The Loretta Lynch Holdup

http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...l#.VQy0ocu9KSM

Granted, the Attorney General has always bed a political position. After all, the AG is a Cabinet Member appointed by The President.

But The Senate does have a Constitutional Duty. The President's choice is just the first step in the process. The Senate has an equal say in the matter, in fact, the final say.

The Left is throwing out the usual "racism" and "sexism" crap as to the reason the Senate, (controlled by the Republicans), will not confirm her, when the truth is, she is a ignorant of the Balance of Powers built into thr Constitution as is President Obama. She thinks the President should be able to do what he pleases, the Senate is reminding the Country that we have three, and equal, Branches of Government.

We just had an election where the People sent a clear message. The People want the Senate to reign in President Obama's use of "executive orders", where he is getting close to making up his own laws and telling the Congress to get fucked.
President Obama could have sent a nominee up who would not prove to be boot licking lackey for his agenda, but he didn't. He chose to play Politics, and the Senate is choosing to play Hard Ball.

Don't confirm her. We deserve an Attorney General that will be the Chief Law Enforcement Officer for all the people.

The Ozombies thought they elected a KING... fuckin Ozombies SUCK!

You begin by acknowledging it's always been a political position then demand that a leopard lose its spots? This is DC baby, it doesn't happen that way.

Both sides are fiddle fucking around again nothing has changed since the huge landslide for the republicans who were going to show us how they ran the country.

Both sides are fiddle fucking around again nothing has changed since the huge landslide for the republicans who were going to show us how they ran the country. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Yes, I remember something about them taking charge and showing us some shit. They have shown nothing except that they are in fact as inept as we feared they would be.

Do not confirm Loretta Lynch!

Here is the real story why the nomination isn't moving forward:


Republicans Learn to Play Hardball

Mitch McConnell draws the line when Senate Democrats filibuster a human-trafficking law.

By Kimberley A. Strassel

March 19, 2015 6:58 p.m. ET


Politics can be aspirational, though mostly it’s just transactional—a straight-up game of giving and getting. The left’s tantrum this week over the stalled nomination of Loretta Lynch is a reminder to Republicans that their best bet for notching any accomplishments during this Congress is to keep it nakedly transactional.

Ms. Lynch’s vote to become attorney general is on hold for precisely one reason: Democrats won’t play ball on a bill to combat human sex trafficking. This is legislation, note, that is as bipartisan as it comes. It was jointly authored by Republican John Cornyn and Democrat Amy Klobuchar, and co-sponsored by much of the Senate. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell followed regular order, and Democrats gave unanimous consent to move the bill.

Yet suddenly faced with the real prospect of doing something productive—after six, long years of hiding from votes—the Senate Democratic caucus wigged out. (Debate? Vote? How does one do those things?) Desperate to revert to comfortable dysfunction, Democrats suddenly “discovered” language in the bill that upholds a prohibition against the federal funding of abortions.

Yes, it is language that has been in law for 37 years and yes, it was in the bill all along, and yes, Democrats had voted for it unanimously in committee, and yes they had voted for it unanimously last year in an appropriations bill. But Minority Leader Harry Reid needed a reason to balk, and the abortion language had the side benefit of allowing Democrats to revive the Republican “war on women.” They filibustered.

At which point, something new happened. Mr. McConnell made clear that so long as he didn’t get his trafficking bill, Democrats didn’t get Ms. Lynch. He would devote the rest of this week to the Cornyn-Klobuchar legislation, next week would be about the budget, the week after that would be Easter recess, and so on. Let’s hope Ms. Lynch enjoys Sudoku. No give, no get.

Democrats are furious, though watching them try to shame Mr. McConnell into moving up a vote on the first black woman nominee for AG is amusing. Someone had the bad idea to roll out Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), who compared Ms. Lynch to Rosa Parks, railing that Republicans were making her “sit in the back of the bus.”

This would be the same Dick Durbin who filibustered Janice Rogers Brown (the first black woman nominee to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals) and who kicked off the bus Miguel Estrada (the first Hispanic nominee to that court)—filibustering him seven times over 28 months, until he withdrew his nomination. Progress, thy name is not Dick Durbin.

Similarly laughable are Democratic claims that Ms. Lynch has now waited longer than any AG nominee since Ed Meese in 1985. That number only works if it includes all the time last year that Mr. Reid, who was still running the Senate (remember that?), didn’t act on her nomination. He was too busy packing the courts with Obama judicial nominees. And it ignores that Mr. Reid spent weeks locking down the Senate over Homeland Security funding, and now over human trafficking.

