DOJ attorney resigns over Philly black panther voter intimidation case.

[J-P]

It's quite amusing how regularly LG's sources are from the Soros funded propaganda machine. Can you say puppet?

 

[gsvol]

that one quote completely discredits anything Cynthia Tucker has to say.

But we all know some people are going to believe everything put out by George Soros and company anyway.

Honest mistake Im sure.

ACLG sure has a funny way of eating crow doesn't he???

Reckon he sautes it in grey poupon??

Is this really even voter intimidation? Sure the guy used a racial epithet and that's bad, but it doesn't really coerce anyone to vote one way or the other.

The more condemning allegation is the man waving the baton, but given the paranoid nature of race relations in this country, a rolled up magazine may be passing as a "baton" in this case and who knows whether it was being shaken at anyone inparticular or not.

(and don't come back at me about the judgment, when the defendants never even bothered to respond to the charges)

It seems like a stretch to say this is some sort of slam dunk case. Moreso, considering the conservative allegiances the DA who quit has.

And even more of a stretch to see it as an indication of high level black bias on the part of the administration.

Well if I had failed to appear in court then I would have expected to have had an arrest warrant issued with my name on it and have expected to have been arrested at the first opportunity, what exactly is different about this case??

Clueless.

I'm clueless as to where these clueless morons come from.

surely you're not trying to ascribe any ability to reason to these idiots and how does that change the point?

The point is that the Obama/Holder justice department is a freaking joke!!!!

Who Will Investigate the Investigators? - WSJ.com

But there is some evidence backing up Mr. Adams. Last year, Justice abandoned a case it had pursued for three years against Missouri for failing to clean up its rolls. When filed in 2005, one-third of Missouri counties had more registered voters than voting-age residents. What's more, Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, a Democrat who this year is her party's candidate for a vacant U.S. Senate seat, contended that her office had no obligation to ensure individual counties were complying with the federal law mandating a cleanup of their voter rolls.

The case made slow but steady progress through the courts for more than three years, amid little or no evidence of progress in cleaning up Missouri's voter rolls. Despite this, Obama Justice saw fit to dismiss the case in March 2009. Curiously, only a month earlier, Ms. Carnahan had announced her Senate candidacy. Missouri has a long and documented history of voter fraud in Democratic-leaning cities such as St. Louis and Kansas City. Ms. Carnahan may now stand to benefit from voter fraud facilitated by the improperly kept voter rolls that she herself allowed to continue.

Mr. Adams' allegations would seem to call for the senior management of Justice to be compelled to testify under oath to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. But Justice is making none of its officials available and is refusing to enforce subpoenas issued by the commission. The more this story develops, the more it appears Justice is engaged in a massive coverup of its politicization of voting rights cases.

 

[lawgator1]

It's quite amusing how regularly LG's sources are from the Soros funded propaganda machine. Can you say puppet?

I am certainly willing to listen/look at proof from the other side of the aisle that Obama ordered this, or that Obama's administration ordered it, or that there are some sort of protective racial politics at work here.

As of now, all I have is the word of a very hateful former attorney who is very political and anti-Obama, and he just keeps getting quoted over and over by the usual suspects: Fox, Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity.

On the other hand, there is in writing recorded testimony from the head of the civil rights division in May to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rghts saying that the criminal charges were dropped and civil charges filed prior to Obama taking office.

I am certainly open to proof that it was the Obama administration that did it and for some illicit reason. So far, given the actual evidence, I think its a pretty weak claim. Don't you?

I mean, if it were true, presumably Fox or this former DOJ attorney who hates Obama would have some documentation showing when the charges were dropped, or at least that the charges existed as of the day Obama took office. Wouldn't you expect that?

 

[volinbham]

Love this preface from Cynthia Tucker

It was clear from the beginning that this was not a case of voter intimidation against anyone who might vote for John McCain. As many observers noted on that day, no matter how badly those two New Black Panters were behaving (and the police were called and responded), it’s a HEAVILY DEMOCRATIC PRECINCT. As blogger Ben Smith noted way back then, “You don’t typically intimidate your own voters.”

A heavily democratic district is far from a 100% democratic district.

 

[lawgator1]

Anyone got a link to the documentation showing that the criminal charges were dropped when Obama took office? Or at least that they were still in place after that date?

Anyone?

 

[Oldvol75]

The AJC was quoting someone else. I haven't seen anyone rebut the statement, however, that the decision to drop the criminal charge came before Obama was president.

I guess Shabazz's own words don't rebute it then????? Why should anyone have to refute what came out of the man's own mouth?

Even if the AJC was quoting someone else doesn't matter, you posted that it was a fact and clearly it wasn't!

 

[lawgator1]

This was the lead to the Fox story when it first came out:


"Charges brought against three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense under the Bush administration have been dropped by the Obama Justice Department, FOX News has learned."



