Thoughts on Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton Meeting

 
First, it is just unimaginable to me that our Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer of the United States of America, would have this meeting in a public space as the FBI investigation nears its end.  The optics are just horrific for her and for Hillary Clinton, and the immediate thought that enters pretty much everyone's mind will be "well, the fix is in on that deal."

That sure was my first thought.

However, the other side of this is that it is just as likely that the AG was giving Mr. Clinton a head's up that there probably will be an indictment as it is that there will not be one. He is an ex-President, after all, and the office is deserving of deference and respect even if the person who  held it isn't. 

If I were in her position on this thing, I know I would be more likely to want to deliver bad news in person than good news.  I think I'd want to give that level of deference to anyone who had held the office.

I'm kind of like Fox Mulder where the AG is concerned: I want to believe Ms. Lynch will turn out to be an honorable person on this matter, and much of her background encourages optimism in that regard.  But we all have to understand that she is no doubt under tremendous pressure from her President to quash any criminal referral the FBI brings forth for purely partisan political reasons.

So, assuming the FBI does bring down such a referral, Ms. Lynch is likely to be faced with a choice of keeping her job or her integrity intact.  Her admirers would contend she would choose the later.  Only time will tell.

But the bottom line on this ill-advised meeting is that one should not assume she was delivering news that Mr. Clinton wanted to hear.  That could have just as easily been done over the phone with no prying eyes looking in.

BREAKING: Obama Judge Follows Constitution on Fracking Regulation!

Color me shocked, stunned, flabbergasted, discombobulated and utterly, completely agog:  A federal judge appointed by our current President issued a decision yesterday that - be sure you are sitting down before you go on - actually follows the legislative and regulatory process as the founding fathers and Constitution envisioned it ought to work.

I know that's hard to believe - trust me, upon reading the article, I did a double take and went over to snopes.com and The Onion to make sure it wasn't an urban legend or a prank - but it's true.  It actually did happen.

Here are the high points:

• Federal Judge Scott Skavdahl is a federal district court judge in Wyoming, appointed by Barack Obama;

• His ruling, for once, exactly follows the intent of the legislative/regulatory process, i.e., he rules that DOI cannot regulate hydraulic fracturing because Congress has not given that power to DOI.  What a concept!;

• Key passage from the decision:  "Congress' inability or unwillingness to pass a law desired by the executive branch does not default authority to the executive branch to act independently, regardless of whether hydraulic fracturing is good or bad for the environment or the citizens of the United States.”

·        If upheld through the appellate process, the reasoning behind this decision could have wide-reaching impacts on other major Obama Administration environment-related regulatory actions, such as the Waters of the U.S. and methane emissions regulations, given that all of those actions also vastly exceed the authority granted to the regulators by congress.

DOI will of course appeal this decision, but at least for this morning, justice has actually prevailed.

Somebody pinch me and make sure I'm not just dreaming this...