapse of fundamental assumptions on which the rule of law rests. When solemn oaths are empty words, when missions such as “law enforcement” become self-parody, public contempt for Washington intensifies — in particular, on the political right, which wants to preserve the good society and constitutional order the rule of law sustains.

Mitch McConnell and the other Progressive RINOs are responsible for destroying mainstream America’s faith in their government and the rule of law. Our contempt and disgust for those in DC is now complete. The last time out for a presidential election, millions of Republicans were so disillusioned that they stayed home rather than voting. Obama won a second term that way. It appears that the Republican Party is intent on losing the next presidential race as well… they obviously don’t give a flying crap about their base. Ask yourself this… would McConnell be doing anything differently if he were Obama’s insider in the Senate?

Mike Lee had this to say:

“I voted against her because even though I walked into her confirmation process with an open mind, hoping and even expecting to like her, I couldn’t vote for her because she refused to answer any of my questions about prosecutorial discretion and its limits,” Sen. Mike Lee, whose grilling gave Lynch the most trouble, told The Federalist. “Even as I made the questions more and more obvious, and gave her hypotheticals which I thought made the question clearer, she refused to answer. It’s not because she doesn’t have the capacity, it’s because she had concluded that she wanted to share as little information as possible and, apparently, she responded well to coaching. I found that troubling.”

Lee had offered a hypothetical scenario wherein a governor wanted to raise the speed limit from 55 miles per-hour to 75 but could not convince the legislature. Could that governor decide to unilaterally instruct his highway patrol to not enforce the speed limit? Could he issue permits to drivers who wanted to exceed the limits established by statute? “I thought that was a pretty reasonable hypothetical,” Lee explained. She refused [to] discuss the scenario.

And from TheBlaze:

Much of the GOP’s opposition to Lynch was due to her support for Obama’s executive action on immigration. During her confirmation hearing, Lynch said she believes Obama’s plan was consistent with the Constitution, drawing outrage from Republicans who have said it’s an end-run around Congress.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the most vocal Republican against Obama’s plan, said the Senate shouldn’t confirm Lynch to be the nation’s top law enforcement officer given her support for what he has called an illegal move by Obama.

“The Senate must never confirm an individual to such an office as this who will support and advance a scheme that violates our Constitution and eviscerates established law and congressional authority,” he said Thursday. “No person who would do that should be confirmed. And we don’t need to be apologetic about it, colleagues.”

Obstructionist and evasive doesn’t quite do Loretta Lynch justice here. In my opinion, she is an anti-Constitutionalist and certainly a Liberal Progressive. I am convinced that Lynch is not only a racist, she will be just as bad or worse than Eric Holder and you can thank, in large part, Mitch McConnell and the Progressive Republicans for it. She also has a very special enthusiasm for civil asset forfeiture that she will up the stakes on across the nation. The fact that she is black and a woman should have nothing to do with her confirmation – her adherence and stances on the law and the Constitution should be all that counts. We are definitely at a Constitutional tipping point and Loretta “I Refuse To Answer” Lynch may very well be the Progressive straw that broke the Republic’s back.

04/23/15

Sen. Ted Cruz Urges Colleagues to Oppose the Loretta Lynch Nomination

Hat Tip: BB

Ted Cruz SLAMS Republican majority in the Senate for allowing Lynch nomination:

On the Senate floor a few moments ago, Ted Cruz SLAMMED the new Senate Republican majority for refusing to block Loretta Lynch’s nomination to Attorney General. He said that the Republican majority could continue to block the nomination if they wanted to and it’s something he’s urged them to do do because of her admissions to run the DOJ in a lawless fashion just like Eric Holder.

He pointed out that more than a few voters are asking what is the difference between a Republican and Democratic Senate majority when someone promising the exact same lawlessness as Holder will be allowed to get confirmed. He says that’s something each Republican will have to explain to their constituents.

He also adds that not a single Republican can vote for such a nomination and be consistent with their oath of office to support and defend the Constitution.

Unfortunately, Loretta Lynch was just confirmed. Sigh.

