Loretta Lynch confirmation

[Guest]

I find it odd that the Senate would stall the confirmation of Loretta Lynch. Is she a pawn in a bigger game.

Are Republicans concerned that this might put them in a negative light? They might look like obstructionists or the party of "no", as previously accused. I believe the Republicans should learn to choose their battles more carefully. I don't think this is a battle that is worth winning.

Not sure this fiasco will set well with voters.

Obama calls delay of his attorney general nominee 'crazy' | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/18/obama-calls-delay-his-attorney-general-nominee-crazy/)

[Guest]

I find it odd that the Senate would stall the confirmation of Loretta Lynch. Is she a pawn in a bigger game.

Are Republicans concerned that this might put them in a negative light? They might look like obstructionists or the party of "no", as previously accused. I believe the Republicans should learn to choose their battles more carefully. I don't think this is a battle that is worth winning.

Not sure this fiasco will set well with voters.

Obama calls delay of his attorney general nominee 'crazy' | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/18/obama-calls-delay-his-attorney-general-nominee-crazy/)

Actually they are doing us a favor by not letting in another Obama, you owe me, racist puppet/parrot.

[Guest]

Actually they are doing us a favor by not letting in another Obama, you owe me, racist puppet/parrot.


And you get to keep your favorite Attorney Holder, Eric Holder, who may have a lifetime appointment.

The demographic groups that this refusal to confirm Loretta Lynch alienates are too numerous to mention, but ones that the GOP has already given up on.

[Guest]

I am ashamed of my party holding up this vote. It is as if republican congressmen want to alinate the entire U.S. voting population.

[Guest]

I am ashamed of my party holding up this vote. It is as if republican congressmen want to alinate the entire U.S. voting population.


It is encouraging that some in the rank and file are ashamed about this action, however the GOP senators holding up the nomination are not ashamed or embarrassed.

The president nominated Loretta Lynch almost six months ago, and she passed out of committee with flying colors. She has waited longer than the last eight AG nominees combined, times two.

[Guest]

I am ashamed of my party holding up this vote. It is as if republican congressmen want to alinate the entire U.S. voting population.

because of Lynch? Please expand.

[Guest]

because of Lynch? Please expand.

It shows childish obstruction of our democratic process. I could understand if she was under an investigation for crimes, if proven, would change her eligibility, but this is just hateful.

[Guest]

I believe that she would have been confirmed, albeit narrowly, had senate Democrats not decided to play politics with the Human Trafficking bill, after they were told that such a ploy, and it was a ploy because the language they held it up on is in many many bills, would stall This vote.

Funny, Reid has pulled theses stunts for years and escaped any criticism. Now, Sharpton has decided to make this racial, which is not going to help, but it is what they do.

[Guest]

I believe that she would have been confirmed, albeit narrowly, had senate Democrats not decided to play politics with the Human Trafficking bill, after they were told that such a ploy, and it was a ploy because the language they held it up on is in many many bills, would stall This vote.

Funny, Reid has pulled theses stunts for years and escaped any criticism. Now, Sharpton has decided to make this racial, which is not going to help, but it is what they do.

For sure, Sharpton is a race baiter, but when we don't explain why the vote being withheld, we look bad. We spin facts every bit as much as liberals. It must stop or we will be fresh for takeover by China and we will deserve it.

[Guest]

For sure, Sharpton is a race baiter, but when we don't explain why the vote being withheld, we look bad. We spin facts every bit as much as liberals. It must stop or we will be fresh for takeover by China and we will deserve it.

You didn't read.

The democrats were told that if they played this political game with the human trafficking bill, that the vote on Lynch would be "delayed". They played the game and are now twisting it back, which is normal.

Do I think the Republicans should just go ahead...yeah, but that seems to always be the case any more.

Just remember, this situation could have been avoided had the democrats not played their game.

[Guest]

You didn't read.

The democrats were told that if they played this political game with the human trafficking bill, that the vote on Lynch would be "delayed". They played the game and are now twisting it back, which is normal.

Do I think the Republicans should just go ahead...yeah, but that seems to always be the case any more.

Just remember, this situation could have been avoided had the democrats not played their game.

