Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Lynch is wrong. The First amendment did not make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American. That is Lynch trying to change the US Constitution to fit her political agenda. The First amendment has no qualifiers. The wording is very clear; Congress shall make NO LAW abridging freedom of speech. Where is the qualifier?
Lynch is wrong. She cannot protect specific religions. Congress can make no law establishing any religion. That means the government cannot favor one religion over another. Lynch, based on the Constitution could not prosecute anybody to protect a religion. She must prosecute the perpetrator if an individual was harmed or property was damaged. This means when Muslims kill infidels, the Muslims must be prosecuted. The law protects the individual not the religion. The law also protects individuals who proclaim the name of Jesus Christ.
Remember Attorney General Lynch, you are not the top law enforcement officer of a Caliphate or a dictatorship yet. When you are you can ignore the US Constitution and enforce your law according to ideology and politics. Until then you are supposed to follow all of the law; you cannot abridge any speech even if you deem it not to be American. You cannot favor any religion or protect any religion only individuals. You have learned from Obama that you can violate the Constitution and say it means whatever is politically and ideologically convenient. That is the way it works in a dictatorship, not a free society.