No Reason to Prosecute this Black Panther?

Just to correct the record.
There were other witnesses, beyond the citizen with a camera phone.
There were complaints of people being harassed trying to enter the polling location, and some people being chased off.

Where are these complaints? I know there were other witnesses that testified the black panthers were standing out there, and they testified that they saw other people threatened or scared away, but where are the witnesses that allegedly were threatened or scared away. I keep hearing about them on the internet, but I haven't really heard anything credible aside from hearsay. The closest it gets is one guy from the DOJ claiming there is some vast conspiracy in an office filled primarily with conservative staff, and saying the Obama administration is gagging everyone else in the office, but he somehow escaped this. It seems more likely to me that he was just dissatisfied with the decision of the DOJ to reduce the penalty on the injunction, and used his outrage on this issue as an excuse to sensationalize this issue and promote his ideals by demonizing the justice department and creating this false premise of a racial conspiracy.

As for the video, thanks for reminding me why I don't watch Faux News. Just a bunch of hype and bare assertion. That and the crazy lady screaming at her guest insisting that she doesn't know what she is talking about. You know what would happen if the DOJ continued with their injunction at the level it was at? Three guys who would be a symbol of racial hatred because they were barred from voting for the rest of their life because they were standing in front of a polling station.
 
Easy fix: Move to a state where CCW is permitted, get your permit, and then carry to the polling place. Problem solved. Trust me. No jackbooted BP slapping his nightstick barking 'cracker' is going to make me feel unsafe.
 
Where are these complaints?
Where have you looked?

It's in the testimony given to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Based on what I've been told, it should be in here somewhere.

You know what would happen if the DOJ continued with their injunction at the level it was at? Three guys who would be a symbol of racial hatred because they were barred from voting for the rest of their life because they were standing in front of a polling station.
Do you have any idea how ridiculous you present yourself to be?
Open your eyes and look at what is going on around you- stop being contrarian because you mistakenly think it makes you feel intelligent.

And your comments on Fox News were moronic. Kirsten Powers is a Democrat Strategist who obviously knows about as much as you regarding this story, yet attempts to dismiss it and then somehow change the subject to George W. Bush. Megyn Kelly is excellent, a legal purist, very objective, and 100% right for challenging Kirsten as she did.
 
Where have you looked?

It's in the testimony given to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Based on what I've been told, it should be in here somewhere.

I have looked there. Have you?

Do you have any idea how ridiculous you present yourself to be?

Just pointing out the likelihood that they reduced the penalty to avoid civil unrest and outcry. Normally one has to commit a felony to lose the right to vote. Could you imagine how people would act if the government started arbitrarily removing peoples right to vote. This would be twisted into a political weapon worse than it is now.

And your comments on Fox News were moronic. Kirsten Powers is a Democrat Strategist who obviously knows about as much as you regarding this story, yet attempts to dismiss it and then somehow change the subject to George W. Bush.

I apparently know more than you.... I have read the depositions and transcripts.

Megyn Kelly is excellent, a legal purist, very objective, and 100% right for challenging Kirsten as she did.

Yeah..... Screaming at a guest and interrupting them every time they try and speak. That shows a lot of objectivity and journalistic integrity. No. That is standard fox news. Fight with the evil dems on air jerry springer style to raise ratings among their conservative viewers who want to do the same.
 
FIND, is Cal's link the same place where you read the depositions and transcripts?
 
I have looked there. Have you?
You looked there before or after I presented you a link to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights web page?
But no, I have no read all of the documentation associated with the case. In addition to what I read, I'm also relying upon the opinions of people I trust who have.

Just pointing out the likelihood that they reduced the penalty to avoid civil unrest and outcry. Normally one has to commit a felony to lose the right to vote.
Are you presuming that he still has his right to vote. Because, just at a glance, based on what he's doing, who he's affiliated with, and the video of him that has been made publicly known recently, I'd be willing to go out on a limb and say he's probably had that right rescinded... I'd be willing to be he's a felon. Wouldn't you?

Could you imagine how people would act if the government started arbitrarily removing peoples right to vote.
If the government were to "arbitrarily" start revoking the right to vote, we'd have a unabashed tyranny. Outrage and revolt would be entirely appropriate. But that's not the case here.

I apparently know more than you.... I have read the depositions and transcripts.
You apparently like to pretend you know more than I do, yet you don't present any of that wisdom here. How curious. And frankly, I think don't believe you'd read any of it prior to this morning. And where did you find them?