I suspect your right, but my god, this he said she said mentality is going to destroy America. I have been a republican most of my life, but I swear, which ever candidate if either one, takes the high road in 2016, that person has my vote. This silly B.S. HAS TO STOP. We are in need of a moderate Republican and soon. The liberals wish to give the country away, and the Tea Party's wish is to run it like NAZI Germany.

[Guest]

I suspect your right, but my god, this he said she said mentality is going to destroy America. I have been a republican most of my life, but I swear, which ever candidate if either one, takes the high road in 2016, that person has my vote. This silly B.S. HAS TO STOP. We are in need of a moderate Republican and soon. The liberals wish to give the country away, and the Tea Party's wish is to run it like NAZI Germany.

How about a couple of examples that demonstrate this conclusion?

[Guest]

I suspect your right, but my god, this he said she said mentality is going to destroy America. I have been a republican most of my life, but I swear, which ever candidate if either one, takes the high road in 2016, that person has my vote. This silly B.S. HAS TO STOP. We are in need of a moderate Republican and soon. The liberals wish to give the country away, and the Tea Party's wish is to run it like NAZI Germany.
Agree wholeheartedly. This needs to stop. Moderation and compromise, that is what will help us. Do not listen to the keepers and do what is best for us as a nation, not to line the ultra rich, or those refusing to work's, pockets! Enough of this partisan crap!

[Guest]

Heard on the Sunday talk shows that this vote will finally take place this coming Wednesday. We will see if the vote happens and if she gets enough votes to be confirmed.

[Guest]

I suspect your right, but my god, this he said she said mentality is going to destroy America. I have been a republican most of my life, but I swear, which ever candidate if either one, takes the high road in 2016, that person has my vote. This silly B.S. HAS TO STOP. We are in need of a moderate Republican and soon. The liberals wish to give the country away, and the Tea Party's wish is to run it like NAZI Germany.

You got my vote!!! :bowdown:

[Guest]

Loretta Lynch was finally confirmed today as Attorney General. Ten republican senators ended up supporting her.

The only AG that took longer to be confirmed was Ed Meese. Why? Because he was being investigated by a special prosecutor at the time.

Lynch's father, a minister, was in the gallery when the vote came down and was quoted as saying "the good guys won".

[Guest]

Despite Warning Senate Cheers After Lynch Is Confirmed - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/despite-warning-senate-cheers-after-lynch-confirmed-n347076)


The final vote was 56-43. You can watch the vote being taken on the link above, followed by cheers all around after the vote.

[Guest]

Golly! President Obama AND the American people won AGAIN.

Looks as though the Tea Party will have something else to bitch about.

[Guest]

Golly! President Obama AND the American people won AGAIN.

Looks as though the Tea Party will have something else to bitch about.



Of course Marco Rubio voted no, and Ted Cruz didn't even bother to vote.

Back in 2011, The Daily Caller was right when they said that AG Eric Holder's days as AG were numbered, specifically 1277 days to be exact.

[Guest]

I suspect your right, but my god, this he said she said mentality is going to destroy America. I have been a republican most of my life, but I swear, which ever candidate if either one, takes the high road in 2016, that person has my vote. This silly B.S. HAS TO STOP. We are in need of a moderate Republican and soon. The liberals wish to give the country away, and the Tea Party's wish is to run it like NAZI Germany.

What a truly deranged comment regarding the Tea Party ... you don't have a clue what's it's about but since when has ignorance been an obstacle for you to opine?

[Guest]

Amazing stuff. This confirmation would have taken place weeks ago, but the Democratic Party, knowing that they were holding it up, played politics with the Human Trafficking bill, and yet uninformed idiots still mention the tea party.

[Guest]

Amazing stuff. This confirmation would have taken place weeks ago, but the Democratic Party, knowing that they were holding it up, played politics with the Human Trafficking bill, and yet uninformed idiots still mention the tea party.

Democrats always blame someone else, taking their cue from the current administration.

[Guest]

Amazing stuff. This confirmation would have taken place weeks ago, but the Democratic Party, knowing that they were holding it up, played politics with the Human Trafficking bill, and yet uninformed idiots still mention the tea party.

