Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  O'Bomber's Illegal Intervention in Justice Dept Prosecution

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   O'Bomber's Illegal Intervention in Justice Dept Prosecution
jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 289
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 30, 2009 10:41 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
Hey, isn't this exactly what you would expect when you elect a Chicago thug who surrounds himself with other thugs he's appointed to high positions within his administration?

EXCLUSIVE: Career lawyers overruled on voting case
Black Panthers had wielded weapons, blocked polls
By Jerry Seper
Friday, May 29, 2009

Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms.

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times.

The career Justice lawyers were on the verge of securing sanctions against the men earlier this month when their superiors ordered them to reverse course, according to interviews and documents. The court had already entered a default judgment against the men on April 20.

A Justice Department spokesman on Thursday confirmed that the agency had dropped the case, dismissing two of the men from the lawsuit with no penalty and winning an order against the third man that simply prohibits him from bringing a weapon to a polling place in future elections.

The department was "successful in obtaining an injunction that prohibits the defendant who brandished a weapon outside a Philadelphia polling place from doing so again," spokesman Alejandro Miyar said. "Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law."

Mr. Miyar declined to elaborate about any internal dispute between career and political officials, saying only that the department is "committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote."

Court records reviewed by The Times show that career Justice lawyers were seeking a default judgment and penalties against the three men as recently as May 5, before abruptly ending their pursuit 10 days later.

People directly familiar with the case, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because of fear of retribution, said career lawyers in two separate Justice offices had recommended proceeding to default judgment before political superiors overruled them.

Tensions between career lawyers and political appointees inside the Justice Department have been a sensitive matter since allegations surfaced during the Bush administration that higher-ups had ignored or reversed staff lawyers and that some U.S. attorneys had been removed or selected for political reasons.

During his January confirmation hearings, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said that during his lengthy Justice Department tenure, the career lawyers were "my teachers, my colleagues and my friends" and described them as the "backbone" of the department.

"If I am confirmed as attorney general, I will listen to them, respect them and make them proud of the vital goals we will pursue together," he said.

Justice officials declined to say whether Mr. Holder or other senior Justice officials became involved in the case, saying they don't discuss internal deliberations.

The civil suit filed Jan. 7 identified the three men as members of the Panthers and said they wore military-style uniforms, black berets, combat boots, battle-dress pants, black jackets with military-style insignias and were armed with "a dangerous weapon"and used racial slurs and insults to scare would-be voters and those there to assist them at the Philadelphia polling location on Nov. 4.

The complaint said the three men engaged in "coercion, threats and intimidation, ... racial threats and insults, ... menacing and intimidating gestures, ... and movements directed at individuals who were present to vote." It said that unless prohibited by court sanctions, they would "continued to violate ... the Voting Rights Act by continuing to direct intimidation, threats and coercion at voters and potential voters, by again deploying uniformed and armed members at the entrance to polling locations in future elections, both in Philadelphia and throughout the country."

To support its evidence, the government had secured an affidavit from Bartle Bull, a longtime civil rights activist and former aide to Sen. Robert F. Kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign. Mr. Bull said in a sworn statement dated April 7 that he was serving in November as a credentialed poll watcher in Philadelphia when he saw the three uniformed Panthers confront and intimidate voters with a nightstick.

Inexplicably, the government did not enter the affidavit in the court case, according to the files.

"In my opinion, the men created an intimidating presence at the entrance to a poll," he declared. "In all my experience in politics, in civil rights litigation and in my efforts in the 1960s to secure the right to vote in Mississippi ... I have never encountered or heard of another instance in the United States where armed and uniformed men blocked the entrance to a polling location."

Mr. Bull said the "clear purpose" of what the Panthers were doing was to "intimidate voters with whom they did not agree." He also said he overheard one of the men tell a white poll watcher: "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."

He called their conduct an "outrageous affront to American democracy and the rights of voters to participate in an election without fear." He said it was a "racially motivated effort to limit both poll watchers aiding voters, as well as voters with whom the men did not agree."

The three men named in the complaint - New Black Panther Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz, Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson - refused to appear in court to answer the accusations over a near-five month period, court records said.

Justice Department Voting Rights Section Attorney J. Christian Adams complained in one court filing about the defendants' failure to appear or to file any pleadings in the case, arguing that Mr. Jackson was "not an infant, nor is he an incompetent person as he appears capable of managing his own affairs, nor is he in the military service of the United States."

Court records show that as late as May 5, the Justice Department was still considering an order by U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell in Philadelphia to seek judgments, or sanctions, against the three Panthers because of their failure to appear.

But 10 days later, the department reversed itself and filed a notice of voluntary dismissal from the complaint for Malik Zulu Shabazz and Mr. Jackson.

That same day, the department asked for the default judgment against King Samir Shabazz, but limited the penalty to an order that he not display a "weapon within 100 feet of any open polling location on any election day in the city of Philadelphia" until Nov. 15, 2012.

Malik Zulu Shabazz is a Washington, D.C., resident.

Mr. Jackson was an elected member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee, and was credentialed to be at the polling place last Nov. 4 as an official Democratic Party polling observer, according to the Philadelphia City Commissioner's Office.

Efforts to reach the Panthers were unsuccessful. A telephone number listed on the New Black Panthers Web site had been disconnected.

