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

Freedom Outpost
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 Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, the Overbrook Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, the Streisand Foundation, and 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 Baldwin, Joe Biden, Sherrod Brown, Hillary Clinton, communist icon Angela Davis, Rosa DeLauro, John Edwards, Russ Feingold, Rep. Barney Frank, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Al Gore, Tom Harkin, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson Jr., Ted Kennedy, former Assistant Attorney General Bill Lann Lee, John Lewis, Ralph Nader, Harvard 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; “” 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.


One thought on “Here’s why the Senate should not Confirm Loretta Lynch as Attorney General

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s