Every time I see the word idiot in a post this comes to mind:

https://youtu.be/GlA35y0bGQc

[Guest]

Amazing stuff. This confirmation would have taken place weeks ago, but the Democratic Party, knowing that they were holding it up, played politics with the Human Trafficking bill, and yet uninformed idiots still mention the tea party.

Let me see if I have the sequence of events right. The human trafficking law has been in force since 2000 with periodic reauthorizations

"The Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-386), the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003 (H.R. 2620), the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (H.R. 972), and the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 7311) provide the tools to combat trafficking in persons both worldwide and domestically. The Acts authorized the establishment of G/TIP and the President's Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons to assist in the coordination of anti-trafficking efforts.

-03/07/13 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Title XII of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013)" from State.gov

When the materially identical billed stalled in 2014 it was reintroduced in 2015. It was foolishly assumed by Democrats that as is the usual process the bill is reauthorized without changes of any significance. It sailed through committee with full Democratic support and no discussion of any anti-abortion changes having been made.

"For instance, an e-mail exchange between two Judiciary Committee staffers obtained by POLITICO shows two staffers discussing the legislation. Republicans gave a list of seven changes from a different trafficking bill that stalled last year and the abortion provision wasn’t mentioned."

Then someone read the bill and noticed that the anti-abortion crusaders had modified the bill and added anti-abortion language that had never been in the law before.


"Democrats didn’t read the 68-page bill to discover its provisions dealing with abortion, and Republicans didn’t disclose the abortion language when Democratic staffers asked them for a summary of the legislation."

This alteration to the law was unacceptable to the Democrats and no member of the GOP had felt it necessary to announce the language having been inserted prior to the committee vote. Call it good tactics or call it sneaky. The Dems really should have read the bill but they didn't. Even the house bill didn't contain the anti-abortion language.

So the Democrats insisted the new language be removed before they would vote for the authorization.

The Democrats did not hold up the confirmation vote on AG, that was the majority leader's decision that he couldn't handle the difficult job of having the Senate look at two issues at once and until the trafficking bill was adjusted the Senate would be unable to vote on AG. The Democrats were perfectly ready all along to vote on the AG, from the day she passed through the required committee.

[Guest]

Let me see if I have the sequence of events right. The human trafficking law has been in force since 2000 with periodic reauthorizations

"The Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-386), the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003 (H.R. 2620), the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (H.R. 972), and the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 7311) provide the tools to combat trafficking in persons both worldwide and domestically. The Acts authorized the establishment of G/TIP and the President's Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons to assist in the coordination of anti-trafficking efforts.

-03/07/13 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Title XII of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013)" from State.gov

When the materially identical billed stalled in 2014 it was reintroduced in 2015. It was foolishly assumed by Democrats that as is the usual process the bill is reauthorized without changes of any significance. It sailed through committee with full Democratic support and no discussion of any anti-abortion changes having been made.

"For instance, an e-mail exchange between two Judiciary Committee staffers obtained by POLITICO shows two staffers discussing the legislation. Republicans gave a list of seven changes from a different trafficking bill that stalled last year and the abortion provision wasn’t mentioned."

Then someone read the bill and noticed that the anti-abortion crusaders had modified the bill and added anti-abortion language that had never been in the law before.


"Democrats didn’t read the 68-page bill to discover its provisions dealing with abortion, and Republicans didn’t disclose the abortion language when Democratic staffers asked them for a summary of the legislation."

This alteration to the law was unacceptable to the Democrats and no member of the GOP had felt it necessary to announce the language having been inserted prior to the committee vote. Call it good tactics or call it sneaky. The Dems really should have read the bill but they didn't. Even the house bill didn't contain the anti-abortion language.

So the Democrats insisted the new language be removed before they would vote for the authorization.

The Democrats did not hold up the confirmation vote on AG, that was the majority leader's decision that he couldn't handle the difficult job of having the Senate look at two issues at once and until the trafficking bill was adjusted the Senate would be unable to vote on AG. The Democrats were perfectly ready all along to vote on the AG, from the day she passed through the required committee.

It's amazing how we turn into idiots when we see the underhanded and despicable tactics used by the te naggers. They are truly disgusting!