04/10/15

Sharpton Calls for “National Policing”

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

Al Sharpton, President Obama’s “go-to man on race” as described by Politico last year, is at it again. After riling up the nation over false narratives about Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, Sharpton has found a case he can get behind where there appears to be little doubt this time that a white policeman, Michael Slager, brutally and unnecessarily shot to death an unarmed black man in South Carolina.

But in our justice system, even that cop deserves his day in court. After all, we were reminded of that right when on Wednesday, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was found guilty on 30 counts for his role in the Islamic terrorist attack on the Boston Marathon that resulted in four deaths.

Within hours of the release of the cell phone video of Walter Scott being shot dead in North Charleston, South Carolina, Sharpton announced that “It’s time for this country to have national policing,” adding “We can’t go from state to state, we’ve got to have national law to protect people against these continued questions.” Never mind that the cop in question was quickly charged with murder, fired from his job, and is being held in jail without bail. Once again, it appears that Sharpton draws the wrong lessons from such tragedies. No peace, no justice? Or is this what justice should look like? Sharpton announced yesterday that his organization, National Action Network, would stand with Scott’s family.

Jack Cashill, an outstanding journalist, recalls in his latest article just how those false narratives, including the deaths of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, take hold. Cashill cites the case of Rolling Stone’s false, and now retracted, story of a gang-rape at a University of Virginia fraternity house. He makes the point that “all right thinking people were of one mind…on the shooting deaths of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, a collective misreporting far more consequential than that of the Rolling Stone rape story.”

The mainstream media often treat MSNBC’s Sharpton like royalty, promoting his left-wing agendas while carefully avoiding mention of his conflicts of interest and continuing corruption. The Washington Post recently published a piece that serves as an ideal example of such biased coverage.

The piece, “Sharpton to lead advocacy campaign in advance of 2016 election,” written by Wesley Lowery, acts as a press release for Sharpton’s National Action Network’s radical civil rights agenda. Lowery described this agenda as promoting Loretta Lynch’s nomination to replace Eric Holder as attorney general, and “opposing state-level religious objections bills, seen as discriminatory against gays and lesbians, and pressing Congress to advance reforms of the criminal justice system.”

Accuracy in Media has extensively outlined how the mainstream media have worked first to stoke racial tension in places like Ferguson, Missouri and then called for criminal justice reform throughout the country, with Sharpton as one of the more vocal media mouthpieces.

“Although he is a lightning rod despised by many police groups, especially the New York Police Department, Sharpton is vowing to take a more considerate line,” reported Lowery.

“We demonstrate that we are serious when we say, ‘Let’s take the name-calling down,’ and when we’re willing to hear from everybody as long as they are serious in substance,” said Sharpton, according to Lowery. “We don’t need a season more of screaming. We need some real policy.”

Sharpton has a show, “PoliticsNation,” on MSNBC on weeknights. According to accusations in a $20 billion racial discrimination lawsuit, and public comments by Byron Allen, a black TV executive, Sharpton has his show on MSNBC “Because he endorsed Comcast’s acquisition of NBCUniversal.” Could that have been a factor in NBC getting the first interview with the gentleman who took the video of the shooting in North Charleston?

Sharpton’s MSNBC show wasn’t even mentioned by Lowery. Neither was his failure to pay back taxes, nor allegations of pay for play, nor that Sharpton was found liable for defamation in the Tawana Brawley case. And with Sharpton’s latest call for “national policing,” once again, Sharpton isn’t getting the media scrutiny he deserves.

02/1/15

Will New AG Support Civil Forfeiture Reform?

By: Alan Caruba
Warning Signs

The  Wednesday hearings on the confirmation of a new Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, lasted hours because members of the Senate Judiciary Committee were often called away to vote. In the wake of the scandals surrounding the manner in which Eric Holder’s Department of Justice has functioned, the hearing, led now by Republicans, could have been harsh, but it was not. The Wall Street Journal characterized the mood in the hearing room as “cordial.” Watching it on CSPAN, I can confirm that.

In early November the Wall Street Journal, in an opinion titled “The Next Attorney General: One area to question Loretta Lynch is civil asset forfeiture”, it noted that “As a prosecutor Ms. Lynch had also been aggressive in pursuing civil asset forfeiture, which has become a form of politicking for profit.”

