Has the U.S. Department of Justice violated the Hatch Act?

Who will be the first Republican to publically suggest that the DoJ has violated the Hatch Act?

The Hatch Act of 1939, also known as An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is named after the late U.S. Senator from New Mexico, Carl Atwood Hatch (1889-1963).  

The U.S. Government’s Office of Special Counsel’s website offers this definition of the Act:

The Hatch Act, a federal law passed in 1939, limits certain political activities of federal employees, as well as some state, D.C., and local government employees who work in connection with federally funded programs. ​The law’s purposes are to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion, to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace, and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation.​​​​ ​​

Further information is provided at uslegal.com:

The Hatch Act applies to federal employees, employees of the District of Columbia and certain employees of state and local governments.  According to 5 USCS § 7322 (1) “employee” means any individual, other than the President and the Vice President, employed or holding office in–
      (A) an Executive agency other than the General Accounting Office [Government Accountability Office];
      (B) a position within the competitive service which is not in an Executive agency; or
      (C) the government of the District of Columbia, other than the Mayor or a member of the City Council or the Recorder of Deeds;
   but does not include a member of the uniformed services.

Lastly, additional information is posted on legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com:

Enacted in 1939, the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C.A. 7324) curbs the political activities of employees in federal, state, and local governments. The law's goal is to enforce political neutrality among civil servants: the act prohibits them from holding public office, influencing elections, participating in or managing political campaigns, and exerting Undue Influence on government hiring. Penalties for violations range from warnings to dismissal. The law's restrictions have always been controversial. Critics have long argued that the act violates the First Amendment freedoms of government employees. The U.S. Supreme Court has disagreed, twice upholding the law's constitutionality. Congress has amended the Hatch Act several times since 1939. In 1993, a number of amendments to the act sought to limit the effects of political patronage in federal hiring.

The intent of the Hatch Act is, therefore, to prohibit “influencing elections,” by protecting “federal employees from political coercion in the workplace,” including, but not limited to, persons “employed or holding office in–(A) an Executive agency other than the General Accounting Office [Government Accountability Office].”  

So here’s the question: Does former President William Jefferson Clinton’s Phoenix tarmac rendezvous with Attorney General Loretta Lynch represent a potential case of political coercion in an effort to influence an election?

And, if it does, is an investigation by a Special Prosecutor warranted?

Also, note the federal government entities (underlined & bolded) on the list of the top 20 donor organizations to President Barack Obama’s 2012 Re-election Campaign according to OpenSecrets.org:

University of California  $1,350,139

Microsoft Corp  $815,645

Google Inc  $804,249

US Government  $736,722

Harvard University  $680,918

US Dept of State  $638,237

Kaiser Permanente  $592,761

Stanford University  $532,246

Columbia University  $478,123

Deloitte LLP  $458,275

Time Warner  $447,521

DLA Piper  $415,390

US Dept of Justice  $402,280

Sidley Austin LLP  $400,671

US Dept of Health & Human Services  $391,978

IBM Corp  $370,491

Walt Disney Co  $369,598

New York University  $357,822

University of Chicago  $354,282

University of Michigan  $351,118

The combined total of the four federal contributions is $2,169,217, making the government the #1 source of contributions on the Obama Campaign donor list.

By the way, in comparison, not one government agency appears on the GOP 2012 Presidential Top 20 donor list.

Who will be the first Republican to publically suggest that the DoJ has violated the Hatch Act?

The Hatch Act of 1939, also known as An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is named after the late U.S. Senator from New Mexico, Carl Atwood Hatch (1889-1963).  

The U.S. Government’s Office of Special Counsel’s website offers this definition of the Act:

The Hatch Act, a federal law passed in 1939, limits certain political activities of federal employees, as well as some state, D.C., and local government employees who work in connection with federally funded programs. ​The law’s purposes are to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion, to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace, and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation.​​​​ ​​

Further information is provided at uslegal.com:

The Hatch Act applies to federal employees, employees of the District of Columbia and certain employees of state and local governments.  According to 5 USCS § 7322 (1) “employee” means any individual, other than the President and the Vice President, employed or holding office in–
      (A) an Executive agency other than the General Accounting Office [Government Accountability Office];
      (B) a position within the competitive service which is not in an Executive agency; or
      (C) the government of the District of Columbia, other than the Mayor or a member of the City Council or the Recorder of Deeds;
   but does not include a member of the uniformed services.

Lastly, additional information is posted on legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com:

Enacted in 1939, the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C.A. 7324) curbs the political activities of employees in federal, state, and local governments. The law's goal is to enforce political neutrality among civil servants: the act prohibits them from holding public office, influencing elections, participating in or managing political campaigns, and exerting Undue Influence on government hiring. Penalties for violations range from warnings to dismissal. The law's restrictions have always been controversial. Critics have long argued that the act violates the First Amendment freedoms of government employees. The U.S. Supreme Court has disagreed, twice upholding the law's constitutionality. Congress has amended the Hatch Act several times since 1939. In 1993, a number of amendments to the act sought to limit the effects of political patronage in federal hiring.

The intent of the Hatch Act is, therefore, to prohibit “influencing elections,” by protecting “federal employees from political coercion in the workplace,” including, but not limited to, persons “employed or holding office in–(A) an Executive agency other than the General Accounting Office [Government Accountability Office].”  

So here’s the question: Does former President William Jefferson Clinton’s Phoenix tarmac rendezvous with Attorney General Loretta Lynch represent a potential case of political coercion in an effort to influence an election?

And, if it does, is an investigation by a Special Prosecutor warranted?

Also, note the federal government entities (underlined & bolded) on the list of the top 20 donor organizations to President Barack Obama’s 2012 Re-election Campaign according to OpenSecrets.org:

University of California  $1,350,139

Microsoft Corp  $815,645

Google Inc  $804,249

US Government  $736,722

Harvard University  $680,918

US Dept of State  $638,237

Kaiser Permanente  $592,761

Stanford University  $532,246

Columbia University  $478,123

Deloitte LLP  $458,275

Time Warner  $447,521

DLA Piper  $415,390

US Dept of Justice  $402,280

Sidley Austin LLP  $400,671

US Dept of Health & Human Services  $391,978

IBM Corp  $370,491

Walt Disney Co  $369,598

New York University  $357,822

University of Chicago  $354,282

University of Michigan  $351,118

The combined total of the four federal contributions is $2,169,217, making the government the #1 source of contributions on the Obama Campaign donor list.

By the way, in comparison, not one government agency appears on the GOP 2012 Presidential Top 20 donor list.