Black Democrats to Obama: Pick Lynch for Supreme Court

Leave a comment

This is from The Hill.

Loretta Lynch has no business being Attorney General.

She has less business being on the Supreme Court for life.

Black lawmakers in Congress are urging President Obama to make history by nominating Attorney General Loretta Lynch to the Supreme Court.

Lynch, if confirmed, would become the first African-American woman to serve as a justice. She would also be the first African-American appointed by a Democratic president since Thurgood Marshall, an influential liberal who retired in 1991.

 Members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) argue the court’s only African-American justice, Clarence Thomas, who was nominated by George H.W. Bush in 1991, doesn’t represent the interests of their constituents.“I would love to see him appoint Loretta Lynch. She’s already been vetted. She meets the criteria that he’s laid out. She would certainly be my recommendation,” said Elijah Cummings, a senior member of the CBC.

Cummings noted that African-American women voters helped Obama win the presidency.

“African American women have played a major role in our electoral process. They vote at a high rate,” he said.

Senate Republicans are vowing to oppose any Supreme Court nominee from Obama, saying this week that the person will not receive a hearing from the Judiciary Committee or even a meeting with top Republicans.

Democrats say Obama should ramp up the pressure on the GOP by picking a Supreme Court candidate who has attracted bipartisan support.

Black lawmakers argue that Lynch would fit the bill, noting that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) voted to confirm her as attorney general last year.

Nine other Republicans also voted for Lynch, including vulnerable GOP incumbents facing reelection such as Sens. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Rob Portman of Ohio.

“African-Americans across the country understand the significance of the Supreme Court,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), another member of the CBC.

Cleaver said Obama should pick Lynch.

“Probably more than anyone else, she would, with open minds, sail through the Judiciary Committee and onto the floor for a vote,” he said.

Lynch also has won plaudits from former Republican New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who last year expressed his full confidence that Lynch would uphold the Constitution as attorney general.

“As a Republican and looking at the Constitution, I find Loretta Lynch not only to be an acceptable appointment, but I find her to be an extraordinary appointment,” he said.

Lynch received her law degree at Harvard and served as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York. One of her biggest cases was prosecuting members of New York City’s police force for brutally beating Abner Louima, a Haitian immigrant.

At a time when the Black Lives Matter movement has become a political force, her nomination would resonate with African Americans, Democrats say.

“The Supreme Court pretty much reflects America with that one exception. The way in which the president addresses this issue, frankly, could have an impact on turnout in the election,” Cleaver said.

Reflecting that grassroots sentiment, the liberal group Democracy for America on Friday launched a petition calling for Obama to put a “woman of color” on the high court.

“After centuries of racial and gender exclusion, America has a lot of catching up to do. Since the creation of the Supreme Court in 1789, America has had 112 justices, and 106 have been white men,” the petition says, without specifically advocating Lynch.

Despite her qualifications, Republicans did hold up Lynch’s nomination as attorney general, using it as leverage to pass a human-trafficking bill.

And even though Lynch was confirmed with bipartisan support in a 56-43 vote, other potential Supreme Court candidates have passed the Senate by more overwhelming margins.

Jane Louise Kelly, of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, and Sri Srinivasan of the D.C. Circuit won Senate confirmation in 2013 by votes of 96-0 and 97-0, respectively.

But black lawmakers argue that Lynch or another African-American jurist would have a unique perspective on some of the biggest legal issues of the day: racism, police brutality, the mass incarceration of African-American men and voting rights.

“I think it’s important for him to nominate a candidate who is going to consider the legal interests of the African-American community. It would be great to have more diversity there,” said Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), a CBC member. “I think Loretta Lynch would be phenomenal.”

Lawmakers say African Americans lost an important voice on the court when Marshall stepped down and was replaced by Thomas, a staunch conservative.

President Lyndon Johnson praised Marshall at his 1965 swearing-in ceremony as someone at the legal vanguard to end discrimination in education, housing and voting.

