Rep. Jim Jordan on Attorneys General

Andrew Napolitano on DC Swamp Culture

In reaction to revelations that the FBI withheld 30 documents about the July 2016 tarmac meeting between former President Bill Clinton and Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch (when Hillary Clinton was still under investigation for the Hillary Email security violations), Judge Andrew Napolitano revealed an ugly truth about Beltway ethics. 

Napolitano's exhortation for government officials to follow the rule of law and not protect other "members of the club", explains why Values Voters Summit participants repeatedly rallied at allusions to "Drain the Swamp".

Andrew McCarthy on Clinton E-Mail Investigation

Trey Gowdy Grills A.G. Loretta Lynch on Specific Intent and Clinton Emails

Challenging Attorney General Lynch's Stonewall for Clinton Email Case

Donald Trump Impugns A.G. Loretta Lynch on Clinton Emails

Presumptive Republican Presidential nominee's reaction to FBI Director Comey's decision not to recommend prosecution on the Clinton Email case was to spread the net of condemnation to include Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

Trump parlays Presumptive Democrat Presidential nominee First Lady/Senator/ Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's  (D-NY) trial balloon on keeping Lynch on as America's chief law enforcer as a bribe not to prosecute Hillary for the national security violations of sensitive data in the Clinton emails from the State Department.

This specious claim certainly underlines the meme of Crooked Hillary, but note Trump's tactic of paralepsis, in which he claims not to cast aspersions on the Attorney General but does just that, instead of hammering the proven Hillary falsehoods by FBI Director Comey.

But Trump was not simply content on muddying the message on Clinton Emails by impugning Attorney General Lynch by inference.  In the same speech, Trump later praised the efficiency of Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein on killing terrorists.

So on a day in which Trump could have driven home the point on a corrupt District of Calamity (sic), Trump opened the door for the Lamestream Media to focus on another off-message gaffe.  How's that for exploiting the egregious actions of "Crooked Hillary"?

Pondering Donald Trump's Present Pro-Life Pitch

 Fox New's  Bill O'Reilly used a viewer submitted question to press his personal friend Donald Trump about to name one specific thing Trump would do to protect the sanctity of life
Trump as the the presumptive Republican nominee proffered the so called No Spin Zone some soothing sentiments to pro-life partisans by claiming that he would appoint pro-life judges, but not necessarily commiting to overturn Roe v. Wade (1973).  Huh? How does that work?

Of course, the Trump's unequivocal utterance does not square well  with Trump's track record, even during this Presidential campaign.  Trump made headlines in late March when he mused that women having abortions should be punished.  Of course, this was one of only four different abortion utterances in one day, which eventually extended to changing the GOP party platform to allow more exceptions. Moreover, how does Trump's latest claim comport with his repeated assertions that Planned Parenthood does great things for women's health.





Trump spun the sanctity of life question into picking pro-life justices for Supreme Court nomination.  It would seem that made Trump's earlier idea of appointing his abortion rights sister who is a judge to the nation's highest court inoperative. If O'Reilly really did not want to be spun, he should have followed up on Trump's vetting process for appointing "conservative, pro-life judges", especially since Trump waffled on overturning Roe v. Wade.  To legally drill down, clarification is necessary to discern if there is a right to privacy embedded in the Bill of Rights and applied to the states.

In prior pressers, Trump opined that same-sex marriage is the "Law of the Land".  Well, Justice Kennedy's opinion on the same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)  is premised on a newly concocted "right to dignity" that reads things into the Bill of Rights via the 14th Amendment. As Trump was squishy about overturning Roe v. Wade which enshrined the judicial activist practice of forcing federal will upon states concerning matters of prior state jurisdiction, the same-sex marriage case law is directly relevant.

From a culture war standpoint, it is easy to see Trump's flip-flop on the Transgendered (well, actually transvestites or those claiming gender fluidity at a given moment) to use the opposite sex bathroom. The Trump Town Hall pronouncement is that North Carolina's bathroom bill hurt business and ought to be rescinded.  As Attorney General Loretta Lynch made clear in suing the State of North Carolina for respecting traditional public facility proprieties, Transgendered Bathrooms has been elevated into a civil rights issue, reading gender dysphoria into the 1965 Civil Rights Act. Once again, understanding the judicial philosophy of a hypothetical Trump Administration's judicial vetting would be instructive. Otherwise, voters are just being played and the Deal Maker in Chief could bargain with his cronies.

First Lady Senator Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has made clear that she wants to strengthen pro-abortion rights under the guise of women's health.  Trump's laurels to Planned Parenthood, his penchant to flip-flop, his eagerness to cut deals and populist proclivities informed by New York Values really does not give comfort that Trump's pro-life rhetoric will become reality.

While it is quixotic to be a one issue voter, especially on anti-abortion issues.  But Trump's word seems to be worth little on fundamental issues.  Moreover, when Trump was asked what he would do specifically, he relied on labels "I'd appoint conservative, pro life judges" but won't bother with the details of reversing Roe v. Wade.  