Even the link I posted isn't the complete list of documentation, it's really just the starting point.

Yeah..... Screaming at a guest and interrupting them every time they try and speak. That shows a lot of objectivity and journalistic integrity.
So objectivity is letting a pundit ramble off topic and say things that are untrue, while implying that you are a racist?

No. That is standard fox news.
If you mean having an articulate, educated woman with a legal background preventing a pundit misrepresent, spin, and imply racism without going unchallenged, you would be correct. But that's not what you mean. You're just ranting, blissfully unaware of your ignorance.

Did you watch the initial interview with the whistleblower?
If you really did read the transcripts on the page I posted, why aren't you aware of any intimidation?
 
Just for entertainment, here's his myspace style webpage:
http://www.blackplanet.com/KINGSAMIR/


July 13, 2010 12:30 P.M.
Unequal Justice
Team Obama lets the Black Panthers get away with voter intimidation.

Voters at a precinct on Philadelphia’s Fairmount Street witnessed unusual sights and sounds on Election Day, Nov. 4, 2008. Two members of the New Black Panther party, King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, stood within 15 feet of this polling station dressed in military-style black jackets, black berets, and black combat boots. Shabazz wielded a two-foot-long night stick.

“Cracker, you are about to be ruled by a black man,” one of the New Black Panthers told a white voter. They taunted others as “white devils.” Angela and Larry Counts, a black couple who served as GOP poll watchers, told authorities they felt endangered when the Panthers called them “race traitors.” (Her deposition is included on the link I provided earlier... but I'm sure you read that.)


At an April 23, 2010, U.S. Civil Rights Commission hearing, Chris Hill, an eyewitness and roving poll watcher, explained under oath that he spoke with Larry Counts inside the precinct. “When I found him, he was not quite cowering, but he was definitely shook up,” Hill testified. “And he told me that he was called a race traitor by Mr. Shabazz . . . and that he was threatened if he stepped outside of the building, there would be hell to pay.”

A Dec. 22, 2008, Justice Department memorandum states that Mr. and Mrs. Counts “confirmed that they were afraid to leave the polling place until the Black Panthers had departed.” The memo adds that Angela Counts “wondered what might occur next and if someone might ‘bomb the place.’”

Legendary civil-rights attorney and liberal-Democrat activist Bartle Bull was at the Fairmount Street precinct. Bull’s left-wing credentials are not sterling. They are platinum. The former publisher of the Village Voice served as New York State campaign manager for Ted Kennedy’s 1980 presidential bid. He did the same for Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. As early as 1966, he watched polls and served Democratic candidates in such places as Midnight, Miss. “I saw nooses hung over the branches of trees,” he told the Civil Rights Commission.

Bull recalled that on the day Barack Obama was elected president of the United States, “the gentleman with the club,” King Samir Shabazz, “pointed the billy club at me and said, ‘Now you will see what it means to be ruled by the black man, Cracker.’ And the reason I recall that very well is because it struck me as ironic that having worked as a civil-rights lawyer and being threatened in Mississippi, I was now being threatened in this way here, and being called a cracker, frankly.”

So, the Panthers behaved menacingly, used some nasty language, and terrified at least two poll watchers. But did they actually intimidate voters? Eyewitnesses say they did.

• The DOJ memo states: “Attorney poll watcher Harry Lewis told us he saw voters appear apprehensive about approaching the polling location entrance behind the Black Panthers.”

• Chris Hill told that Civil Rights Commission: “As I was standing on the corner, I had two older ladies and an older gentleman stop right next to me, ask what was going on. I said, ‘Truthfully, we don’t really know. All we know is there’s [sic] two Black Panthers here.’ And the lady said, ‘Well, we’ll just come back.’ And so, they walked away.” Referring to the Panthers, Hill added: “I saw these guys. They attempted to intimidate me. I’m Army Infantry. I don’t intimidate, but they did stop those three people from voting at that second.”

Surely the Obama administration prosecuted Shabazz and Jackson for voter intimidation?

Wrong!

When they ignored late-term Bush-administration charges of Voting Rights Act violations, federal district judge Stewart Dalzell issued a default ruling against Shabazz, Jackson, the New Black Panther party, and its chairman, Malik Zulu Shabazz (no relation to the other Shabazz). Although career federal prosecutors won this case (arguing, among other things, that “there is never a good reason to bring a billy club to a polling station”), they were overruled by political appointees in Pres. Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department, who ordered them to dismiss the complaints against all parties except King Samir Shabazz. He was ordered not to exhibit a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia precinct through Nov. 15, 2012. Shabazz presumably would abide by this injunction if he brandished his baton at voters 105 feet from a polling place or did so in Philadelphia in 2013. Pittsburgh seems fair game.

