DCPolitics

GOP Lawmakers: Reject Loretta Lynch’s Nomination

BARACK OBAMA’S NOMINEE “UNFIT” TO SERVE (Editor’s note: The following opinion editorial was submitted to our website by eight members of the U.S. House of Representatives, including U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina. It addresses U.S. president Barack Obama‘s controversial nomination of Loretta Lynch to be the next U.S….

BARACK OBAMA’S NOMINEE “UNFIT” TO SERVE

(Editor’s note: The following opinion editorial was submitted to our website by eight members of the U.S. House of Representatives, including U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina. It addresses U.S. president Barack Obama‘s controversial nomination of Loretta Lynch to be the next U.S. Attorney General). 

As members of the U.S. House of Representatives we recognize that the power to consent on executive branch nominees resides in the Senate.  The Senate also has the power, indeed, the obligation to reject those nominees unfit for service.  We believe that Loretta Lynch, who has been nominated by the President to serve as the nation’s next Attorney General, falls in the unfit category.

As members of the House of Representatives, we are obligated to work with the attorney general, in order to fulfill our constitutional duties.  We expect the nation’s top law enforcement officer to be committed to the rule of law, not to a political party or an Administration.  We cannot be certain that Ms. Lynch has such a commitment.

Based on Ms. Lynch’s response to the questions posed to her at her Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing we can only conclude that she has no intention of departing in any meaningful way from the policies of Attorney General Eric Holder, who has politicized the Department of Justice and done considerable harm to the administration of justice.

When asked to differentiate herself from Attorney General Holder, she chose not to do so.  When asked directly and specifically about the Fast and Furious scandal, she made no legitimate attempt to answer the questions, instead she obfuscated and avoided.  When asked if she would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the targeting of conservative groups by the Internal Revenue Service she was dismissive saying, “[m]y understanding is that that matter has been considered and that the matter has been resolved to continue with the investigation as currently set forth.”

Moreover, her answers concerning the President’s executive order circumventing Congress by granting amnesty gives us great concern.  Under the guise of exercising “prosecutorial discretion,” the President has erected a bureaucratic apparatus to accept millions of applications from illegal immigrants, grant them “deferred action” from deportation, and then issue them authorizations to work, all without Congress’s approval.  When asked whether she agreed with the legal rationale concocted to justify the President’s actions, she said that she found it to be “reasonable,” the obvious implication being, of course, that she would continue to follow it.  And indeed, not once during the hearing did Ms. Lynch ever disavow—or even question—the legality of the President’s actions.

As Attorney General, Ms. Lynch would be required to swear an oath to the Constitution, not to the President and certainly not to uphold and defend a political agenda that undermines the Constitution and diminishes the Congress.  Although the President’s nominee cannot reasonably be expected to publicly oppose the President’s policies, the Attorney General has an independent duty to uphold and defend the Constitution.  That has not been the case during the tenure of Attorney General Eric Holder.  Under Holder the Justice Department went before the Supreme Court 20 times defending the overreaching policies of the Obama Administration and arguing for government authority that exceeded the powers granted by the Constitution and each time the Obama Administration was rejected by a unanimous vote of 9-0.

Ms. Lynch’s answers to questions during her confirmation hearing made it clear that, like Holder, she would do nothing to reign in the President’s usurpation of the powers of Congress or confront wanton disregard of the Constitution.

During the 2014 election the voters sent a clear message against the abuses of power that have come to distinguish this administration.  Recent polling indicates that the most unpopular position of the Obama Administration is the President’s position on illegal amnesty.  It would be a serious mistake to assume that the public’s disapproval of the abuse of executive power and government overreach could be ignored less than four months after the election.

As members of the House of Representatives we are well aware that the responsibility to vet nominees for the office of Attorney General rests with the Senate. We respect that and defer to the judgment of our colleagues in that chamber.  But as elected representatives ourselves we are acutely aware of the delicate balance of power that we are obligated by oath to not only abide by, but are honor bound to uphold and defend.  We believe the confirmation of Ms. Lynch would be a vote in support of President Obama’s assault against the Constitution and the lawlessness of his administration.  A vote for this nominee should fairly be considered a vote against the will of the American people.  In that regard, we respectfully urge our colleagues in the Senate to reject the nomination of Ms. Lynch.

This article was authored by the following U.S. Representatives: Rep. Brian Babin (TX-36), Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC-3),  Rep. Trent Franks (AZ-8), Rep. Vicky Hartzler (MO-04), Rep. Jody Hice (GA-10), Rep. Barry Loudermilk (GA-11), Rep. Gary Palmer (AL-06), Rep. John Ratcliffe (TX-4).

Related posts

Politics

Palmetto Political Stock Index – 6/19/2024

FITSNews
Politics

Guest Column: GOP Lawmaker Doxxes Private Citizens – Cites ‘Mean Girls’

FITSForum
DC

Hunter Biden Found Guilty On Gun Charges

FITSNews

28 comments

Rocky March 31, 2015 at 10:31 am

Well rejecting her would make Rudy Guliani pretty upset.