Fast and Furious Executive Privilege Denial

The Department of Justice's Fast and Furious program under former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder gunrunning policy towards Mexico has been under judicial and Congressional scrutiny for years.  In fact, the House held Holder in contempt for his stonewalling of Congress on the Fast and Furious matter.

Judicially, the Obama Administration tried to quash the judicial action under a claim of Executive Privilege.  




U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ruled that the Obama Administration's assertion of Executive Privilege was invalid because the Department of Justice had already released the information to the public in a 2012 Inspector General's Report.

Judge Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee, did leave open the possibility that Executive Privilege could be claimed if material was deemed sensitive on law enforcement techniques, matter of state with Mexico or attorney-client privilege.  

The Obama Administration's new Attorney General Loretta Lynch did not immediately indicate her Department of Justice would appeal or if the stonewalling was sufficient to extinguish the fire behind the Fast and Furious gunrunning in the last year of the Barack Obama Administration.

h/t: Politico

Hillary's Hiding EMails Continues to Haunt Her Reputation for Honesty

Prior to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) formal campaign announcement, there were questions about her emails while at the State Department . It was revealed that Mrs. Clinton exclusively used a personal email (HDR22@clintonemail.com) stored on a private server during her tenure at Foggy Bottom.  Additionally, Mrs. Clinton only turned over her emails in late 2014 with paper copies of the work emails that she deemed relevant.

Of course, there are plenty of questionable things already associated with the email imbroglio. Only using a personal email account was highly irregular and probably insecure.  Mrs. Clinton's lame rationale about using only one device associated with an email was lanced when it was shown that Hillary used both an Ipad as well as her trusty Blackberry.  State Department policy requires immediate surrender of all work materials to an archivist, who then determines what is personal. It was odd that Hillary printed out emails for the State Department rather than the electronic originals (making it difficult to do computer searches).  Then there is the oddity of months longs gaps in emails including when  Mrs. Clinton traveled to Libya and was photographs of her using her Blackberry, there are no record of documents.  Hmm.


 Now it has been revealed that House Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA 49th) had sent a letter to the State Department on December 12, 2012 which specifically asked if the Secretary of State ever used a personal email account to conduct official business.  Uh oh.

Well, Mrs. Clinton resigned from the State Department February 1, 2013.  The State Department did not respond to the House Government Reform Committee until March 27, 2013 and their response merely was a copy of the policy that all State Department employees : “should make it clear that his or her personal email is not being used for official business.”.

While the Lamestream Media sought to create a frenzy for Hillary's Mystery Machine Listening Tour road trip to Iowa, Mrs. Clinton is slipping in the polls in key battleground states to Republican challengers.  Quinnipiac Poll Assistant Director Peter Brown attributes this drop to the perception that Hillary Clinton is a dishonest politician, which can be attributed to the continuing email embarrassment.

If convicted, an official who obstructs or destroys federal documents could be barred from office. It is almost inconceivable that an Obama Department of Justice (under Attorney General Eric Holder or the stalled nominee Loretta Lynch) would ever prosecute or seek to convict such a high profile progressive politician.  But there are no such strictures in the court of public opinion.  Hillary for America intends to raise $2.5 billion for their campaign.  But she who raises the most cash does not always win (sic). In 1980, Governor John Connally (D R-TX) was considered a great orator and had a distinct fundraising advantage.  In the end, Connally spent $11 million and only garnered one delegate. How embarrassing.  Actually, not as embarrassing as Hillary's continuing email embarrassments.

h/t: Hot Air
      John Cole 

Is Loretta Lynch a Holder "Mini-Me"?

Prior to the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing on the nomination of  Loretta Lynch to succeed  Attorney General Eric Holder, there were concerns about the independence of the A.G. nominee. During pre-testimony meetings, Senator David Vitter (R-LA) noted: “I found her responses in the conversation about executive amnesty not just frustrating . . . but sort of unbelievable.” 

Loretta Lynch's appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed this assessment. Lynch proclaimed: "[T]he Constitution, the bedrock of our system of justice, will be me lodestar." Yet during challenging question from Senate Republicans,  Ms. Lynch did not voice legal concerns over President Barack Obama's Executive Action on amnesty.  In fact, Lynch told Senator Jeff Sessions that she preferred everyone who is America should be able to work, regardless of their legal status.

The Senate has the Constitutional duty of Advice and Consent.  Ms. Lynch's answers demonstrate that she makes no legal distinction of Executive Action on immigration.  So if the Senate rubber stamps her nomination, it both validates President Obama's usurpation of the Constitution on immigration and ignores the power of check and balances.  Moreover, such an Advice and Consent blank check moots the strategy of using the budgetary process to thwart abuses by the Department of Homeland Security.

If Loretta Lynch is going to be the judicial equivalent of a mini-me, why should we sell ourselves short for an Eric Holder Mini Me.

 The Senate ought to reject Loretta Lynch on policy considerations.  That will have the effect of Attorney General Eric Holder staying in office until a suitable replacement is found.  More likely, the President will make a recess appointment when Holder wants to leave the government.  But at least the Senate will not acquiese to what is forthright expressions of lawlessness.