quote- At a hearing before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on May 14, 2010, Perez was asked by Commissioner Peter Kirsanow whether any political leadership [was] involved in the decision not to pursue this particular case. Perezs answer, on page 79 of the transcript of that hearing, is an uncategorical No. When the statements of Perez are compared to the documents that Judicial Watch forced DOJ to release in the FOIA lawsuit, it is clear Judge Walton was polite when he said they are contradictory and cast doubt on the accuracy of Perezs account. According to the court, the DOJ documents, including emails from former Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli (who was the number-two official at DOJ) and former Democratic election lawyer and Deputy Associate Attorney General Sam Hirsch, revealed that political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJs dismissal of claims. The PJ Tatler » Federal Court: DOJ Official May Have Lied About the New Black Panther Case is that more clear and substantial? and just aside from that, what the heck would they be conferring ON or over? the color of the Nationals new uniforms?