I'd like to see the documentation on that as it appears that the head of the civil rights division has given statements that the date of that decision was prior to Obama taking office.


If its true, this should be easy.

 

[volinbham]

Anyone got a link to the documentation showing that the criminal charges were dropped when Obama took office? Or at least that they were still in place after that date?

Anyone?

I thought it was about the civil charges being dropped?

John Fund: Black Panther Voter Intimidation Case Dropped - WSJ.com

According to this story, the civil charges were filed prior to Obama taking office. They were then dropped by Team Obama.

This passage indicates why this case is particularly odd and that Team Obama is not being forth-right about it's decision to drop the charges.

Mr. Wolf's demands that Justice make the career attorneys on the case available for questions have been rebuffed. He also wants the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings. A spokesman for House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers was noncommittal as to whether any hearing would be held.

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights voted on Aug. 7 to send a letter to Justice expanding its own investigation and demanding more complete answers. "We believe the Department's defense of its actions thus far undermines respect for rule of law," its letter stated. It noted "the peculiar logic" of one Justice argument, that defendants' failure to show up in court was a reason for dismissing the case: "Such an argument sends a perverse message to wrongdoers—that attempts at voter suppression will be tolerated so long as the persons who engage in them are careful not to appear in court to answer the government's complaint."

 

[VOLinthaNATI]

I'm not sure I see the analogy because the precinct at issue was very much a Democratic precinct. I mean, if you are going to intimidate, why intimidate peoiple who are going to vote for your candidate?

I must have missed the part in the video of one of the panthers in question where he was saying he hates all crackers and they and their babies should be killed but made sure to point out that he was not talking about democrat crackers. Please post this part please so all of us can see it. Appreciate it.

 

[volinbham]

I must have missed the part in the video of one of the panthers in question where he was saying he hates all crackers and they and their babies should be killed but made sure to point out that he was not talking about democrat crackers. Please post this part please so all of us can see it. Appreciate it.

That was a separate video but interviews with whitey's from the precinct do indicate they were being "talked to" as they entered and exited the polls.

 

[lawgator1]

I thought it was about the civil charges being dropped?

John Fund: Black Panther Voter Intimidation Case Dropped - WSJ.com

According to this story, the civil charges were filed prior to Obama taking office. They were then dropped by Team Obama.

This passage indicates why this case is particularly odd and that Team Obama is not being forth-right about it's decision to drop the charges.

Ahhh.... so now the argument is going to shift to be that, "ok ok, you got me that the criminal charges were dropped before Obama, but gosh durn it Obama dropped the civil charges!"

The problem with this -- aside from its obvious backpedalling nature -- is that the DOJ under Obama did in fact get an injunction against them from repeating their activities and so there is no value to civil charges.

Face it. Fox -- who was really all too willing to believe this right away -- got duped by a former DOJ atorney with a personal political axe to grind.

Now that the true facts are coming out, as is par for the course, Fox's incredibly sloppy reporting guided by their overt policial agenda is exposed, leaving them (and supporters like yourself) scrambling to salvage some minimal amount of face over it.

Find a link suppoorting the story, or give it up. The further Fox and folks like yourself go with this, in spite of the facts, the more obvious your lack of respect for the truth.

 

[volinbham]

This was the lead to the Fox story when it first came out:


"Charges brought against three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense under the Bush administration have been dropped by the Obama Justice Department, FOX News has learned."



I'd like to see the documentation on that as it appears that the head of the civil rights division has given statements that the date of that decision was prior to Obama taking office.


If its true, this should be easy.

What is wrong with the story? Charges were filed under Bush and dropped under Obama.

 

[VOLinthaNATI]

That was a separate video but interviews with whitey's from the precinct do indicate they were being "talked to" as they entered and exited the polls.

I know it was different. Just blowing up the libs ridiculous point that they have no reason to intimidate voters who are primarily voting Democrat anyway.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Ahhh.... so now the argument is going to shift to be that, "ok ok, you got me that the criminal charges were dropped before Obama, but gosh durn it Obama dropped the civil charges!"

The problem with this -- aside from its obvious backpedalling nature -- is that the DOJ under Obama did in fact get an injunction against them from repeating their activities and so there is no value to civil charges.

Face it. Fox -- who was really all too willing to believe this right away -- got duped by a former DOJ atorney with a personal political axe to grind.

Now that the true facts are coming out, as is par for the course, Fox's incredibly sloppy reporting guided by their overt policial agenda is exposed, leaving them (and supporters like yourself) scrambling to salvage some minimal amount of face over it.

Find a link suppoorting the story, or give it up. The further Fox and folks like yourself go with this, in spite of the facts, the more obvious your lack of respect for the truth.

In LG's moderate America, Voter Intimidation is perfectly acceptable...... outstanding!