The May 15, 2009, case dismissal was timed perfectly for Jerry Jackson. During the Election Day 2008 incident, he was an elected member of Philadelphia’s 14th Ward Democratic Committee and a credentialed poll watcher for the Democratic party and the Obama campaign. With the federal case safely behind him, Jackson watched the polls again for the Democrats in municipal elections on May 19, 2009.

This situation is even more outrageous given the unvarnished bigotry of those involved.

• “You want freedom, you gonna have to kill some crackers,” King Samir Shabazz says on a National Geographic/YouTube video. “You gonna have to kill some of they [sic] babies.”

“I’m about the total destruction of white people,” Shabazz told the Philadelphia Daily News’s Dana DiFilippo. “I’m about the total liberation of black people. I hate white people. I hate my enemy.” Shabazz likes to relax by putting on his headphones and listening to “revolutionary, cracker-killing hip-hop.”

“F*** Whitey’s Christmas,” read a message on Jerry Jackson’s MySpace page, until it was whitewashed once Kerry Picket uncovered it in the July 30, 2009, Washington Times. “BLACK POWER, BLACK LOVE, BLACK UNITY, BLACK MINDS, KILLIN CRAKKKAS,” stated Jackson’s webpage.

• The leftist Southern Poverty Law Center calls NBPP “a hate group based on the anti-white, anti-gay, and anti-Semitic views its leaders have repeatedly expressed.” The NBPP is so bigoted, it has been repudiated even by the original Black Panthers.

• “Let’s talk about this brother,” NBPP president Malik Zulu Shabazz says at a public gathering while someone holds up a large photo of al-Qaeda chief “Sheik Osama bin Laden,” as Shabazz calls him. As crowd members shout “Allahu akbar,” Shabazz continues: “He’s standing up. He’s bringing reform to this world.” Speaking on March 22, 2002 — more than six months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks — Shabazz says: “Here’s a Muslim that’s [sic] standing up. . . . Let’s give him a hand, man.” The audience bursts into applause and cheers. “If the enemy hates him,” Shabazz concludes about bin Laden, “tangentially, logically, mathematically, he’s your friend.”

Why would the supposedly ethnically transcendent Obama administration distribute free passes to the black equivalent of Klansmen with a soft spot for al-Qaeda? Blame power-lust and unequal justice under law.

J. Christian Adams, until recently a career attorney in the Justice Department’s Voting Rights Division, testified under oath July 6 before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission. He offered an insider’s view of the politicized, radical atmosphere within Obama’s Justice Department.

• According to Adams, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes last November instructed prosecutors on the “Motor Voter” law that governs voter registration. Regarding that statute’s Section 8 — which requires that local officials purge their rolls of relocated, ineligible, and dead voters — Adams recalls hearing Fernandes, an Obama political appointee, say: “We have no interest in enforcing this provision of the law. It has nothing to do with increasing turnout, and we are just not going to do it.” Such lawlessness, of course, invites ACORN-style vote fraud.

• As a July 6 Washington Times editorial (one of at least 31 that have advanced this story) noted, Adams also testified that “There is an open hostility to race-neutral enforcement of the voting-rights laws.” He added: “I was told by Voting Section management that cases are not going to be brought against black defendants on the benefit of white victims.”

Adams, who resigned from Justice in protest on June 1, encapsulated the Obama administration’s moral bankruptcy in this case: “We abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens.”


— Deroy Murdock is a nationally syndicated columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.
 
So, in order to accept the premise that the case has no merit, you have to discredit Adams, or at least ignore what he says. Where's James Carville when we need him? :D
 
So, in order to accept the premise that the case has no merit, you have to discredit Adams, or at least ignore what he says. Where's James Carville when we need him? :D

And, play the race card in the media.
Those interested in this story, and this story in the broader political context, are racist playing up the racially charged, "scary black man" imagery.
 
In my view the 'racist' charge is getting the 'cry wolf' treatment. It won't be effective long term. Even those who are leveling the charge know good and well that it's false - that's why they won't meet the Tea Party on the merits of the argument. They know that the reason for the Tea Party is that we're being overtaxed and overextended, and yet they don't want to lose POWER. So they attack the Tea Party with a red herring.
 

Members online

Back
Top