22nd Congressional Candidate Allen West Statement on New Black Panther Party:

Discussion in 'Congress' started by The T, Jul 9, 2010.

  1. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,031
    Thanks Received:
    5,464
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,464
    Thursday, July 08, 2010

    (Deerfield Beach, FL) “The recent decision by the Obama Justice Department to drop all charges of voter intimidation against the New Black Panther Party during the 2008 Election represents a sad day for all Americans. For an Administration that promised a new era in race relations, Obama and the Democrats in Congress have demonstrated that race will continually be exploited for political gain. It is outright hypocrisy that the Justice Department under Attorney General Holder is suing a sovereign American State, yet dismissing this heinous violation of our Constitution – the right to vote.

    Throughout history, the Democrat party has been the standard bearer of voter intimidation in America – only this time the once victim is now the perpetrator.
    The recent comments and actions of the New Black Panther Party are despicable, disgusting, and completely reprehensible. It is with no reservation that I make a formal condemnation of this racist and extremist group, which is anathema to the principles and values that make America a great Nation. For those who would define our country as a “nation of cowards,” or who feel the United States is neither great nor exceptional, and to any other racist and extremist groups, feel free to show yourselves the door...


    ...The dye has been cast in this election cycle – Democrats and their liberal progressive socialist allies will continue to play the race card when it is politically expedient. I demand an investigation of the New Black Panther Partyand the placement of it, along with any extremist group, be placed on the Terrorist Watch List if warranted. If that it not done prior to my taking the oath of office as a United States Congressman, it will happen soon thereafter.”

    Read More of the statement.

    ___________________________

    I Concur.:clap2:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Gatekeeper
    Offline

    Gatekeeper Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,004
    Thanks Received:
    350
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Ratings:
    +350
    I concur, and why is this administration 'protecting' them? I think an investigation of the "New Black Panther Party" should be started immediately. But don't hold your breath, this administration has an agenda of change and it isn't for our own good. And while we're at it maybe another investigation of the president, and ALL his so called advisers, but by whom? Seems that too many are 'on the payroll'.

    Well, the voters will have their, OUR, 'agenda of change', the VOTE, and hopefully toss out ALL of these race baiting progressives that seem determined to shove this country into the toilet, rewrite the constitution and allow the world to feed on our bones.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Bfgrn
    Offline

    Bfgrn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Messages:
    15,012
    Thanks Received:
    2,051
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,220
    Ah, the fascist is also a paranoid pea brain...

    [​IMG]


    Abigail M. Thernstrom is a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute in New York, and a highly partisan Republican commissioner on the United States Commission on Civil Rights.


    July 6, 2010 4:00 A.M.

    Abigail Thernstrom

    The New Black Panther Case:
    A Conservative Dissent

    Never mind this one-off stunt by fringe radicals; the DOJ is engaged in much more important voting-rights mischief.

    Forget about the New Black Panther Party case; it is very small potatoes. Perhaps the Panthers should have been prosecuted under section 11 (b) of the Voting Rights Act for their actions of November 2008, but the legal standards that must be met to prove voter intimidation — the charge — are very high.

    In the 45 years since the act was passed, there have been a total of three successful prosecutions. The incident involved only two Panthers at a single majority-black precinct in Philadelphia. So far — after months of hearings, testimony and investigation — no one has produced actual evidence that any voters were too scared to cast their ballots. Too much overheated rhetoric filled with insinuations and unsubstantiated charges has been devoted to this case.

    A number of conservatives have charged that the Philadelphia Black Panther decision demonstrates that attorneys in the Civil Rights Division have racial double standards. How many attorneys in what positions? A pervasive culture that affected the handling of this case? No direct quotations or other evidence substantiate the charge.


    Thomas Perez, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, makes a perfectly plausible argument: Different lawyers read this barely litigated statutory provision differently. It happens all the time, especially when administrations change in the middle of litigation. Democrats and Republicans seldom agree on how best to enforce civil-rights statutes; this is not the first instance of a war between Left and Right within the Civil Rights Division.

