Congressional hearing: Attorney general refuses to admit speeding illegal

During a congressional hearing on June 12, Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified before a panel of House Republicans, many of whom expressed frustration with her intentionally opaque answers regarding the Justice Department’s investigation of former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.  Among the legislators who questioned Lynch was Georgia representative Doug Collins, who grilled the attorney general for her reluctance to give a concrete “yes” or “no” answer to even the most basic of questions.

Fed up with Lynch’s slippery testimony, Collins asked (40:50) the attorney general whether she would consider it a crime to drive at 65 miles per hour on a highway with a 55 mile per hour speed limit.  The attorney general refused to answer even this simple hypothetical in the affirmative:

DC: I’ve got a question for you. Riding down the road, the speed limit says 55.  I’m doing 65.  Have I broken the law?

LL: You’d have to ask the highway patrol.  They’d likely write you a ticket.

This noncommittal attitude is indicative of the rest of Lynch’s testimony the testimony of the U.S. attorney general, a top member of what the president has laughably referred to as “the most transparent administration in history.”  Lynch is particularly exemplary of the Obama administration’s lack of transparency, as is demonstrated by her private meeting with former president Bill Clinton only days before FBI director James Comey recommended not to indict Hillary Clinton.

The attorney general refused to discuss her opinion of Comey’s recommendation instead claiming that she preferred to defer to his judgment and would not indicate whether she had even read (41:45) the FBI’s briefing.  Ironically, Lynch has exercised no such restraint when discussing other politically charged topics.  As Florida’s Rep. Ron DeSantis pointed out (15:50), when responding to the San Bernardino shooting in February of this year, Lynch openly discussed the possibility of bringing criminal action against citizens accused of spreading anti-Muslim rhetoric.

The attorney general’s obfuscatory performance at yesterday’s hearing speaks to the unprecedented slack that the Obama administration has shown the former secretary of state.  Apparently, as far as Loretta Lynch is concerned, even speed limits are negotiable if your last name is Clinton. 

During a congressional hearing on June 12, Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified before a panel of House Republicans, many of whom expressed frustration with her intentionally opaque answers regarding the Justice Department’s investigation of former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.  Among the legislators who questioned Lynch was Georgia representative Doug Collins, who grilled the attorney general for her reluctance to give a concrete “yes” or “no” answer to even the most basic of questions.

Fed up with Lynch’s slippery testimony, Collins asked (40:50) the attorney general whether she would consider it a crime to drive at 65 miles per hour on a highway with a 55 mile per hour speed limit.  The attorney general refused to answer even this simple hypothetical in the affirmative:

DC: I’ve got a question for you. Riding down the road, the speed limit says 55.  I’m doing 65.  Have I broken the law?

LL: You’d have to ask the highway patrol.  They’d likely write you a ticket.

This noncommittal attitude is indicative of the rest of Lynch’s testimony the testimony of the U.S. attorney general, a top member of what the president has laughably referred to as “the most transparent administration in history.”  Lynch is particularly exemplary of the Obama administration’s lack of transparency, as is demonstrated by her private meeting with former president Bill Clinton only days before FBI director James Comey recommended not to indict Hillary Clinton.

The attorney general refused to discuss her opinion of Comey’s recommendation instead claiming that she preferred to defer to his judgment and would not indicate whether she had even read (41:45) the FBI’s briefing.  Ironically, Lynch has exercised no such restraint when discussing other politically charged topics.  As Florida’s Rep. Ron DeSantis pointed out (15:50), when responding to the San Bernardino shooting in February of this year, Lynch openly discussed the possibility of bringing criminal action against citizens accused of spreading anti-Muslim rhetoric.

The attorney general’s obfuscatory performance at yesterday’s hearing speaks to the unprecedented slack that the Obama administration has shown the former secretary of state.  Apparently, as far as Loretta Lynch is concerned, even speed limits are negotiable if your last name is Clinton.