“That perspective, the values that Thurgood Marshall brought to the court, are just extraordinary, and right now we do not have an African American that shares that crucial perspective, and it would be great to have someone like that on the Supreme Court,” said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP’s Washington bureau.

“It’s time for serious consideration to be given to a talented African-American jurist,” said Rep. Lacy Clay (R-Mo.), another member of the CBC.

“When you think about qualifications, [former Obama Attorney General] Eric Holder is the first one that comes to mind along with Loretta Lynch, who have both been through Senate confirmation,” he said.

Some Republicans have recently questioned Lynch’s impartiality in the investigation into whether Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton may have compromised classified material by using a private e-mail server.

Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn (Texas) has called for Lynch to appoint a special counsel to avoid the possibility of “political considerations” interfering with a decision to launch a criminal investigation of Clinton.

Even if Republicans blocked Lynch, the Democrats argued her nomination would not be wasted because Clinton, if she wins the White House, could resubmit her name to Congress.

“Under Hillary Clinton, we would have a good chance of getting a qualified African-American nominee through,” Clay said. “She could always re-nominate the person.”

Lynch has proved much less of a lightning rod at Justice Department than Holder, her predecessor, who also enjoys support among black lawmakers.

They would love to see Obama tap Holder for the high court, but acknowledge he has become too politically controversial despite his impressive legal résumé.

“I would love to see Eric Holder on the bench, more than any other person I know on the planet,” Cleaver said. “I’m not sure that would not be seen by the other side as the president lobbing a hand grenade in their bunker.”


SHERIFF CLARKE: Challenged Obama With Something That He Will Never Do

Leave a comment

This is from Clash Daily.

Obama is a member of the elite ruling class so he in his own mind deserves to be protected.

Sheriff Clarke would make a great Attorney General in a Trump or Cruz administration.

Sheriff Clarke just called out Obama and you can expect him to never even think about doing this.

( – “I am done asking people in my community to outsource their personal safety to the government,” Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke told Fox News’s Sean Hannity Thursday night.

The sheriff accuses Democrats of “exploiting misery and tragedy” to pursue a political, anti-gun agenda.

“But here’s my challenge to the president of the United States, you think this is so easy. Forego your Secret Service protection, for you, for the first lady, and your children, and see what it is like to have to fend yourself.

“And then we’ll sit down and have a conversation so you know what we here at ground level have to deal with on a daily base in terms of self-defense.”




Leave a comment

This is from Breitbarts Big Government. 

McConnell is a gutless misleader just like Boehner.

The Establishment Republicans are setting the stage for not only a DemocRat president in 2016 but a DemocRat controlled House and Senate.


Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell doesn’t have to bring U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch, President Barack Obama’s nominee to serve as the next Attorney General of the United States, up on the Senate floor for a vote next week—or ever—if he doesn’t want her confirmed. But he’s doing it anyway, even though just four Senate Republicans have said they’ll vote for her—and even their support for her is questionable at this point.

McConnell’s office has struggled to defend the Majority Leader’s decision—which flies in the face of a pre-election promise to not allow any attorney general nominee who supports Obama’s executive amnesty.

McConnell’s spokesman Don Stewart repeatedly refused to answer when Breitbart News asked him why the leader plans to bring Lynch’s nomination up for a floor vote next week. He also refused to state whether McConnell himself—even though he’s bringing up Lynch for a vote—will personally vote for Lynch, something that would be a direct violation of thepre-election promise McConnell made to voters.

“He’ll speak on her next week—assuming Dems end their filibuster of the anti-trafficking bill,” Stewart said, refusing to answer where the Majority Leader himself stands and why he’s even bringing her up for a vote when he doesn’t have to. “McConnell is the leader of a majority in the Senate,” Daniel Horowitz, the Conservative Review’s senior editor, told Breitbart News.

He could easily refuse to bring Lynch up for confirmation and actually stand for conservative values. However, McConnell always likes taking the path of least resistance. In this case, simply allowing Lynch to come for a vote, but personally opposing her, allows him to win the best of both worlds: avoid any confrontation with Obama but preserve his conservative bona fides.