Mr. McConnell shouldn’t budge. Because what is notable is how much Democrats want Ms. Lynch confirmed. They want something. In such scenarios, the Republican job is to transact, to make clear what the left must give in return. This is the model the GOP used in the omnibus last year, in which it ceded a few Democratic demands, and in return landed some key policy victories on issues like trucking regulations and endangered-species listings.

It’s a vast improvement over what it generally does. The party keeps trying to unilaterally take things away from the president—his health-care bill, his immigration executive order. Yet he has the power to say no, and Republicans have little recourse. (Give us what we want, or we will shoot ourselves with a shutdown!)

They’ve mainly highlighted their own divisions, making it even harder to press Democrats into a deal. And when they do actually transact, they don’t drive a hard bargain. House Speaker John Boehner just cut a deal with Rep. Nancy Pelosi for a “doc fix.” She’s getting a huge priority—an extension of Schip, the child health-insurance program. Why aren’t Republicans getting a repeal of ObamaCare’s medical-device tax?

Despite the appearance that Mr. Obama has no interest in working with Republicans, there are things he and his party want. They want their nominees. They want more domestic spending. They want approval for certain pet projects. They want cover on some issues. They want to avoid others. Many congressional Democrats simply want a chance to vote on legislation, so that they have something to show voters in the next election.

Democrats are still acting as if they own Congress and betting bluster will force the GOP to back down. Republicans can hurry along the left’s new acceptance of minority status by spelling out very clearly the terms of trade. Then maybe, just maybe, they can transact a few victories.

.

McConnell is making a mistake again. He wants to tie the Lynch nomination with a sex trafficking bill but Lynch is a disaster as a nomination. She should never be confirmed even if the democrats capitulate to get what is already federal law. She is in favor of the unconstitutional actions of Obama (strike 1), she was part of a scheme that defrauded hundreds of people of their restitution (strike 2), and as part of that scheme she chose who was going to profit and not the law (strike 3).

McConnell is making a mistake again. He wants to tie the Lynch nomination with a sex trafficking bill but Lynch is a disaster as a nomination. She should never be confirmed even if the democrats capitulate to get what is already federal law. She is in favor of the unconstitutional actions of Obama (strike 1), she was part of a scheme that defrauded hundreds of people of their restitution (strike 2), and as part of that scheme she chose who was going to profit and not the law (strike 3). Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

If people only got three strikes, your ass would've been out long ago.

For a change, Junior presents "the REAL story" but doesn't include any link to it.

Even Rudy Giuliani considers her qualified, so I say let her through.

For a change, Junior presents "the REAL story" but doesn't include any link to it. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

One thing that never changes is that AssUp is a lazy, broke loser with Alzheimers. Here is a repost (edited for the author's name) from the last time he "busted" me for not including a link:

1. If you weren't too lazy to google her name, you would know that Kim Strassel writes for the WSJ.

2. If you didn't have Alzheimers, you would recall that I post WSJ stories in their entirety (instead of a link) because the WSJ has a paywall.

3. If you weren't such a broke loser, you could afford your own online subscription. Originally Posted by lustylad

You sound as if this is somehow different that all the delays and obstructions of so many nominees in the past 14 years.

This is not about her qualifications. It is pure politics at its worst. This is exactly what Reps griped about (legitimately) when Dems slow rolled Bush people.

It is bullet now as it was then. Put up a sane Rep who can actually win, then you get to nominate people. Neither party cares about governing--all they care about is "winning" and their ego driven power trips.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...l#.VQy0ocu9KSM

Granted, the Attorney General has always bed a political position. After all, the AG is a Cabinet Member appointed by The President.

But The Senate does have a Constitutional Duty. The President's choice is just the first step in the process. The Senate has an equal say in the matter, in fact, the final say.

The Left is throwing out the usual "racism" and "sexism" crap as to the reason the Senate, (controlled by the Republicans), will not confirm her, when the truth is, she is a ignorant of the Balance of Powers built into thr Constitution as is President Obama. She thinks the President should be able to do what he pleases, the Senate is reminding the Country that we have three, and equal, Branches of Government.

We just had an election where the People sent a clear message. The People want the Senate to reign in President Obama's use of "executive orders", where he is getting close to making up his own laws and telling the Congress to get fucked.
President Obama could have sent a nominee up who would not prove to be boot licking lackey for his agenda, but he didn't. He chose to play Politics, and the Senate is choosing to play Hard Ball.

Don't confirm her. We deserve an Attorney General that will be the Chief Law Enforcement Officer for all the people. Originally Posted by Jackie S