    The two Panthers have been described as “armed” — which suggests guns. One of them was carrying a billy club, and it is alleged that his repeated slapping of the club against his palm constituted brandishing it in a menacing way. They have also been described as wearing “jackboots,” but the boots were no different from a pair my husband owns.

    A disaffected former Justice Department attorney has written: “We had indications that polling-place thugs were deployed elsewhere.” “Indications”? Again, evidence has yet to be offered.

    The New Black Panther Case: A Conservative Dissent - Abigail Thernstrom - National Review Online
     
  4. Jeremy
    Offline

    Jeremy TRANSFER!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2010
    Messages:
    7,777
    Thanks Received:
    1,185
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +1,185
    :clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:
     
  5. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,031
    Thanks Received:
    5,464
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,464
    It's refreshing to see someone take a stand that is running for office. It's past time to highlight this administration for what it is and the LIES the Candidate Obama told to get elected...

    I also think Eric Holder needs to go. This on top of giving terrorists rights to civil trial...? This bunch has been exposed for the rubes they are for turning the DOJ into a clearing house for criminals...that is to say clearing
    the criminals for thier wrongdoing when it was readily apparent what their intent was.
     
  6. Bfgrn
    Offline

    Bfgrn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Messages:
    15,012
    Thanks Received:
    2,051
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,220
    Accusations don't stand up to the facts

    The Bush administration's Justice Department -- not the Obama administration -- made the decision not to pursue criminal charges against members of the New Black Panther Party for alleged voter intimidation at a polling center in Philadelphia in 2008;

    The Obama administration successfully obtained default judgment against Samir Shabazz, a member of the New Black Panther Party carrying a nightstick outside the Philadelphia polling center on Election Day 2008;

    The Bush administration DOJ chose not to pursue similar charges against members of the Minutemen, one of whom allegedly carried a weapon while harassing Hispanic voters in Arizona in 2006;

    No voters have come forward to claim that they were intimidated from voting on account of the New Black Panthers standing outside the polling center in 2008;

    The Republican vice chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is currently investigating the Justice Department's decision, has called that investigation "very small potatoes" full of "overheated rhetoric filled with insinuations and unsubstantiated charges," and said it has not "served the interests of the commission"; she further said that DOJ has given a "plausible argument" for not pursuing additional charges in the case.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Jeremy
    Offline

    Jeremy TRANSFER!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2010
    Messages:
    7,777
    Thanks Received:
    1,185
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +1,185
    Two wrongs don't make a right. Any 5 year old can tell you that. All cases of voter intimidation should be prosecuted.
     
  8. Jeremy
    Offline

    Jeremy TRANSFER!!!

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2010
    Messages:
    7,777
    Thanks Received:
    1,185
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +1,185
    I'm so tired of this bullshit "Bush did it so why can't Obama" excuse. Bush doubled the deficit so it's ok for obama to quadruple it. Bush DOJ dropped charges so Obama can do it.
    etc. etc. etc. Are you guys actually happy that he is following in Bush's shoes on these issues? What ever happened to this lie of "change" he belched out of his vagina during the election?
     
  9. Bfgrn
    Offline

    Bfgrn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    Messages:
    15,012
    Thanks Received:
    2,051
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,220
    I'm tired of obtuse right wing pea brains.

    The Bush administration's Justice Department -- not the Obama administration -- made the decision not to pursue criminal charges against members of the New Black Panther Party.
     
  10. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,031
    Thanks Received:
    5,464
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,464
    Wrong Answer. The DOJ filed a lawsuit under the Voting Rights Act against the NBPPSD and three of its members alleging the defendants intimidated Philadelphia voters during the Nov. 4, 2008 general election. The action was filed in January before President George W. Bush left office.