McConnell could also undo the so-called “nuclear option”—where now Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, then the Majority Leader, in the last Congress changed U.S. Senate rules for nominees to require only a 51-vote threshold rather than a 60-vote threshold as was required for most of U.S. history, since the days of the Founding Fathers.

When Reid made the move to undo Senate rule precedent in late 2013, invoking the so-called “nuclear option,” McConnell went the Senate floor and made several eloquent speeches bombarding him for doing so. The thrust of McConnell’s argument was that Reid was doing it to distract the American people from the dangers and the harms of Obamacare that was unravelling before America’s eyes at the time.

But now, McConnell won’t undo the nuclear option—because doing so would require Republicans using the tactics of the Democrats to succeed, essentially fighting fire with fire, something McConnell doesn’t want to do.

“Undoing the nuclear option under the regular order would take 67 votes,” Stewart said. “No Dem supports and not all Republicans agree, which means the vote would be well short of 67. The only other way, even if all Republicans agreed, is to use the nuclear option to reverse the change made by the nuclear option. And as you noted below, Sen. McConnell has given numerous excellent floor speeches opposing the use of the nuclear option.”

Here’s why the Senate should not Confirm Loretta Lynch as Attorney General

Leave a comment

This is from Freedom OutPost.

It sounds like Loretta Lynch is Barack Obama and Eric Holder in a dress.

The brain bleach is in the top right hand cabinet on the bottom shelf.


Don’t say no—say hell no! Why do we make this statement? Because just like the present Attorney General, Eric Holder, this lady is a fox in sheep clothing. Some say she is pretty equal in her dealings, but they do not recognize her background, nor do they allow her words to enter into the picture—words, by the way, that are very similar if not exactly like Eric Holder’s. We feel it is our duty to inform the public now rather than after this very bad lady is confirmed as to what she truly represents. This will not surprise many, as they are now very weary of anyone Obama places into any nomination. This needs to be spread wide and far and fast.

Let us begin by showing some of the ideas this lady has that should on their own stop anyone with a right mind from allowing her to obtain this high post, as it would be like just placing another puppet below Obama and his puppet masters. Loretta Lynch is close to Eric Holder, as she chaired his advisory committee, so she is part of the problem and not a solution to it. But allow us to present the damaging evidence of this.

“During her four-and-a-half years as U.S. Attorney, Lynch developed a close relationship with Attorney General Eric Holder. In early 2013, she was named chair of Holder’s advisory committee, and she collaborated with the AG in a high-profile Justice Department investigation that ultimately (in July 2014) forced Citigroup to pay a $7 billion fine for having helped trigger the financial crisis of 2008. Specifically, Citigroup was charged with: (a) making mortgage loans that had material defects and a high probability of default, and (b) securing and selling pools of these defective loans to investors. Said Lynch: “[A]fter collecting nearly 25 million documents relating to every residential mortgage-backed security issued or underwritten by Citigroup in 2006 and 2007, our teams found that the misconduct in Citigroup’s deals devastated the nation and the world’s economies, touching everyone.” By contrast, Lynch made no mention of the various government policies—most notably the Community Reinvestment Act—which, in the name of social and economic justice, had required banks to knowingly lend money to underqualified borrowers, particularly nonwhite minorities.”

This is but a small part of this Obamanation of an appointment. We will continue on to the other parts of this to illustrate just why this lady should never be allowed to any position higher than what she is in now:

During a 2013 speech which she delivered at the Martin Luther King Center in Long Beach, New York, Lynch asked the young people in the audience: “What is it that makes you feel oppressed? Is it the prison of racism?”

But Lynch does not stop here when it comes to her bias—she continues to go along with Eric Holder in his views of Voter Laws, especially those which have ID’s tied to them. Just read the words from her below and decide yourself if this lady should be allowed to “represent” all people, or just those she wants to represent.