“She recently announced that her office had collected more than $904 million in criminal and civil actions in fiscal 2013, according to the Brooklyn Daily Eagle. Liberals and conservatives have begun to question forfeiture as an abuse of due process that can punish the innocent.”

That caught my eye because the last thing America needs is an Attorney General who wants to use this abuse of the right to be judged innocent until proven guilty. Civil forfeiture puts no limits on the seizure of anyone’s private property and financial holdings. It is a law that permits this to occur even if based on little more than conjecture. It struck me then and now as a bizarre and distinctly un-American law.

Writing in the Huffington Post in late 2014, Bob Barr, a former Congressman and the principal in Liberty Strategies, told of the passage of the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA) in 2000 “as a milestone in the difficult—almost impossible—task of protecting individual rights against constant incursions by law-and-order officials.” The problem is that civil forfeiture was and is being used to seize millions.

“The staggering dollar amounts reflected in these statistics, however,” wrote Barr, “does not pinpoint the real problem of how law enforcement agencies at all levels of government employ the power of asset forfeiture as a means of harming, and in many instances, destroying the livelihood of individuals and small businesses.”

“In pursuing civil assets, the government need never charge the individuals with violations of criminal laws; therefore never having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty of having committed any crimes.”

As noted above, as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Ms. Lynch’s office had raked in millions from civil forfeiture. Forbes magazine reports that she has used it in more than 120 cases and, prior to the hearing to confirm her as the next Attorney General US News & World Report noted on January 26 that Ms. Lynch’s office had quietly dropped a $450,000 civil forfeiture case a week before the hearings. She clearly did not want to answer questions on this or any other comparable case.

Just one example tells you why there is legitimate concern regarding this issue and it appeared in a January 3rd edition of Townhall.com. I recommend you read the account written by Amy Herrig, the vice president of Gas Pipe, Inc, a Texas company that an editor’s note reported as “faced with extinction of a civil asset forfeiture to the federal government of more than $16 million. Neither Herrig nor her father, Jerry Shults, have been charged with any criminal offense.”

Jerry Shults is a classic example of an American entrepreneur. After having served in the Air Force and serving in Vietnam where he earned a Bronze Star, Shults moved to Dallas where he began selling novelty items at pop festivals throughout Texas. Since the first store that he opened had gas pipes exposed in the ceiling, he dubbed it Gas Pipe, Inc. Suffice to say his hard work paid off for him. By the late 1990s, he had seven stores, a distribution company, a five-star lodge in Alaska, and was an American success story. By 2014 the company had grown to fourteen stores and other notable properties.

By then he had been in business for nearly 45 years and employed nearly two hundred people. And then someone in the northern district of Texas, Dallas division, initiated a civil forfeiture seizure against him. I was so appalled by his daughter’s description of events I secured a copy of the September 15 complaint that was filed. I am no attorney, but it looked to me as spurious as one could have imagined, except for the details of Gas Pipe’s assets. On 88 single-spaced pages, those were spelled out meticulously and all were subject to seizure despite the fact that not a single instance of criminality had been proven in a court of law. Imagine having 45 years of success erased by one’s own government in this fashion. It is appalling.

Assuming Ms. Lynch will be approved for confirmation as our next Attorney General, civil forfeiture is the largely hidden or unknown issue that could spell disaster for countless American businesses, large and small, in the remaining two years of the Obama administration. She has a record of pursuing it. The upside of this is that the current AG, Eric Holder, in early January announced that the DOJ would no longer acquire assets seized as part of a state law violation.

On the same day of Ms. Lynch’s hearing, January 28, writing in The Hill’s Congress Blog, former Representative Rick Boucher (D-VA) was joined by Bruce Mehlman, a former Assistant Secretary of Commerce in the George W. Bush administration, to raise a note of warning. “The topic of civil asset forfeiture should be an important part of the discussion with Lynch. As U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Lynch was the top official in a hotbed of civil asset forfeiture—helping to bring in hundreds of millions of dollars under the program in recent years.”

Ms. Lynch was not asked about civil forfeiture by either the Republican or Democrat members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was a lost opportunity and, if the new Attorney General applies her enthusiasm for it to the entire nation, it will be yet another Obama administration nightmare.

© Alan Caruba, 2015