    ...The complaint said NBPPSD Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz confirmed that the placement of Messrs. Shabazz and Jackson was part of a nationwide effort to deploy NBPPSD members at polling locations on Election Day. The Justice Department sought an injunction to prevent any similar future actions by NBPPSD members at polling locations.



    “Intimidation outside of a polling place is contrary to the democratic process,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Grace Chung Becker at the time. “The Department takes allegations of voter intimidation seriously.”

    None of the defendants responded to the lawsuit. Instead of immediately filing for a default judgment as is the normal procedure, sources told The Bulletin the DOJ asked for and received an order from the court providing an extension of time to file. Specifically, they asked the court to give them until May 15."

    But on May 15, DOJ changed its mind again. Rather than a default judgment, the DOJ filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the lawsuit for two of the defendants. This included Mr. Jackson, who identified himself to police as a member of the Democratic Committee in the 14th Ward. He also produced credentials to that effect.

    DOJ only asked for a default judgment against one defendant, Samir Shabazz, which was granted on May 18. But sources say the proposed order for the default judgment asks for none of the usual conditions the Justice Department would want, such as keeping Mr. Shabazz away from any polling locations for a set number of years into the future.

    Hans von Spakovsky is a former career Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. He thinks the inaction by the Justice Department is unprecedented. He told The Bulletin that the dismissal by Justice, with no notice on the Justice Department press site, particularly against an organization listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, is a horrible miscarriage of justice. He said DOJ has failed in its duty to enforce voting laws. He is outraged by the action.

    “It is absolutely unprecedented for the Justice Department to dismiss a lawsuit after the defendants failed to answer the suit and are thus in default," he said. "

    __________________

    SOURCE <READ MORE

    _______________

    DOJ Slimes Whistleblower Adams in Panthergate Case


    Call it Panthergate, call it what you will. The Department of Justice (or its minions) is already attempting to slime its whistleblower J. Christian Adams — the attorney who recently resigned from the Department over its abandonment of the New Black Panther case.
    Now Adams has struck back, telling Pajamas Media that the DOJ’s smears were a “blatant lie.”
    Adams appeared on Megyn Kelly’s Fox News show to tell his story Tuesday, following which a “source familiar with the case” came forward, trying to tarnish the lawyer’s reputation. Pajamas Media was informed by a Fox producer:
    The person said that any story should include the fact that Adams only left DOJ after being put into a job he disliked, and that he has long been an advocate of conservative views. Source also says Adams’ claims are “willfully inaccurate.”
    This battle had been brewing for several days since Adams — using the Panther case as an example — asserted in the Washington Times, and then in more detail in Pajamas Media, that institutionalized bias had infiltrated Eric Holder’s Justice Department. Civil rights complaints would only be pursued when initiated by people of color against white people.
    When it was the other way around, the complaints, even when well-substantiated as with the New Black Panthers, would disappear in a bureaucratic morass.
    The attacks on Adams — whether from the “anonymous source” or from DOJ spokesperson Tracy Schmaler — were of surprising ferocity, indicating nervousness on the part of the Department.
    Adams told Pajamas Media:
    I was appalled and disappointed by the DOJ yesterday. They included a blatant lie in their response to my interview. They told Fox News I had been “unhappy with my position.” Not only would this be a personnel matter they aren’t supposed to discuss, it’s a fairy tale. In fact on April 28 I got a promotion, so maybe they can let me know what position I was unhappy with.
    …
    The problem with smearing me is that there are many others who know the truth inside the Department. Documents which they refuse to turn over pursuant to subpoenas from the Civil Rights Commission prove it. Testimony from other DOJ employees, which they refuse to allow, would also prove it.
    ____________________

    It happened under Obama's watch. They were told to drop the case...



    What the HELL does this have to do with anything? Nice try at the deflection Bufu...

    Any other LIES Bufu?

    Bush didn't drop the case.
     

Share This Page