[Guest]

Al Sharpton made another one of his visits to Obama headquarters and personally vouched for Loretta Lynch. Enough said.

As to congressional voting if you haven't figure it out yet both sides simply won't introduce a bill and do an up/down vote. No, they have to try and sneak through controversial junk which to me is counterproductive and often not in the best interests of citizens and costly to taxpayers . Such was the case here.

The above-mentioned is the symptom the problem is the federal government is much too big and needs to be reduce to about half its size.

People who make disparaging comments about any political party are fooling themselves and error in dealing with absolutes. They would serve themselves better by focusing on individual issues and people to maintain their objectivity

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

It is interesting to look at the GOP members who voted for Lynch. Most are from bluish states and are looking at facing the voters in 2016. However the strange one is McConnell voting yes. Best explanation is to give his moderate members some political cover. See, if I voted the same way as the GOP Senate leader then no one can say I voted against the party. No one here said they voted for Lynch because she was the President's choice, and the President is entitled to have his people in the cabinet unless they are unqualified. (although I've always wondered if RFK would get confirmed as JFK's AG today)

[Guest]

Well we will soon see the true grit and political persuasion of this new AG.
Will she kowtow to the Obama very leaning left or will she do the right thing and open an investigation on the Clinton Foundations suspected quid pro quo Russia uranium deal with Sectetary of State boast of a "reset with Russia.
Obama went after Senator Robert Mendez for his poltical favors for pa with a florida doctor and the state of Virginia sent governor McConnell to prison for accepting money for political favors. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

The trail of scandal left the Clinton's from Arkanas to present day make such allegations clearly worth looking at. the clinton sold access to the Lincoln bedroom and in darkness have been selling bits of America for a very long time.
This is what despots do in 3rd world countries

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Well we will soon see the true grit and political persuasion of this new AG.
Will she kowtow to the Obama very leaning left or will she do the right thing and open an investigation on the Clinton Foundations suspected quid pro quo Russia uranium deal with Sectetary of State boast of a "reset with Russia.
Obama went after Senator Robert Mendez for his poltical favors for pa with a florida doctor and the state of Virginia sent governor McConnell to prison for accepting money for political favors. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

The trail of scandal left the Clinton's from Arkanas to present day make such allegations clearly worth looking at. the clinton sold access to the Lincoln bedroom and in darkness have been selling bits of America for a very long time.
This is what despots do in 3rd world countries

Personal Best Regards:

You don't need the AG to be involved in any Clinton issues. The House will certainly have twenty or thirty committees investigate, issue reports that they can find no evidence of wrong doing, then appoint new committees to investigate the same thing over and over. And perhaps the Speaker can shed a tear over that lack of any quid pro quo.

You forgot to add something about Rev. Sharpton to this post. I think he was they guy who smuggled the cash into the state department.

Clinton couldn't keep his pennis in his pants. Other than that his administration may be the most successful scandal free and economically beneficial 8 years since Ike. And no one was constantly checking on Ike. What was Bill's approval rating when he left office? Oh , it was the highest of any President since Gallup began polling. So whatever it was that the Clintons gave America, America liked it.

[Guest]

Can anyone please explain to me what 43 GOP Senators felt was a legitimate reason to not consent to the nomination of Lynch? Other than general hatred of Obama. Isn't it the role of the Senate to determine whether the nominee is qualified for the job, has an appropriate skill set and temperament? I can see voting against a nominee based on some wild ideology that nominee may hold. What is Lynch's wild ideology?

[Guest]

Can anyone please explain to me what 43 GOP Senators felt was a legitimate reason to not consent to the nomination of Lynch? Other than general hatred of Obama. Isn't it the role of the Senate to determine whether the nominee is qualified for the job, has an appropriate skill set and temperament? I can see voting against a nominee based on some wild ideology that nominee may hold. What is Lynch's wild ideology?

If you are really that interested, why not write to all 43 Senators and ask them?

[Guest]

You don't need the AG to be involved in any Clinton issues. The House will certainly have twenty or thirty committees investigate, issue reports that they can find no evidence of wrong doing, then appoint new committees to investigate the same thing over and over. And perhaps the Speaker can shed a tear over that lack of any quid pro quo.

