TexasCHLforum.com

It should go without saying that the U.S. attorney general, as our nation’s chief law-enforcement officer, is expected to wield the Justice Department’s full powers to fight for those victimized by crime. It should also go without saying that federal prosecutors routinely make deals with criminals to secure convictions for other, larger crimes, or to save themselves time and the taxpayers’ money — and that those criminals’ victims sometimes come out the losers in such deals. Yet new evidence suggests that Loretta Lynch, President Obama’s pick to take DOJ’s reins from Eric Holder, may have gone beyond the accepted norms of prosecutorial conduct in her time in charge of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York. Lynch’s office appears to have let self-professed criminals walk free in exchange for their cooperation with her office, watched impassively as they committed further crimes, and intentionally kept the victims of those crimes in the dark — denying them their chance to seek tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in restitution in direct contravention of federal law.

puma guy wrote:TAM, you need to understand she'll fit right like glove with this bunch. I assure you she'll be approved.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

puma guy wrote:TAM, you need to understand she'll fit right like glove with this bunch. I assure you she'll be approved.

.....and by a republican senate, no less.....

Jumping Frog wrote:Elections have consequences.

There are people who believe if the President is duly elected, the POTUS has the right to either suceed or fail trying implement his agenda. That means he has the right to execute his agenda with cabinet members of his choice.

I do not fully subscribe to that notion, but I understand there is a certain degree of reasonableness to it.

This worthless and dangerous AG is a consequence of the American people making a bad 2008 choice worse in 2012.