Tag Archives: political parties

Loretta Lynch Meets

Posted on by
Reply

US Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton, former Democrat President and husband of Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, on Lynch’s plane at the Phoenix airport Tuesday.  Lynch said the meeting was unplanned, and all they talked about was grandkids.  Oh, and Brexit.

For anyone who believes this, I might know of some beachfront property north of Santa Fe in which they might be interested.

President Barack Obama (D) has already, three times publicly, instructed Lynch and through her his FBI Director to take no substantive action against Hillary Clinton: in two interviews in which he announced she’d done nothing wrong, and in his endorsement in which he said she should be President.

Bubba understands this; he didn’t go over to Lynch’s plane to shoot the breeze about inconsequentials, or to gossip about Brexit, or to tell her his terms.  He went at her invitation to hear her offered quid pro quo.

As if that’s not enough, there’s this:

Department of Justice officials filed a motion in federal court late Wednesday seeking a 27-month delay in producing correspondence between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s four top aides and officials with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a closely allied public relations firm that Bill Clinton helped launch.

Notice that: Wednesday—the day after Lynch met with Bubba in her private plane.  And

US District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras, a President Obama-appointed judge, had previously ordered the State Department to release the requested documents by July 21.

Hmm….

Update: Lynch on Friday said she’ll “defer to career prosecutors and the FBI” on matters related to the Hillary Clinton investigation.  A DoJ official prior to her actual announcement:

Determinations as to whether to charge any individual, as well as the findings of the investigation, will be made by career prosecutors and investigators who have been handling this matter since its inception[.]

But what does “defer” mean–she’s explicitly not recusing herself from the case?  What’s the practical value of those determinations being made by career prosecutors and investigators?  Deferral doesn’t mean she’s not retaining final decision-making.  Those prosecutors and investigators will still be working for Lynch after they’ve wrapped things up.

And Lynch has already amply demonstrated her level of integrity with that meeting with Bubba and her subsequent move to try to suppress release of those Clinton Foundation emails she’s been ordered to release.

UpUpdate: At her Colorado news conference Friday, Lynch confirmed that she will defer to her career FBI investigators and prosecutors but will not recuse.

There’s also this tidbit, it turns out, from Christopher Sign of ABC 15 in Phoenix:

The former president steps into her plane. They then speak for 30 minutes privately. The FBI there on the tarmac instructing everybody around “no photos, no pictures, no cell phones.”

Is there any remaining doubt that FBI Director James Comey is as deeply in Hillary Clinton’s (and Bill Clinton’s, whose Clinton Foundation also is under criminal investigation, supposedly) back pocket as Comey’s boss, Lynch?

Democrats’ Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

The Democratic Party’s draft platform calls for

the Department of Justice to investigate alleged corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies who have reportedly misled shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change[.]

This is on top of all the Democratic Party State Attorneys General persecuting companies under pseudo-RICO charges for daring speak.  Because we can’t have the average American individual [who] is morally and intellectually inadequate presuming to dispute with the Democrats’ received wisdom.  Nossir.

And

Democratic members of the Federal Election Commission, in a decision to be made public on Thursday, voted last month to punish Fox News over criteria changes for the network’s first Republican presidential primary debate….

Fox News‘ crime, so heinous in the eyes of Democrats? They altered the format of that first debate to expand free speech by increasing the number of Presidential candidate debaters.  We can’t have, after all, those morally and intellectually inadequate Americans having access to too wide a range of view.  Mm, mm.  Fortunately, the honest members of the FEC succeeded in blocking this travesty.

This is what a Hillary Clinton administration will inflict on us.

“DOJ to institute mandatory bias training”

Posted on by
Reply

Or so the Fox News headline says AG Loretta Lynch claims.  Her Deputy Attorney General, Sally Yates, on the matter:

Implicit bias also presents unique challenges to effective law enforcement, because it can alter where investigators and prosecutors look for evidence and how they analyze it without their awareness or ability to compensate[.]

There isn’t anything implicit about ethics or about lying.  Will Lynch obey a Federal court order to have her lawyers undergo ethics training, or will she continue to refuse that and allow her lawyers to continue to lie in court—the cause of the ethics training order?

Another Government Overreach?

Posted on by
1

Before the government can measure the size of the gig economy—or is it the sharing economy? The digital economy?—the sector needs to be defined.

No, it doesn’t.  It doesn’t even need to measure the size of the gig economy; government has shown it’s not going to do anything useful, or freedom-promoting, with that measurement.

And this misconception, by Commerce Department Acting Under Secretary for Economic Affairs Justin Antonipillai:

In order to have good policy making, you have to have good data[.]

Again, no.  Government doesn’t need to make any policy in this area.  Not at all.  Government just needs to butt out, and let American entrepreneurs make their own way.

Only our Liberals are unable to function without being told every little thing every step of the way.  Even Liberals can learn how, though.

Barry Goldwater on Power

Posted on by
Reply

Via The Wall Street Journal, a paragraph from Goldwater’s 1964 Republican Convention nomination acceptance speech:

Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.

Could he have been talking about someone today?