Loretta Lynch: Worse Than Eric Holder?

• Attorney general nominee the “queen of civil forfeiture.”

By Pete Papaherakles —

With Eric Himpton Holder, Jr. resigning as United States Attorney General, the nominee to replace him, Loretta Elizabeth Lynch, is undergoing congressional vetting.

Although getting rid of Holder is reason to celebrate after his many scandals, corruption and failure to uphold the Constitution, many people feel that we’d be doing even worse with Ms. Lynch. Just like Americans voting for Obama thinking they couldn’t do any worse than George W. Bush, we might be in for a rude awakening if Ms. Lynch becomes America’s new top cop.

Before getting into all the reasons Ms. Lynch would be a disaster, a politically-incorrect observation has to be addressed: Ms. Lynch is black. This doesn’t mean she is unqualified simply because of her race. It only means that President Barack Hussein Obama is a racist and that she is the nominee simply because she is black. It is unfathomable that there are no whites who can match Ms. Lynch’s credentials. Considering blacks only make up 12% of the U.S. population while whites still constitute 65%, the law of averages would give more than a five-to-one favor toward nominating a white attorney general over a black one. Considering this is the second time Obama is placing a black in that position, the odds become 25 to one—and that it is not by chance.

It has been well documented that Holder is a racist and has supported black criminals like the New Black Panthers, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and others while trying his hardest to persecute white police officers and promote the myth of white privilege and racism. Along with Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Obama himself, he has been working hard to disenfranchise whites in America in every way possible. The book, America’s Racial Powder Keg, which was published by AMERICAN FREE PRESS, tells all about it.

Ms. Lynch will most likely follow those same anti-white policies.

Ms. Lynch rose to prominence when she supervised the successful prosecution of a white New York police officer who horrifically sodomized Haitian immigrant Abner Louima in 1997. The case became a national symbol of white police brutality against blacks.

Former representative, presidential candidate and former U.S. Air Force flight surgeon, Dr. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has given some dire warnings about Ms. Lynch. Dr. Paul is concerned that Ms. Lynch will aggressively increase what is called “civil asset forfeiture,” an Orwellian term more properly described as civil asset “theft.” It’s where the government seizes cash, vehicles and other private property from individuals merely suspected of wrongdoing, without evidence, formal charges or specific crime.

Writing at Dr. Paul’s website, John Tate, Campaign for Liberty president and good friend of Dr. Paul’s, said Ms. Lynch’s confirmation must be stopped at all costs. Ms. Lynch should be nationally known as the “queen” of civil asset “theft,” wrote Tate. He points out that as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Ms. Lynch’s office seized nearly a billion dollars’ worth of private property under the guise of civil asset forfeiture just in 2013. The Internal Revenue Service is used as the federal goon enforcers to confiscate property and assets.

“There is no doubt Ms. Lynch will continue her asset theft policies once she becomes AG,” wrote Tate.

In a Senate hearing, Ms. Lynch boldly declared this method a “useful” and “wonderful tool.” As the Homeland Security definition of a terrorist has now been expanded to include all those who praise the Founding Fathers, or criticize the U.S. dollar, millions of Americans could be targets for asset theft.

It also seems certain that Ms. Lynch plans to continue Holder’s practice of unilaterally expanding the authority of the Executive Branch and federal power.

In recent Senate hearings, Ms. Lynch was asked by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) about her views on the constitutionality of the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping program. Without hesitating, Ms. Lynch called the program “constitutional and effective.”

She has refused to state whether or not the president has the power to use drone strikes to kill American citizens on U.S. soil.

Ms. Lynch also supports Obama’s use of executive orders to overturn the will of Congress and write new laws as only he sees fit.

Four Republican senators have already publicly declared their support for Ms. Lynch. If all Democrats vote along party lines, Ms. Lynch will get 50 votes, requiring Joe Biden as the vice president to cast the deciding vote.

But none of this is certain, as promises are always broken in politics.

What is certain is that Ms. Lynch’s confirmation process has dragged out longer that any other AG in history, going on five months now. This led Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) to use the racial analogy that the Republican majority was asking the first African-American woman ever nominated for AG to “sit in the back of the bus.”

Although much is made about Ms. Lynch’s unique status as the first black woman AG in history if she is confirmed—as if that somehow deserves applause—it would also be the first time in nearly two centuries that a president had elevated a United States attorney directly to the position of attorney general.

There’s no telling how long the delay will continue. Some say that Ms. Lynch won’t even be considered until mid-April. Others feel that the GOP majority may choose to permanently ignore Ms. Lynch, leaving Holder in office through January 2017. At this point, it’s hard to tell if this would be a good thing or a bad thing.

Pete Papaherakles is a writer and political cartoonist for AFP.