You forgot to add something about Rev. Sharpton to this post. I think he was they guy who smuggled the cash into the state department.

Clinton couldn't keep his pennis in his pants. Other than that his administration may be the most successful scandal free and economically beneficial 8 years since Ike. And no one was constantly checking on Ike. What was Bill's approval rating when he left office? Oh , it was the highest of any President since Gallup began polling. So whatever it was that the Clintons gave America, America liked it.

I'm always intrigued by the moral tradeoff so many are willing to make. The Clinton Crime Family can pretty much run amok (morally, financially, politically) but as long as they talk the liberal talk, and deliver on at least some of it, people are ok.

It occurs to me that is one genius scam and no one can deny that it works. It just stinks is all.

[Guest]

I'm always intrigued by the moral tradeoff so many are willing to make. The Clinton Crime Family can pretty much run amok (morally, financially, politically) but as long as they talk the liberal talk, and deliver on at least some of it, people are ok.

It occurs to me that is one genius scam and no one can deny that it works. It just stinks is all.

And the scams and corruption will continue...business as usual with the Clintons.

[Guest]

Still waiting for a Clinton supporter to speak to why it is OK with them.
No name calling required.
No party line abuse talk.
Just state why what the Clintons do that trips far too many illegal, untrustworthy alarm bells is OK with them.

[Guest]

I'm always intrigued by the moral tradeoff so many are willing to make. The Clinton Crime Family can pretty much run amok (morally, financially, politically) but as long as they talk the liberal talk, and deliver on at least some of it, people are ok.

It occurs to me that is one genius scam and no one can deny that it works. It just stinks is all.

Despite your strong words, I am still awaiting the crimes of which the Clinton are guilty. Oh there is the crime of beating Bush I in 1992, of beating Dole in 1996, of leaving office with the highest approval rating of any President, the crime of being beloved by the middle class, of continuing to serve the world, and yes the crime of capitalism by gaining some wealth from books, personal appearances at inflated prices, and being famous. The crime of Hillary winning the US Senate race twice from New York which was not really her home state, the crime of serving as Secretary of state and restoring confidence in the US as a world leader that had been destroyed by the previous administration, and the crime of potentially being the next President. Call out the Swift Boats. By the way, most of the Democrats I know feel that the Third Way approach of the Clintons is far too illiberal. I would greatly prefer an unapologetic progressive as President. There is nothing but practicality in the Clinton governance.

[Guest]

Despite your strong words, I am still awaiting the crimes of which the Clinton are guilty. Oh there is the crime of beating Bush I in 1992, of beating Dole in 1996, of leaving office with the highest approval rating of any President, the crime of being beloved by the middle class, of continuing to serve the world, and yes the crime of capitalism by gaining some wealth from books, personal appearances at inflated prices, and being famous. The crime of Hillary winning the US Senate race twice from New York which was not really her home state, the crime of serving as Secretary of state and restoring confidence in the US as a world leader that had been destroyed by the previous administration, and the crime of potentially being the next President. Call out the Swift Boats. By the way, most of the Democrats I know feel that the Third Way approach of the Clintons is far too illiberal. I would greatly prefer an unapologetic progressive as President. There is nothing but practicality in the Clinton governance.

It's still early in the investigative process. Let's see how it lay out. As a side note, The Clintons are filing ammended tax returns for the last 5 years. Is this the next shoe to drop? We shall see.

[Guest]

Despite your strong words, I am still awaiting the crimes of which the Clinton are guilty. Oh there is the crime of beating Bush I in 1992, of beating Dole in 1996, of leaving office with the highest approval rating of any President, the crime of being beloved by the middle class, of continuing to serve the world, and yes the crime of capitalism by gaining some wealth from books, personal appearances at inflated prices, and being famous. The crime of Hillary winning the US Senate race twice from New York which was not really her home state, the crime of serving as Secretary of state and restoring confidence in the US as a world leader that had been destroyed by the previous administration, and the crime of potentially being the next President. Call out the Swift Boats. By the way, most of the Democrats I know feel that the Third Way approach of the Clintons is far too illiberal. I would greatly prefer an unapologetic progressive as President. There is nothing but practicality in the Clinton governance.