Lynch believes that voter ID laws are part of a racist effort to suppress minority turnout at the polls. “Fifty years after the civil rights movement,” she said in 2013, “we stand in this country at a time when we see people trying to take back so much of what Dr. [Martin Luther] King fought for…. People try and take over the State House and reverse the goals [gains] that have been made in voting in this country.” In line with this view, Lynch emphasized that she was “proud” of the Justice Department for having filed suit against North Carolina’s voter ID laws that “seek to limit our ability to stand up and exercise our rights as citizens.”

And Lynch made this statement way, way back in 2013. Now, that is not very long ago, so this has to be brought up to the people that may well decide her nomination. This has to be held up to Obama and any member of the Senate who votes to confirm this radical lady. But wait, there is more:

Lynch has also suggested that school discipline policies, which result in higher rates of suspension and expulsion for nonwhite children than for whites, are racist. “The dream is still continuing not only in the courts but in our schools,” she told a mostly black audience in 2013. “And we all know, education is the key. And we understand that discipline is important. We understand that rules are important, but we also know that when we sit and look at schools that have these zero-tolerance programs, they are often used, and they take our babies, minority children, black children, Hispanic children, and they put them out of school before they have a chance to learn.” Building on this theme, Lynch praised the Department of Justice for having “gone into the South, although we’re looking further, and brought the first ‘school-to-prison pipeline’ cases against school districts in Alabama.”

Wow! This lady even makes education part of her ideology of the minorities being treated unfairly, even if they do wrong. How can anyone with a right mind even consider this today as being what Lynch says it is? But, once again, this is but a small part of this lady’s recent rage about the social standing of minorities. Just look at the statement below from way back in 2014:

In April 2014 Lynch participated in a panel titled “Strengthening the Relationship Between Law Enforcement and Communities of Color,” along with such notables as Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, and Bill de Blasio. One of the panel’s action items stated: “Remember that racial bias is pervasive. Research has shown that people who are not consciously mistrustful of African Americans or intentionally racist can still behave in a way that is influenced by racial bias.”

This is a very concerning problem with this lady, and she does this so very far back that the dates seem to be in this year. Just a sly remark by us to show once again that what this lady has intense action dealing with tossing the race card around. It is time that we as a nation do away with this type of crazy, stupid, idiotic ideology that seems to permeate from the Obama Administration. But let us show just one more reason to pass this article on to your Senator with a note telling them not to vote for her to this position:

In August 2014 Lynch spoke about the need to “eliminate,” from the American criminal-justice system, all forms of “racial discrimination” against “the most vulnerable members of society.” She stated that she and Eric Holder were focused “not just on the prosecution of crime, but on eradicating its root causes as well as providing support for those re-entering society after having paid their debt to it.” Lamenting that the U.S. “currently imprisons approximately 2.2 million people” who are “disproportionately people of color,” Lynch emphasized the need to “reform this aspect of our criminal justice system,” which she described as a “drain on both precious resources and human capital.”

Notice that, in this excerpt, Lynch is in lock step with Eric Holder in her thoughts concerning these poor criminals.

But we should never allow the color of one’s skin to determine the sentence or lack of sentence to the crime committed. Perhaps we have to remind this lady that if people are convicted by peers of crimes, the sentence should be the same, no matter what the color of their skin or where they came from. But this lady wants to change the justice system to ensure that those of minority are given special sets of laws and rules for the crimes they do? Can this even be considered as being fair? This we leave up to you to decide. Do you wish for the minorities to be given special treatment just because they are from a minority?

This lady has some very deep influences on why she thinks this way, and we will briefly explore that.

In addition to her work in government and with private law firms, Lynch also served a stint as an advisory board member with the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.

Now just what is this “American Constitution Society for Law and Policy”? It kind of sounds like something Obama placed into his cabinet, but it is not. It is something that he knows about, as does a list of the people closely associated with “Progressive,” a term closely linked to Socialism.