Reply
The Colonel March 31, 2015 at 10:47 am

The only part of this that Jeff Duncan wrote is his name one the bottom of the page. I congratulate him for doing it though.

Reply
Birthers For Cruz March 31, 2015 at 3:04 pm

I Agee with that.

Duncan is too dumb to have written it.

Reply
Sconset987 March 31, 2015 at 10:58 am

These guys need to be realistic. If Lynch isn’t confirmed, Holder stays in the job. And, they really hate Holder!

Reply
FastEddy23 March 31, 2015 at 11:17 am

That is not necessarily bad. Holder would then have to defend His UnConstitutional actions and inactions before the Supremes … Which bouts He has lost 20 of 20 rounds.

Reply
Birthers For Cruz March 31, 2015 at 3:05 pm

You don’t understand pure unadulterated

Hate

It’s much more powerful than rational thought.

Reply
FastEddy23 April 2, 2015 at 11:54 am

Its not just “Them” who hate The Eric. Holder’s batting average against the Supremes is running about 000, losing 20 out of 20 of his challenges to the Constitution.

Reply
euwe max March 31, 2015 at 11:02 am

Thank god the Republicans did it so the Democrats don’t have to. She’s a bought and paid for shill for big business.

My religious convictions prevent me from supporting Republicans – no matter which party they belong to.

Reply
FastEddy23 March 31, 2015 at 11:10 am

My self righteousness and personal indignation prevents me from supporting either party in this rather simple question. Do we want yet another g’ment Helot picking winners and losers and whiners when the Constitution is at risk?

Ms. Lynch does seem to be another of those who champions “just us” to the negation of the law.

Bye, bye, Lynch, and don’t let the door hit your butt on the way out.

Reply
GrandTango March 31, 2015 at 11:41 am

But Obama is a ” bought and paid for shill for big business” as is the Democrat Party……and you LOVE them…Dumb@$$…

Reply
euwe max March 31, 2015 at 11:43 am

You should take up knitting or something.

Reply
GrandTango March 31, 2015 at 11:45 am

Liberals HATE having your myths dispelled…don’t you?…. LMAO…

Reply
euwe max March 31, 2015 at 11:50 am

what cartoon fantasy are you living in?

GrandTango March 31, 2015 at 12:07 pm

GM, Goldman Sachs, Solyndra, GE, Big Labor, Big Insurance, Big Hospital…etc…..corporations have amassed $2 trillion (un-invested) in Obama’s terms, while Obama has propped up the stock market for the investor class, to get richer…and the average family starves…the poor can hope for food stamps at best…not a job…

Are you so F*#king stupid you don’t even know what your own god is doing???….No need to answer…

euwe max March 31, 2015 at 1:22 pm

Your party of corporate dick-sucking hypocrites be damned.

Pineapple Twist March 31, 2015 at 9:20 pm

The one where he works for BB the evil nemesis. :)

Big Business March 31, 2015 at 12:03 pm

Don’t worry, we have several other shills for Obama to nominate, ones that the Republicans will more easily swallow.

Reply
euwe max March 31, 2015 at 1:22 pm

I sure hope not.

Reply
RogueElephant March 31, 2015 at 1:05 pm

EUWE, We might not be as far apart politically as it would seem : My religious convictions prevent me from supporting Democrats – no matter which party they belong to. A POS (R) = A POS (D).

Reply
euwe max March 31, 2015 at 1:30 pm

I don’t have a problem when you guys don’t want to marry someone of the same sex, or when your women decide they’d rather have their daddy’s child than abort it, or when your men take an oath not to have an abortion, and forbid your sons from having them… I don’t even have an issue with Republicans going to a member’s only shoot-out with unregistered fully automatic weapons….

So, you might be right.

Reply
FastEddy23 April 2, 2015 at 11:37 am

I think I could follow both you and The Rogue in those efforts. (Sort of … Although I would prefer the knife, rather than the full auto.)

The Constitution is pretty clear, especially regarding the First Ten Amendments, that any woman’s rights of self-determination of medical choices shall not be infringed. I can not see that g’ment should have any say in those matters, either way.

Reply
SCBlueWoman March 31, 2015 at 11:42 am

The unfit one is Jeff Duncan and the other teapartiers who signed on. period. There is nothing wrong with Lynch. She would make a great AG.

Reply
The Colonel March 31, 2015 at 2:11 pm

Yeah, not so much.

Reply
FastEddy23 April 2, 2015 at 11:50 am

… or we could do without, altogether, considering that may be better than the one we have now. Holder’s batting average against the Supremes is running about 000, losing 20 out of 20 of his challenges to the Constitution …

Reply
Squishy123 March 31, 2015 at 12:53 pm

Maybe the Kenyan will try to get a non-black appointed now.

Reply
nitrat March 31, 2015 at 1:16 pm

Great idea, guys.
I don’t have a problem in the world with Eric Holder continuing in the AG job.

Reply
Lone Ranger April 22, 2015 at 7:43 pm

Yo…Grahamnesty…just keep on supporting Loretta and embracing flower power
And soon you’ll discover a whole new world when voters bend you over in the shower !!!

Reply

Leave a Comment