Loretta Lynch

Recently our 'Attorney General' offered that she will ensure people are prosecuted for anti-Islamic speech. She did clarify this with the addition of ...speech that edges toward violence. The clarification sounds good on the surface. Speech that threatens or incites violence should be curtailed; unless, of course, such speech is advocating the defense of our Nation or its people.

However, who gets to decide the legally of whether something "edges toward" or not? The government? I think not. Here's a question: Exactly what law specifies that speech which "edges toward" something is a crime? OH, WAIT! I know; there isn't one. And, if a person is actually charged and prosecuted for such a subjective action of speech, how would the government prove the accusation of "edges toward"? A tad bit problematic for them, I would guess.

Rather than focusing on subjective speech, I would suggest that she make better use of her time, her energy and the salary WE pay her by actually doing the job that her office demands; you know, upholding the US Constitution as well as investigating and prosecuting those who break federal laws.

If I may be so bold, here are a few things that she could do if she weren't so bent on adhering to the progressives' agenda:

      Investigating and prosecuting, where warranted, the numerous Islamic terror organizations and sites known to exist in the US.

      Investigating and prosecuting, where warranted, the Imams known to be "preaching" jihad in the Mosques and Muslim terrorist sympathizers in this country.

It's not too difficult to identify such Mosques and persons who side with the terrorists. Hey, here's a start. Just do a small bit of research!

      Investigating and prosecuting, where warranted, the inner city gangs that terrorize and murder our citizens - say like Chicago to start with.

      Investigating and prosecuting, where warranted, federal employees who use the power of their offices to illegally thwart the democratic process by targeting those with a different political approach than that of the current administration.

      Investigating and prosecuting, where warranted, federal employees who authorized, allowed, and effected guns to be illegally smuggled across our Southern border to drug cartels resulting in the deaths of Americans.

      Investigating and prosecuting, where warranted, federal employees who authorized, allowed, and effected guns to be illegally smuggled through Lybia to Islamic terrorists in Syria resulting in the deaths of Americans.

      Investigate why cities that have the strictest gun control (you know, where "gun free zones" exist) are exactly where violent crime is increasing while cities with less strict gun controls see violent crime decreasing.

      Investigate and prosecute those in the federal government who promote and support legislation (evading their sworn oaths to uphold the US Constitution) allowing the entry into our country illegal immigrants (which is against federal law, by the way), and allowing the entry into our country "refugees" for whom no "vetting" is available from areas of the world rife with terrorists in vast numbers.

The above list could be significantly longer. But, one should be able to see a trend of malfeasance in office here.

No, it appears that Ms. Lynch would rather do the bidding of the progressive movement and her boss than to stand for principle, her sworn oath, and the American people.

Speech that "edges toward", INDEED! There is no honor, no positive character, and no morality in this woman. She is a typical example of people in this administration. Of course that is just my opinion!

It seems that I'm not exactly the only one who thinks that Lynch is beneath contempt and somewhat over her head in capabilities, responsible judgement, and competence.

Here is an article that touches on part of this subject. The author is somewhat more lenient and understanding than I in his opinion.

Loretta Lynch Says to Muslims ‘We Stand with You in This’


On Thursday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, speaking at the Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner, shockingly refused to focus on the Muslim community after the terrorist attacks committed by Muslims in San Bernardino and Paris, instead. She reassured her audience, “We stand with you in this.”

In another astonishing moment, Lynch said that since the Paris attacks, her greatest concern has been the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric … that fear is my greatest fear.” One humdred thirty people were massacred by Muslim terrorists in Paris last month, added to the 17 killed in the Charlie Hebdo and kosher supermarket attacks in Paris, plus the 14 slaughtered in San Bernardino, the 13 soldiers murdered at Fort Hood, and the four Marines killed in Chattanooga. Lynch would not say how many Muslims have been killed in the United States because of backlash.

Lynch pontificated, “When we talk about the First Amendment we [must] make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American. They are not who we are, they are not what we do, and they will be prosecuted … My message not just to the Muslim community but to all Americans is ‘We cannot give in to the fear that these backlashes are really based on.’”

The Obama Administration has been loath to ascribe any religious motive to Muslim terrorists, with the Defense Department referring to the Fort Hood slaughter as “workplace violence,” Obama himself saying the murderers at the kosher Paris supermarket “randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris,” and Obama assiduously avoiding any reference to Islam or Muslims in his statement after the massive Paris terror assault.