The American Constitution Society for Law and Policy (ACS) is a Washington, DC-based think tank claiming to have approximately 22,000 affiliates nationwide—mostly law students, law professors, practicing attorneys, and judges. In addition to its student chapters at some 165 law schools across the United States, the organization also maintains professional chapters in 30 cities.

ACS operates on a yearly budget of several million dollars, a portion of which is used to publish a journal and to organize working groups that produce white papers on various topics related to the law. Several foundations have contributed large sums of money to ACS, including the Bauman Family Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Glaser Progress Foundation, the Moriah Fund, the Nathan Cummings FoundationGeorge Soros‘ Open Society Institute, the Overbrook Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, the Streisand Foundationand the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

This looks like the short list of Socialist, Communist, and Marxist people working to help their ideology along by placing those it teaches into places of high esteem. Look at the list and see the one and only George Soros Open Society is included in this group. But this shows only the tip of the iceberg. There is more—a lot more, and one should look into the rest to see why this lady should never go any further than where she is now. Let us show just a bit more of how this group is associated with Loretta Lynch.

“One tactic by means of which ACS effectively influences the minds of law students and young attorneys is to give them first-hand exposure to the passionately articulated agendas of America’s leading leftists. Toward that end, ACS conventions typically feature high-profile guest speakers like Tammy BaldwinJoe BidenSherrod BrownHillary Clinton, communist icon Angela DavisRosa DeLauro, John EdwardsRuss Feingold, Rep. Barney FrankRuth Bader GinsburgAl GoreTom HarkinEric HolderJesse Jackson Jr.Ted Kennedy, former Assistant Attorney General Bill Lann LeeJohn LewisRalph NaderHarvard law professor Charles Ogletree, former Attorney General Janet Reno, Jan Schakowsky, and Senator Chuck Schumer.”

This reads like a list of who’s who in the Socialist Party. It even shows the “COMMUNIST I-con,” Angela Davis! Now, with these names and those showing direct influence from the Communist Party, one has to readily ask why any of these people should even be allowed close to any sort of representation much less public office. It is up to you; “WE THE PEOPLE” have to make this call and stop this very bad appointment from being voted on. Wake up, United States! Make the call and tell you Senators to vote no on Loretta Lynch, or they will be held accountable.

Now the White House says Hagel made final call on Bergdahl as criticism of Obama over prisoner swap mounts

Leave a comment

This is from the U. K. Daily Mail.

Sounds like The Lying King is offering Hagel up as a sacrifice to cover his backside.

Will Little Chuckie Hagel fall quietly on his sword?




  • Congress learned on Monday that Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel gave final approval for the prisoner exchange that freed Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl
  • Last week, Hagel said the swap was a unanimous decision made by senior officials
  • Hagel is expected to defend the prisoner exchange on Wednesday in an appearance before the House Armed Services Committee


FInal approval for the prisoner exchange that freed Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was made by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, members of Congress learned on Monday from White House officials.

‘They indicated (it was) Secretary Hagel (who made the final call),’ Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA) said after a classified briefing, ABC points out.

‘It was the president of the United States that came out (in the Rose Garden) with the Bergdahls and took all the credit and now that there’s been a little pushback he’s moving away from it and it’s Secretary Hagel?’


Last week, Hagel said the swap was a unanimous decision when speaking to the BBC.

‘It was the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Director of National Intelligence, Attorney General,’ he said.

‘It was our judgement based on the information that we had that his life, his health were in peril,’ Hagel also told the channel in defense of not giving Congress 30 days’ notice of the plan.

‘Can you imagine if we would have waited or taken the chance of leaks over a 30-day period?’ Hage

Congress was upset to learn on Monday that 80 to 90 people in the Obama administration knew of the exchange – but that no Republicans or Democrats in Congress were told.

‘It strikes me as unfortunate that they could have 80 to 90 people in the administration aware of what was happening and not be able to trust a single Republican or Democrat in the House or the Senate,’ Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), said, Reuters notes.

”There was a sense of anger that members of Congress didn’t know about this,’ Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) said to reporters after the briefing, ABC notes. ‘Obviously, if there is secure information — members of Congress knew about the capture of Osama bin Laden — and yet 80 to 90 staff in the White House knew about this.’

