• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama expected to nominate Loretta Lynch to be attorney general: CNN

Has this been posted yet?

Who is she?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama is expected to pick Brooklyn prosecutor Loretta Lynch for his next attorney general, CNN reported on Friday, a move that would give the top U.S. law enforcement role to a low-key prosecutor with deep experience in both civil rights and corporate fraud cases.

Lynch, 55, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, would be the first African-American woman to hold the job if nominated by Obama and confirmed by the Senate.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Obama had yet to decide on his nominee. Asked about reports that a decision could come soon, he said he had no specific details on timing but that no announcement was planned on Friday.


More here:

Obama expected to nominate Loretta Lynch to be attorney general: CNN

I haven't the faintest idea who she is. But if the president wants her he probably should have her. That is unless she has something horrendous in her past. When it comes to cabinet positions I believe any president should have whom he wants. After all, whom he chooses reflects directly upon him. Besides any cabinet member is going to do exactly what the president wishes anyway.

Judges are a different deal.
 
Do you suppose that Obama will wait for the new "right wing" Senate to be seated or perhaps let the "left wing" lame duck Senate handle this suddenly urgent matter? ;)

Lame Duck is my bet. Reid's last hurrah.
 
You mean this:

If the Democrats are in charge, stop and frisk is just hunky dory, never mind the Constitutional issues. If Republicans are in charge, then it is obviously racist, as most of those being frisked are black.

Yep.
That's what I got out of her statement. Do you agree?
 
Yep.
That's what I got out of her statement. Do you agree?

I do agree. I read it and reread it a few times, and that's my takeaway as well. I suppose that will be clarified in the confirmation hearings. I hope it isn't what we think it is but I'm so soured on people lately.
 
Um.... didn't you read the part about how she is a black woman? In this administration, those are the credentials that she needs.

Remember, in order to make sure we carry forward the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr, it's important that we continue to judge people based on the color of their skin rather than the content of their character or their particular abilities to do a job well or impartially.

Seriously? So you don't care to learn anything about her; you're just assuming that it's her skin color that is the reason she's nominated.

Stop playing the race card.
 
Don't know anything about her, but it's hard to imagine we could get a worse AG than Holder. Though, Obama is great at picking incompetent people. How hard is it to pick someone that will uphold and defend the Constitution and enforce laws?
 
Seriously? So you don't care to learn anything about her; you're just assuming that it's her skin color that is the reason she's nominated.

For this administration? Yup. We got word as soon as Holder said he was stepping down that they were looking for a black woman. Not a great jurist. not someone who could impartially apply the law. Not someone who could restore any kind of trust in a politicized Justice Department. A black woman.

Because just like SCOTUS appointments, that's what's important :roll:
 
I have to try to retrieve this item from the local media.....we recently had a new appointment of a woman into a high court position. The article talked about her being a single mother, her work in family court, earning her law degree as a single mom.....

all impressive stuff.

What they never mentioned is she is an Indo-Canadian, of East Indian descent. Not even mentioned, and yet its a given in the US that Obama appoints based ion skin color your post can stand for so long completely unchallenged. It is that accepted by all that racial issues and racism runs deep in the American fabric to this day.

fact is, you're right too. and that's the saddest part

It's more important for some than others. but yeah. :(
 
Sure. If the Democrats are in charge, stop and frisk is just hunky dory, never mind the Constitutional issues. If Republicans are in charge, then it is obviously racist, as most of those being frisked are black.

That's what I got out of her statement. Do you agree?

Woah. :shock: "It depends on who's using it"

Sounds a bit....I don't know. WTF was that supposed to mean?

Is this really a difficult concept to grasp? She stated that it's a tool that has its uses, but can also be abused, therefore, the usefullness and appropriateness is largely dependent on the officer in questions's motives. Simple stuff really.
 
Um.... didn't you read the part about how she is a black woman? In this administration, those are the credentials that she needs.



Remember, in order to make sure we carry forward the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr, it's important that we continue to judge people based on the color of their skin rather than the content of their character or their particular abilities to do a job well or impartially.

It is so hard to really read what one's thoughts are behind their actions . I would find it hard to believe that after reading her credentials he missed the part she was black. Or he simply thought she would be a good mix regardless of her skin color.
The same question can be raised at election of the Utah congresswoman Mia Love. Was she voted because she was indeed black which would allow Republicans bragging rights to say they have a black congresswoman in all white Utah? Or simply she would be a breath of fresh air rather than the same old sold out politicians. Who knows, perhaps a little bit of both.
 
I keep calling her "Loretta Lynn" but that's the coal miner's daughter.

Loretta Lynn crossed my mind too. But how many other Loretta's do we know of? Plus the last names are pretty close Lynn=Lynch.
 
Is this really a difficult concept to grasp? She stated that it's a tool that has its uses, but can also be abused, therefore, the usefullness and appropriateness is largely dependent on the officer in questions's motives. Simple stuff really.

another affirmative action poster child apparently. I will have to do some checking on her since her wiki article is really thin
 
another affirmative action poster child apparently. I will have to do some checking on her since her wiki article is really thin

It doesn't make you look racist at all when you make those claims.
 
It doesn't make you look racist at all when you make those claims.

she is the same class as I was (1984) back then affirmative action at Harvard law was out of control. NONE of the blacks who were accepted at Harvard for the class of 1984 were as qualified as at least 2000 white males who were turned down at that school

back then blacks got .5 added to their GPA and 130 points added to their LSAT scores
 
Don't know much about her...No one can be as corrupt as Holder...But we'll see.
 
TSA searches are what? ;)

:) While I certainly believe much of what TSA does is theater I do see a difference between being searched in order to board a plane and cops stopping people on the street for random searches.
 
Sounds like another Obama affirmative action appointment. If Lynch were a white male, Lynch wouldn't even be on Obama's radar screen.
That's not true.... Obama appointed a white, male conservative to head the DoD.
 
Don't know much about her...No one can be as corrupt as Holder...But we'll see.

Mayor Guiliani just made a good case for her being approved on Hannity--she's a life-long prosecutor as one point.
I can't disagree with his points though that the new Senate should approve her, taking away the "stain" of being approved by losing DEM Senators.

Gov. Walker next but I won't be able to watch West/Palin .
 
Does anyone else besides me know that the AG is conformed by the Senate? And that when Harry Reid changed the rules in 2013 it meant they only need a simple majority in the votes, and the GOP can't filibuster? All Reid has to do is push through the confirmation process.

Did you know that except for SCOTUS judges, the senate rule change on filibusters only applied to federal judge nominations?

The repubs could still block her nomination.
 
Back
Top Bottom