The complaint said that the three men were deployed at the entrance to a Philadelphia polling location wearing the uniform of the New Black Panther Party and that King Samir Shabazz repeatedly brandished a police-style nightstick with a contoured grip and wrist lanyard.

According to the complaint, Malik Zulu Shabazz, a Howard University Law School graduate, said the placement of King Samir Shabazz and Mr. Jackson in Philadelphia was part of a nationwide effort to deploy New Black Panther Party members at polling locations on Election Day.

The New Black Panther Party reportedly has 27 chapters operating across the United States, Britain, the Caribbean and Africa. Its Web page said it has become "a great witness to the validity of the works of the original Black Panther Party," which was founded in 1966 in Oakland, Calif.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/career-lawye rs-overruled-on-voting-case/?feat=home_cube_position1&

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 496
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 30, 2009 12:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
nasty. but obama comes into this article WHERE? let's have some more distortion please!!

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 289
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 30, 2009 02:16 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
What?

These thugs were organized to elect O'Bomber.

The charges against these thugs were withdrawn by O'Bomber political appointees.

Are you suggesting O'Bomber is not the chief executive of the executive branch of government...the branch of government where the Justice Department makes it's home?

If Bush was responsible for every sparrow which fell out of the sky...then O'Bomber is most certainly responsible for those who work for him, those whom he appointed to their offices.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 289
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 30, 2009 02:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
May 30, 2009
Who pressured Justice to drop case against voter intimidation in Philly?
Rick Moran
Or, as Jennifer Rubin's piece at PJ Media says, "Democrats: It's OK When We Politicize the Justice Department."

After screaming for 8 years about Bush "politicizing" the Justice Department, it appears that there is a clear cut case of interference in a legitimate prosecution of the New Black Panther Party for intimidating voters at a polling station in 2008 by Obama appointees.

Rubin's article gives the background:

The Justice Department filed a complaint under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act (which prohibits any attempt to "intimidate, threaten or coerce" any voter) against the New Black Panther Party after months of research and acquiring a sworn affidavit attesting to the intimidation. The affidavit by veteran civil rights attorney Bartle Bull describes the egregious behavior in which armed men appeared at a polling place. Bull explains he "never encountered or heard of" such blatant physical intimidation at the polls in his many years as a civil rights advocate.

Neither the New Black Panther Party nor any of the individual defendants responded to the suit. The federal judge therefore ordered the Civil Rights Division to file a default judgment. However, without providing any grounds for doing so the Division moved to dismiss the complaint - in essence forfeiting the case.

The Washington Times report explains that the injunction was obtained to prevent further intimidation. However, the career attorneys were prevented from proceeding further..."

The career prosecutors at Justice had a default judgment against the New Black Panther Party in hand and Obama's political hatchetmen at the department put the kibosh on the whole thing.

Evidently, voter intimidation is fine - when the other side is being intimidated. And don't be fooled by the "New" Black Panther Party. It's as thuggish as the old one.

Rubin obtained a letter from Rep. Lamar Smith that asks DOJ some penetrating questions:

For example, why did the Civil Rights Division voluntarily dismiss a lawsuit that it had effectively already won, against defendants who were physically threatening voters? Is the Division concerned that this dismissal will encourage the New Black Panther Party, or other groups, to intimidate voters? Why did the Division seek such limited relief against a defendant who was actually carrying and brandishing a weapon at a polling station on Election Day? What role did the change of administration play in the unusual resolution of voluntarily dismissing a case on which the Division had already prevailed?

The answers should be very revealing.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/who_pressured_justice_to_drop.html

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 496
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 30, 2009 03:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message
on the face of it this is indeed a scary case. i will have to look a little further than the obvious spin of the american thinker before i make up my mind on it.

but since you exonerate bush because the poor man was outshouted by congress i don't think you are applying the same criteria to the other side - one of the points of this article...double standards!

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 289
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 30, 2009 04:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message
Only one problem with your comments katatonic.

Bush was ripped for supposed political motives for firing 8 US Attorneys but what his leftist accusers never mention is that Bush had the perfect right to fire all the US Attorneys in the system because they are appointees who serve at the pleasure of the President. What's also true is that some of those 8 were avoiding prosecutions of criminal behavior.

Not in any way different but just like Sarah Palin had the perfect right to fire that hack in Alaska for any reason or no reason at all when he gave a very brief suspension to a state trooper for drinking in his cruiser, using a police issued stun gun on his 10 year old step son and threatening the lives of his wife and her father..who is also Sarah Palin's father.

That's what you said caused Sarah Palin to be "indicted" in Alaska.

Something else leftists don't ever want to talk about is Kommander Korruption..aka Bill Clinton firing 92 or 93 US Attorneys when he became President...all at the same time. Of course one of those US Attorneys was hot on Bill and Hill's a$$es in the White Water investigation. That one got replaced by one of Kommander Korruption's former law students. We never hear a peep from leftists about this...not then and not now.

Now, in this case, there is clear evidence of political tampering with an ongoing Justice Department prosecution. A Prosecution the Justice Department had already won during the Bush administration..on which the plug was suddenly pulled by O'Bomber political appointees and charges dismissed.

Of course, that couldn't possibly have anything whatsoever to do with the fact these Black Panther thugs were organized to intimidate, threaten and harass voters who weren't voting for O'Bomber. Course not.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright 2008

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a