Hagel is expected to defend the prisoner exchange on Wednesday in an appearance before the House Armed Services Committee.

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Father of slain Santa Barbara student calls on politicians to ‘get to work and do something’ about guns after Elliot Rodger rampage that killed 6 near university

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily News.

Mr. Martinez is full of crap politicians have done way too much.

What needs to be done is enforce the law, but we have an Attorney General that runs guns to Mexican Drug Cartels.

So fixing  the system and enforcing current laws is out of the question. Sigh.

Stomping your foot does help in ridding you home of vermin, or your two years old craving attention. 



A furious Richard Martinez delivered a four-letter stomping to do-nothing politicians who have called him to cry crocodile tears over his son’s brutal killing.

“I don’t give a s— that you feel sorry for me,” a weeping Martinez said about the congressional condolence calls that followed last Friday’s murder spree by a hate-filled gunman in Southern California.


Get to work and do something . . . Getting a call from a politician doesn’t impress me,” he told the Washington Post.


Martinez spoke four days after his son Christopher Michaels-Martinez and five other victims were slain in a crazed rampage by misogynist killer Elliot Rodger.

The murderer then took his own life in the nation’s latest spasm of gun violence.


“I’m going to ask every person I can find to send a postcard to every politician they can think of with three words on it: ‘Not one more,’ ” Martinez said, adding that he’d deliver the same pointed message to President Obama.


Martinez was among thousands of mourners attending a vigil late Tuesday at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where he led the foot-stomping crowd in a chant of “Not one more.”


“They (politicians) have done nothing and that’s why Chris died in my opinion,” Martinez said. “It’s almost become a normal thing for us to accept this,” he said, of mass-killings. “It’s not normal life doesn’t have to be like this.”


He also read statements from the families of Rodger’s first two victims: roommates Cheng Yuan Hong and Weihan Wang, both 20.


“May we together create a peaceful world and let hatred be gone with the wind,” the Hong family statement said.


“Your sacrifice will wake the power and authority of America. It’s time to stop the gun violence. Our children deserve a land free from fear,” the Wang family said in an open letter to their slain son David.


Christopher Michaels-Martinez, the last of Rodger’s six murder victims, was shot to death inside a deli. A cell phone video from inside the IV Deli Mart captured the terror and chaos as the bullets flew.


The mourning dad’s harsh indictment of Congress was quickly hailed Tuesday by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.


“He got it exactly right,” said Dan Gross, president of the group. “Americans are dying every day because of the corporate gun lobby and the politicians it has in its pockets.”


UCSB mourned as a close friend of the murderer’s parents told the Daily News that the couple was “crippled with grief” — both for their son and his victims.

Read more:

Holder wades deeper into Zimmerman battle, calls for review of ‘stand-your-ground

1 Comment

This is from Fox News Politics.

Mr.Attorney General why should an armed citizen have to

retreat in the face of some punk?

I do not know of any reason we should retreat.

Citizens need to protect themselves as unlike you

Mr.Attorney General do not have armed bodyguards.


Attorney General Eric Holder waded deeper into the controversy over the George Zimmerman case and verdict on Tuesday, suggesting a national review of “stand-your-ground” laws during a speech before the annual NAACP convention in Orlando.

The NAACP is at the forefront of the effort to pressure the Justice Department to bring federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman. Holder confirmed on Monday that his department is reviewing that possibility, citing his personal concerns about the case.

He went a step further on Tuesday, weighing in for the first time on controversial state-level laws on self-defense.

“Separate and apart from the case that has drawn the nation’s attention, it’s time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods,” Holder said.

The comments were a reference to so-called “stand-your-ground” laws, which in Florida and other states allow people to use deadly force if they think their life is being threatened.

The role that law played in the Zimmerman shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin is a matter of dispute.

But Holder suggested the laws encourage confrontation, saying there “has always been” a legal defense for using deadly force when retreat is not an option.

