Donations by AG Lynch to Democrats disqualify her from investigating Clinton

More than $10,000 in campaign donations by Attorney General Loretta Lynch to Democrats between 2004 and 2008 should disqualify her from investigating Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, say senior Republicans.

Democrats say that Lynch is not political.  But that claim rings hollow when you look at the record.

The Hill:

With Republicans already calling for a special prosecutor to monitor the probe, conservatives are pouncing on the past campaign contributions as evidence of bias.

“The latest assertion from her allies that Loretta Lynch is not ‘political’ is totally untrue,” said David Bossie, the president of conservative advocacy organization Citizens United in a statement to The Hill. “In fact, she’s been a regular financial contributor to Democrat candidates, including to her current boss, Barack Obama.”

Former colleagues of Lynch’s described her to The Hill as a hard-nosed lawyer who rarely discussed politics in her previous jobs.

According to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Lynch contributed a total of $10,700 to Democratic candidates between 2004 and 2008.

Of that money, $4,600 went to President Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Another $1,000 went to the campaign of the late Rep. Major Owens (D-N.Y.) and $2,100 went to his son Chris’s unsuccessful 2006 House campaign. Lynch also contributed $1,000 to the failed 2008 campaign of North Carolina investment banker Jim Neal and $2,000 to the fruitless 2008 campaign of Oregon politician Steve Novick.

The contributions are under scrutiny amid increasing calls from some Republicans for Lynch to appoint a special prosecutor to oversee the federal investigation into the security of classified information on the private email server Clinton used as secretary of State.

The server is currently in the hands of the FBI, which is investigating whether classified information was mishandled. The Obama administration has said that more than 1,500 emails on the server are now classified — 22 at the highest level of “top secret” — though it is unclear how many of those determinations were made retroactively. 

Clinton and the State Department insist that none of the emails was marked as classified at the time they were sent.

Conservatives have said the Justice Department should pursue criminal charges against Clinton or her top deputies for putting American secrets at risk.

But Lynch has a conflict of interest, top Republicans say, so the decision on whether to proceed with a criminal case ought to be left to someone more impartial.

The protests by Republicans about Lynch's impartiality are pro forma.  They know full well there isn't a chance in hell that this White House will risk losing the 2016 election on an impartial investigation.  They want someone they can control, and that means that Lynch isn't going anywhere.

This shouldn't surprise anyone who has been following the "most transparent administration in history."

More than $10,000 in campaign donations by Attorney General Loretta Lynch to Democrats between 2004 and 2008 should disqualify her from investigating Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, say senior Republicans.

Democrats say that Lynch is not political.  But that claim rings hollow when you look at the record.

The Hill:

With Republicans already calling for a special prosecutor to monitor the probe, conservatives are pouncing on the past campaign contributions as evidence of bias.

“The latest assertion from her allies that Loretta Lynch is not ‘political’ is totally untrue,” said David Bossie, the president of conservative advocacy organization Citizens United in a statement to The Hill. “In fact, she’s been a regular financial contributor to Democrat candidates, including to her current boss, Barack Obama.”

Former colleagues of Lynch’s described her to The Hill as a hard-nosed lawyer who rarely discussed politics in her previous jobs.

According to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Lynch contributed a total of $10,700 to Democratic candidates between 2004 and 2008.

Of that money, $4,600 went to President Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Another $1,000 went to the campaign of the late Rep. Major Owens (D-N.Y.) and $2,100 went to his son Chris’s unsuccessful 2006 House campaign. Lynch also contributed $1,000 to the failed 2008 campaign of North Carolina investment banker Jim Neal and $2,000 to the fruitless 2008 campaign of Oregon politician Steve Novick.

The contributions are under scrutiny amid increasing calls from some Republicans for Lynch to appoint a special prosecutor to oversee the federal investigation into the security of classified information on the private email server Clinton used as secretary of State.

The server is currently in the hands of the FBI, which is investigating whether classified information was mishandled. The Obama administration has said that more than 1,500 emails on the server are now classified — 22 at the highest level of “top secret” — though it is unclear how many of those determinations were made retroactively. 

Clinton and the State Department insist that none of the emails was marked as classified at the time they were sent.

Conservatives have said the Justice Department should pursue criminal charges against Clinton or her top deputies for putting American secrets at risk.

But Lynch has a conflict of interest, top Republicans say, so the decision on whether to proceed with a criminal case ought to be left to someone more impartial.

The protests by Republicans about Lynch's impartiality are pro forma.  They know full well there isn't a chance in hell that this White House will risk losing the 2016 election on an impartial investigation.  They want someone they can control, and that means that Lynch isn't going anywhere.

This shouldn't surprise anyone who has been following the "most transparent administration in history."