 

[volinbham]

Ahhh.... so now the argument is going to shift to be that, "ok ok, you got me that the criminal charges were dropped before Obama, but gosh durn it Obama dropped the civil charges!"

The problem with this -- aside from its obvious backpedalling nature -- is that the DOJ under Obama did in fact get an injunction against them from repeating their activities and so there is no value to civil charges.

Face it. Fox -- who was really all too willing to believe this right away -- got duped by a former DOJ atorney with a personal political axe to grind.

Now that the true facts are coming out, as is par for the course, Fox's incredibly sloppy reporting guided by their overt policial agenda is exposed, leaving them (and supporters like yourself) scrambling to salvage some minimal amount of face over it.

Find a link suppoorting the story, or give it up. The further Fox and folks like yourself go with this, in spite of the facts, the more obvious your lack of respect for the truth.

Where is the story about criminal charges being dropped by Obama? Frankly I never knew what type of charges they were.

The quote you posted early simply said charges.

The article I linked indicates clearly that the Civil Rights Commission is buying the DOJs reasons for dropping the civil charges.

 

[J-P]

So some here would be okay if some white guys parked out in front of a strongly Republican district polling place with a rope and noose hanging out of the vehicle? I mean, it's just an innocent rope and they could just be waiting for an afternoon rodeo in which they hope to participate, and after all, it's mostly Republicans who vote there.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

 

[VOLinthaNATI]

Ahhh.... so now the argument is going to shift to be that, "ok ok, you got me that the criminal charges were dropped before Obama, but gosh durn it Obama dropped the civil charges!"

The problem with this -- aside from its obvious backpedalling nature -- is that the DOJ under Obama did in fact get an injunction against them from repeating their activities and so there is no value to civil charges.

Face it. Fox -- who was really all too willing to believe this right away -- got duped by a former DOJ atorney with a personal political axe to grind.

Now that the true facts are coming out, as is par for the course, Fox's incredibly sloppy reporting guided by their overt policial agenda is exposed, leaving them (and supporters like yourself) scrambling to salvage some minimal amount of face over it.

Find a link suppoorting the story, or give it up. The further Fox and folks like yourself go with this, in spite of the facts, the more obvious your lack of respect for the truth.

Please tell me your joking. I assume you think MSNBC just reports the news and shows no bias?

You've become a clown and you're too ignorant to admit Obama and his whole administration are clowns as well.

 

[volinbham]

I'm seriously asking LG - where did you see reporting that said the charges dropped by Obama were "criminal charges"? I'm looking but don't see it. I'm reading the transcript from the attorney's interview with Megan Kelly and I don't see any mention of criminal charges. Simply words "case" and "charges".

 

[VOLinthaNATI]

I might have missed it but all I have ever heard from Fox was that the Civil charges were the ones dropped by the administration. Not once have I heard them refer to criminal charges. I assume you can dig up a FoxNews article showing me LG. I'll be wating.

 

[VOLinthaNATI]

I'm seriously asking LG - where did you see reporting that said the charges dropped by Obama were "criminal charges"? I'm looking but don't see it. I'm reading the transcript from the attorney's interview with Megan Kelly and I don't see any mention of criminal charges. Simply words "case" and "charges".

:good!:

Nice work.

 

[volinbham]

From those bastages at Fox News

The Bush Justice Department brought the first case against three members of the group, accusing them in a civil complaint of violating the Voter Rights Act. The Obama administration initially pursued the case, winning a default judgment in federal court in April 2009 when the Black Panther members did not appear in court. But then the administration moved to dismiss the charges the following month after getting one of the New Black Panther members to agree to not carry a "deadly weapon" near a polling place until 2012.

FOXNews.com - Ex-Official Accuses Justice Department of Racial Bias in Black Panther Case

 

[BigPapaVol]

I'm seriously asking LG - where did you see reporting that said the charges dropped by Obama were "criminal charges"? I'm looking but don't see it. I'm reading the transcript from the attorney's interview with Megan Kelly and I don't see any mention of criminal charges. Simply words "case" and "charges".

He was duped by Tucker's intentionally misleading language of the case being downgraded even before it started. She is the one that made it sound as if the Bush admin. thought it unworthy of pursuit rather than them knowing that it wouldn't likely rise to anything of merit in a criminal trial.

 

[volinbham]

He was duped by Tucker's intentionally misleading language of the case being downgraded even before it started. She is the one that made it sound as if the Bush admin. thought it unworthy of pursuit rather than them knowing that it wouldn't likely rise to anything of merit in a criminal trial.

You are correct.

Duped while whining that others were duped.

Begging for an article to refute his claim (an that appears not to have been made) but unable to provide one to support his claim.

Ragging on biased source while relying on his own biased source to get the story wrong.

Just another day in the Poly Forum

 

[BigPapaVol]

Just another day in the Poly Forum

methinks that LG likes this new name for the forum, but that he would prefer something that's hints more at trannies.