Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has announced that he will oppose the nomination of Loretta Lynch to the office of Attorney General. Senator Paul was strident in his opposition to Ms. Lynch, and he was clear and concise in his reasons –
“Mrs. Lynch has a track-record of violating the individual freedoms granted to us by our Constitution. She considers civil asset forfeiture to be a ‘useful tool,’ while I consider it to be an infringement on the Fifth Amendment. She remains non-committal on the legality of drone strikes against American citizens, while I believe such strikes unequivocally violate rights granted to us by the Sixth Amendment. Mrs. Lynch also supports President Obama’s calls for executive amnesty, which I vehemently oppose,” Sen. Paul said. “The Attorney General must operate independent of politics, independent of the president and under the direction of the Constitution. I cannot support a nominee, like Mrs. Lynch, who rides roughshod on our Constitutional rights.”
Senator Paul is absolutely correct to stand against Lynch for Attorney General. She may not be Eric Holder… but she might as well be, and the last thing our nation needs is another Eric Holder.
Bretibart had more from Paul on why he would oppose Lynch’s nomination…
“I think ideally you want an attorney general who, if there were a problem, would be independent and objective looking at the executive branch,” Paul said in a previous interview with Breitbart News this past weekend aboard a flight to Dallas, Texas, where he had several speaking engagements and publicly welcomed Texas GOP chairman Steve Munisteri to his likely 2016 presidential campaign.
That’s kind of what you want an attorney general to do. I’m concerned that a big part of her fame as a federal prosecutor was through civil forfeiture. She was asked specifically about this by Sen. Lee, and her response was ‘oh, everything is fine, it’s done with a court order.’ She seems to not quite understand that innocent people are having their stuff taken by government–their cars, their money, their hotels, their stuff is being confiscated by government even if they’re never charged or even if they’re never convicted. She didn’t seem to grasp that point and this is a week after parts of the administration said they were not going to enforce some of the civil forfeiture.
Paul added that while “that alone”–Lynch’s position on civil forfeiture–would be enough for him to oppose her nomination, her position on Obama’s executive amnesty was even more troubling.
“The separation of powers is probably the most important underpinning of our constitutional system,” Paul said last week. “If her position is that the executive branch can write laws or amend laws, that would be a real problem with me.”
If the GOP doesn’t stand united against this nomination, they will most certainly regret not stopping Loretta Lynch from being the next Attorney General, because she’ll just be more of the same from the Obama DOJ.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com