“But we must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the common sense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat, outside their home, if they can do so safely,” Holder said. “By allowing — and perhaps encouraging — violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety.”

He called for a “hard look” at the laws. The crowd applauded as he said “we must stand our ground.”

The “stand-your-ground” laws have been a popular target ever since the Martin shooting, and the pressure has intensified after Zimmerman was acquitted on Saturday.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott, though, told Fox News that officials should not politicize the case.

“We shouldn’t turn this into politics. This was a tragedy,” he told Fox News on Monday.

Scott noted that he already put together a bipartisan commission to examine Florida’s “stand-your-ground” law.

“Their recommendation is we not make any changes, that it is working the way it was intended,” Scott said.

A confluence of pressure campaigns, though, are weighing on Congress and the Obama administration.

Despite warnings from analysts and attorneys that the Justice Department would face an uphill climb in prosecuting Zimmerman on civil rights charges, an NAACP-led petition demanding such a case has apparently hit one million signatures.

Singer Stevie Wonder is also the latest celebrity to criticize Florida’s self-defense law.

He declared that he would not perform in Florida until the law is abolished.

Read more:


Obama appoints Holder to investigate Holder

Leave a comment

This is from BizPac Review.

What a joke just move proof of Obama’s corruption.

Holder investigating the D.O.J. is like Dr.Josef Mengele

and  Klaus Barbie investigate The Holocaust.

n a page ripped right out of Kafka, President Obama announced Thursday afternoon that he will appoint Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the Attorney General’s targeting of journalists he suspected received classified data.


Photo credit

The targeting first came to light last week with the discovery that the Justice Department had seized two months of telephone records from Associated Press offices and reporters.

On Sunday, It was reported that Fox News correspondents’ records were also seized, extending even to Fox reporter James Rosen’s personal emails and his parent’s telephone records. The DOJ labeled Rosen as a “flight risk” and criminal “co-conspirator” in its search warrant application.

The president indicated he was “troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable,” and, according to The Hill, expressed those concerns to Attorney General Eric Holder.

“Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs,” Obama continued. “Our focus must be on those who break the law.”

“Those who break the law” are those who leak confidential information — not journalists who simply do their job.

Yet Holder personally approved the DOJ’s investigation of Fox journalist Rosen, including the search warrant application, according to NBC News.

Fox News commentator Todd Starnes observed in a tweet:


The far left-leaning Huffington Post suggested that rather than appoint Holder to investigate his own department, the president ought to send him on his way. “Time to go,” the paper proclaimed on its home page.

Perhaps I’m either melodramatic or overly logical, but isn’t appointing Holder to investigate his own department a bit like asking Adolf Eichmann to investigate living accomodations at Auschwitz?

H/T The Hill

Interestingly, back when President Obama was candidate Obama, he called for the resignation of George W. Bush’s attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, as being too much the president’s attorney and not enough the people’s attorney. This clip is from a March, 2007 appearance on Larry King Live.

Holder OK’d search warrant for Fox News reporter’s private emails, official says

1 Comment

This is from Clear Channel on N.B.C.News.

Let me say this up front we will never see the first black

President and Attorney General impeached.

The DemocRats will circle the wagons to save them.

That being said Obama may ask Holder to resign.


Attorney General Eric Holder agreed to a review of Justice Department guidelines for investigations involving journalists, President Barack Obama said Thursday.

By Michael Isikoff
National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News

Attorney General Eric Holder signed off on a controversial search warrant that identified Fox News reporter James Rosen as a “possible co-conspirator” in violations of the Espionage Act and authorized seizure of his private emails, a law enforcement official told NBC News on Thursday.

The disclosure of the attorney general’s role came as President Barack Obama, in a major speech on his counterterrorism policy, said Holder had agreed to review Justice Department guidelines governing investigations that involve journalists.

“I am troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable,” Obama said. “Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs.”