With your post, and particularly the willful blindnees and saying you see NOTHING wrong or questionable with the Clintons behavior (WTF??? I'm speechless!!) I have to give you the much sought after award ... poster boy for self-denial.

You're also making my point ...as long as the Clinton's deliver the goods, you're ok with them. Un-F***ing-believable but no doubt true.

[Guest]

With your post, and particularly the willful blindnees and saying you see NOTHING wrong or questionable with the Clintons behavior (WTF??? I'm speechless!!) I have to give you the much sought after award ... poster boy for self-denial.

You're also making my point ...as long as the Clinton's deliver the goods, you're ok with them. Un-F***ing-believable but no doubt true.


There is not one shred of evidence out there, and don't bother posting all the breitbart links or the daily caller links.

What is unbelievable is the GOP thinking they can continue to manufacture these stories, then set their hair on fire while screaming how can you support these people with all these stories that WE MADE UP.

Women are not as stupid as you would have us believe. How does the song go "Don't Be Fooled Again" ?

[Guest]

There is not one shred of evidence out there, and don't bother posting all the breitbart links or the daily caller links.

What is unbelievable is the GOP thinking they can continue to manufacture these stories, then set their hair on fire while screaming how can you support these people with all these stories that WE MADE UP.

Women are not as stupid as you would have us believe. How does the song go "Don't Be Fooled Again" ?

It's not a question of stupidity but rather willful blindness.

Now, let's get real ... just for a minute if that's all you can muster. --> If ANY other public leader did the kind of stuff the Clintons do with the email server, and the "donations" to the Foundation from foreign governments, and seeing their net worth grow to $150M by running a CHARITY (to cite just a few examples), you would be apoplectic with skepticism, and probably have to double your blood pressure meds. You would be demanding investigations to get to the bottom of things ... which come to think of it, is exactly what we need.

I mean ... if you cannot see it, then any reasonable person has to conclude it is simply because you don't want to see it. Wow ... someone needs to do some academic research into this psychological phenomenon. It's quite interesting the more evidence that accrues...ie your post and that of others on TOTV alone.

[Guest]

Remember we have lawyers defending, working for and assessing lawyers.
They use, abuse and hide behind the letter of the law. They know exactly how far to go out on the definition of "legal" thin ice and still legitimatel legally state no harm done. The legal wagons are circled around the Clintons, make no mistake about it.

And the even when they get caught depending who you are, and again a lawyer or not, nothing happens like the crooked deals of Charlie Rangel or the known tax evasion of Sharpton.

The other gage I like is the one that simply states nothing is illegal until you get caught.....and then it may not matter either. Welcome to the 21st century of selective enforcement.

[Guest]

Loretta Lynch Sworn In As First African-American Woman Attorney General (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/loretta-lynch-sworn-attorney-general-first-african-american-woman?utm_content=buffer8cf5f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer)


Finally, Loretta Lynch was sworn in as the 83rd Attorney General of the US shortly after 11:00 am today by Vice-President Joe Biden. Lynch, who was nominated for the AG job five months ago by President Barack Obama, took longer to be confirmed than the last seven AG's combined.

After the swearing in, Lynch gave a powerful speech and outlined her priorities. If anyone can fill AG Eric Holder's big shoes, it will be Lynch.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1050566]
And the even when they get caught depending who you are, and again a lawyer or not, nothing happens like the crooked deals of Charlie Rangel or the known tax evasion of Sharpton.

QUOTE]

Oh Thank you, I have been awaiting the name of the evil one to be invoked. You automatically win the argument when you hit the bulls eye with a well thrown Sharpton dart.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1050566]
And the even when they get caught depending who you are, and again a lawyer or not, nothing happens like the crooked deals of Charlie Rangel or the known tax evasion of Sharpton.

QUOTE]

Oh Thank you, I have been awaiting the name of the evil one to be invoked. You automatically win the argument when you hit the bulls eye with a well thrown Sharpton dart.

Yes, why would any liberal pick on Sharpton? He's an obvious buffoon, poorly educated and a world class tax cheat ... simpatico with the liberals in so many ways?