Rosen, who has not been charged in the case, was nonetheless the target of a search warrant that enabled Justice Department investigators to secretly seize his private emails after an FBI agent said he had “asked, solicited and encouraged … (a source) to disclose sensitive United States internal documents and intelligence information.”

Obama’s comments follow a firestorm of criticism that has erupted over disclosures that in separate investigations of leaks of classified information, the Justice Department had obtained private emails that Rosen exchanged with a source and the phone records of Associated Press reporters.


Christie calls for investigation of New Jersey agency’s response to boy-with-gun photo

Leave a comment

This is from Fox News Politics.

Chris The RINO Christie is looking for brownie points

with New Jersey’s gun owners.

I think Chris might be worried about being reelected.

That evil Black gun looks like it could start killing on its own.

I got scared just posting this picture. SNARK!




TRENTON, N.J. –  New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is asking the attorney general to probe the state’s visit to the home of a man who uploaded a photo on Facebook of his 10-year-old son holding a military-style rifle.

The state child welfare agency and local police went to the Carneys Point home of Shawn Moore on March 14 following what police say were anonymous calls expressing concern about the safety of a child.

Moore has said he believes he was investigated because of the photo he posted online of his son holding the gun he got for his 11th birthday. The weapon was a .22-caliber rifle made to look like an assault rifle.

Moore said that state child welfare workers and police in SWAT gear showed up at his home, the caseworkers were aggressive and the visit was uncalled for.

No charges were filed against Moore.

Christie says reports on the inquiry raise “troubling questions.”

In a letter Friday, the governor asked Attorney General Jeffrey Chiesa to determine “whether all applicable laws were appropriately followed, and to take any remedial, investigative or other actions that may be required.”

“The public reports of this matter raise troubling questions concerning the facts and circumstances surrounding the investigation, the manner in which the investigation was conducted, and the procedures followed by law enforcement and the Division of Child Protection and Permanency,” the governor wrote. The Christie administration provided a copy of the letter Wednesday.

The state welfare agency, citing confidentiality requirements, has not commented on its visit to the Moore home. Agency officials said only that caseworkers may request police to accompany them on visits if they have reason to be concerned about their personal safety.

Moore’s attorney, Evan Nappen, said Wednesday he believes the public outcry over the case led to the quick decision by the Christie administration to investigate. He said he did not request the probe.

“We welcome the investigation so that something like this hopefully doesn’t happen again,” Nappen said. “There’s this really great reason why there’s no charges and the case is closed, and that’s because my client didn’t do anything wrong.”

Moore first posted a comment about the incident on a gun rights website and within days was appearing with his son, Josh, on a Fox News talk show and elsewhere.

In a statement, Carney Point Police Chief Robert DiGregorio and Mayor Richard Gatanis said officers went to the family’s home after getting anonymous tips that a boy there might have access to weapons and ammunition.

“In light of some of the recent school shootings across our nation, the Carneys Point Police Department takes these types of calls seriously,” they said, adding that they were obligated to go there with state Department of Children and Family caseworkers who requested assistance.

Moore had said the authorities requested to see his weapons, but with his lawyer on a speakerphone he denied them access because they did not have a search warrant.

The Carneys Point officials said the officers — in night uniforms and body armor but not SWAT gear — did not attempt an unlawful search.

The officials said that they respect citizens’ rights to own weapons and that several officers knew the elder Moore from a shooting club.

Nappen said the problem is the idea that the government could respond to people talking about or with photos of weapons on social media.

“This is a shame because of the impact it has on a really good dad and his son,” Nappen said. “No one was in danger.”

He said the state Department of Children and Families was aggressive and intimidating and could have avoided the situation by calling first.

A department spokesman –without commenting on the specific case — said that the department routinely checks on tips it receives.

The department has been under years of court-monitoring and has been criticized in several cases where children who died or were in peril were not checked on.

In a moment of heightened sensitivity around guns and gun control, the brief saga had the makings of a debate starter between people who oppose guns and those who say authorities are overzealous about even legal weapons.

Read more:

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: