DOJ To Be Investigated For Civil Rights Enforcement

[Intense]

We all have Civil Rights, not just women and minorities:

Probe in New Black Panther case

Probe in New Black Panther case
By Jerry Markon
Tuesday, September 14, 2010; A4

The Justice Department's internal watchdog is investigating allegations that its civil rights division enforced voting laws in a racially discriminatory manner, officials said Monday.

The review by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine is an outgrowth of the political controversy over a 2008 voter intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party. Some conservative lawyers, politicians and commentators have said that the civil rights division improperly narrowed that case, part of their broader allegations that the Obama Justice Department has failed to protect the civil rights of white voters.

The department's Office of Professional Responsibility is looking into the matter, and two Republican congressmen, Frank R. Wolf (Va.) and Lamar Smith (Tex.) asked Fine to also investigate the department's handling of the case, according to letters the congressmen sent Fine over the summer.

Fine, in a letter Monday to the congressmen, wrote that his office will not investigate the New Black Panther case specifically but is initiating a broader review of how the Justice Department enforces voting rights laws.

The letter, released by both congressional offices, said the review will focus on what types of cases the civil rights division's voting section brings and whether it enforces the law "in a non-discriminatory manner."...

It's about fucking time.

 

[Annie]

Are you winding the coat hanger in your skull from that failed abortion? If you have something to say, say it. Murdering innocent civilians is a international & national crime. And murder, torture & rape of women & children has no statute of limitations. Rape might, but not murder or torture.

Once again,

I said nothing about torture or rape in any posts.

 

[shintao]

Are you winding the coat hanger in your skull from that failed abortion? If you have something to say, say it. Murdering innocent civilians is a international & national crime. And murder, torture & rape of women & children has no statute of limitations. Rape might, but not murder or torture.

Once again,

I said nothing about torture or rape in any posts.

No, you brought up the DOJ in posts, about them being incompetent, and what is more important for them to be investigated for. More important in my mind is to investigate them for not going after war criminals.

 

[Si modo]

The DOJ is still not punishing election corruption. Still.

They cannot put icing on this turd to make it appealing.

 

[Annie]

The DOJ is still not punishing election corruption. Still.

They cannot put icing on this turd to make it appealing.

Right. The DOJ is ignoring civil rights, when the complainant is of other than minority. Regarding voting, they are ignoring the legals, favoring all but.

 

[Avorysuds]

I wonder why Bush refused to prosecute these men?


He had all of November, all of December and most of January....and he just let the matter drop

Why are we bringing it up two years later? Oh yea.....elections coming up

Has to do less with New Black Panthers than overall civil rights enforcement.

Why did Bush refuse to prosecute?

Is he a Black Panther and nobody knows about it? Were they planted by the Bush administration?

What did Bush know? When did he know it?

Didn't he?

When Obama came into power after the case was "won" they let it go... I'll see if I can find a link. If I find a link will you stfu forever?

Edit... link~ http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504564_162-20010581-504564.html

 

[Si modo]

Has to do less with New Black Panthers than overall civil rights enforcement.

Why did Bush refuse to prosecute?

Is he a Black Panther and nobody knows about it? Were they planted by the Bush administration?

What did Bush know? When did he know it?

Didn't he?

When Obama came into power after the case was "won" they let it go... I'll see if I can find a link. If I find a link will you stfu forever?

Edit... link~ New Black Panther Case Spurs Civil Rights Commission to Challenge DOJ - Crossroads - CBS News

Exactly.

....

The controversy erupted after the Obama Administration dropped most of a federal lawsuit against members of the New Black Panther Party, who were videotaped allegedly intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place on Election Day in November 2008.

The Bush Administration in January 2009 filed suit against three of the members and the New Black Panther Party, but the Obama Administration changed course four months later and dropped the complaint against all but one member, who was wielding a nightstick at the polling place. And it only sought a narrow injunction against him, banning him from Philadelphia polling places until 2012.

....

[Emphasis added]

 

[Annie]

Seems the judge wants to move it along faster than slower:

Pajamas Media Big Blow to DOJ: District Court Fast-Tracks Challenge to Federal Oversight of Elections

Big Blow to DOJ: District Court Fast-Tracks Challenge to Federal Oversight of Elections
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act will get a constitutional challenge soon, without the nine months of discovery requested by the Obama Justice Department.
September 15, 2010 - by J. Christian Adams


Today, D.C. District Court Justice John Bates dealt a blow to the Holder Justice Department by fast-tracking a constitutional challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

I had previously written that the Justice Department requested nine months of factual discovery. I also reported that the DOJ made courtroom arguments that may be untrue. Today, Judge Bates rejected the DOJ positions entirely, calling it “absurd” to pursue extensive discovery.

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act requires mostly southern states to obtain federal government approval of any change involving voting or elections. Merely moving a polling place from a school gym to a fire hall requires Washington’s approval. Increasing or decreasing the number of voter registration offices, or their hours of operation, also requires pre-clearance. The Supreme Court almost overturned the law a few years ago, saying the requirement may be constitutionally defective, but held off the ultimate decision for another day.

Judge Bates’ decision brings that day much closer. He rejected the DOJ’s request to delay the matter to conduct nine months of expensive discovery.

As they have in other potential challenges, in this case the DOJ thought they could dig up the body of Bull Connor and explain that the sins of the past justify the regulation of the present. They relished the prospect of a parade of evidence showing little change in the South. They couldn’t wait to remind the court that not long ago, blacks could not easily register to vote.

The problem is that “not long ago” is approaching a half-century...

 

[Si modo]

Seems the judge wants to move it along faster than slower:

Pajamas Media Big Blow to DOJ: District Court Fast-Tracks Challenge to Federal Oversight of Elections

Big Blow to DOJ: District Court Fast-Tracks Challenge to Federal Oversight of Elections
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act will get a constitutional challenge soon, without the nine months of discovery requested by the Obama Justice Department.
September 15, 2010 - by J. Christian Adams


Today, D.C. District Court Justice John Bates dealt a blow to the Holder Justice Department by fast-tracking a constitutional challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

I had previously written that the Justice Department requested nine months of factual discovery. I also reported that the DOJ made courtroom arguments that may be untrue. Today, Judge Bates rejected the DOJ positions entirely, calling it “absurd” to pursue extensive discovery.

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act requires mostly southern states to obtain federal government approval of any change involving voting or elections. Merely moving a polling place from a school gym to a fire hall requires Washington’s approval. Increasing or decreasing the number of voter registration offices, or their hours of operation, also requires pre-clearance. The Supreme Court almost overturned the law a few years ago, saying the requirement may be constitutionally defective, but held off the ultimate decision for another day.

Judge Bates’ decision brings that day much closer. He rejected the DOJ’s request to delay the matter to conduct nine months of expensive discovery.

As they have in other potential challenges, in this case the DOJ thought they could dig up the body of Bull Connor and explain that the sins of the past justify the regulation of the present. They relished the prospect of a parade of evidence showing little change in the South. They couldn’t wait to remind the court that not long ago, blacks could not easily register to vote.

The problem is that “not long ago” is approaching a half-century...

Good news.

(I find the silence from some on such corruption telling as well.)

 

[Intense]

Are you winding the coat hanger in your skull from that failed abortion? If you have something to say, say it. Murdering innocent civilians is a international & national crime. And murder, torture & rape of women & children has no statute of limitations. Rape might, but not murder or torture.

Like there was a single instance in history where innocents didn't get screwed over in war. You fucking wish the rest of the world played by our standards you fucking moron. How about you go back to your imaginary bubble where you and Michael Moore, and Al Gore can hold hands with Saddam and Chavez, and piss and fornicate on all of the mass graves you waste of space. Have a great day.

 

[Annie]

More now from FOIA request regarding what happened with New Black Panthers case and selective enforcement of law:

Pajamas Media Proof: New Records Show DOJ Lied About New Black Panther Dismissal

Proof: New Records Show DOJ Lied About New Black Panther Dismissal
Posted By J. Christian Adams On September 20, 2010 @ 5:42 am In Uncategorized | 17 Comments

Judicial Watch made an explosive announcement today about the Justice Department’s stonewalling in the New Black Panther voter intimidation case dismissal. Forced to bring a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit after DOJ rebuffed its public records request (so much for transparency), Judicial Watch obtained a privilege log from the DOJ last week.

It shows — in a rather dramatic way — that the DOJ has been untruthful about who was involved in the dismissal of the case.

In July, I complied with a subpoena and provided testimony to the United States Commission on Civil Rights. I did so in part because inaccurate statements had been made about the case by DOJ officials. Some of these statements falsely claimed that ethical rules mandated the dismissal of the charges against the New Black Panthers. This was nonsense.

But the real whopper? DOJ’s claim — repeated over and over again — that career civil servants were wholly responsible for the spiking of the case.

Today we learn, from the Department’s own records, that this claim is demonstrably false.

The privilege log produced in the FOIA litigation contains stunning entries. They show regular discussions and deliberations between the highest political officials inside the DOJ, including the deputy attorney general and the associate attorney general, about what to do with the case. This contradicts numerous statements made to Congress, the Civil Rights Commission, and to the public.

Some of these statements were under oath.

For example: on May 10, 2009, the third highest-ranking official inside the DOJ — Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli — emailed Sam Hirsch, one of his deputies:

Where are we on the Black Panther case?
​

The description of the email contains a bombshell:

asking for update on the NBPP litigation between officials in the [Associate’s office] and noting the [deputy attorney general’s] current thoughts on the case.​

The deputy attorney general is the second highest-ranking official in the Department. The use of the term “current thoughts” infers that there were prior thoughts and ongoing discussions with the second highest-ranking political official at DOJ about how to handle the case.

Further, the logs show dozens of communications between senior DOJ political officials in the two weeks prior to the dismissal of the case.

Congress and the public have been told — for over a year — that the dismissal of the New Black Panther case resulted from nothing more than a dispute between lowly career civil servants. Lapdog reporters have repeated this lie, if they even covered the case at all. The documents uncovered by Judicial Watch expose the ruse...

 

[chanel]

And it gets worse...

The mess surrounding 2010 military voting rights enforcement is coming to a rotten conclusion. On Friday the DOJ announced settlements against states that were not in compliance with the MOVE Act. Friday was the day before ballots were required to go overseas to military voters. In some of the settlements, the ballots aren’t going to go on time.

These Friday news releases are becoming a pattern.

On Friday, the Justice Department reached agreements with Hawaii, Colorado, D.C. and the Virgin Islands in response to their failure to comply with the MOVE Act. MOVE requires ballots to go 45 days in advance of the election – there are no exceptions in the law, no ability for DOJ to rewrite the law. These jurisdictions have been out of compliance since their legislatures went out of session without fixing their laws. Justice took no action – except to wait.

Hawaii and the other states entered into a sweetheart settlement with Justice Friday that allowed them to ignore the MOVE Act while other states like Florida and Vermont took steps to come into compliance with the new law. Worst of all, Justice undermined the decision of the Pentagon to deny these states waivers – and rewrote the will of Congress and changed the law on their own, reducing the time period below 45 days that states must send out ballots.

Instead of mailing ballots 45 days before the election – Justice effectively rewrote the law and allowed ballots in D.C. to mail out 29 days in advance, 16 days fewer that Congress required. In the Virgin Islands, it is 30 days in advance. In Hawaii, Justice rewrote the law and allowed ballots to go out 39 days in advance.

This reminds us that earlier in the year, a Justice official spoke to state election officials. The DOJ official downplayed DOJ's interest in enforcing the law. “Bringing a lawsuit is the last resort” or “the MOVE Act is ambiguous” state officials were told by the DOJ official. Election officials who were there told the Washington Times they simply could not believe what they were hearing. It was an invitation to ignore the law, to them. This state official said that everyone got the message loud and clear - they didn't need to worry because DOJ wouldn't be aggressive. This mess rests at the foot of the bureaucrats in the Department of Justice and the political leadership at DOJ. Congressional oversight hearing next year will be very interesting.

Election Law Center: DOJ military voting enforcement: failed to give the full measure of their devotion

An organization fighting to ensure that all overseas members of the U.S. military have the opportunity to vote has sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder listing what it says are violations of the federal MOVE Act in two states and in multiple counties in five other states, FoxNews.com has learned.

On Monday, MVP Project sent a list of possible MOVE Act violations to Attorney General Eric Holder, claiming the act may have been violated in Connecticut, New Mexico, seven counties in Alabama, two counties in Arkansas, one county in California, one county in Indiana and two counties in Nevada.

FOXNews.com - EXCLUSIVE: Advocates Cite Purported MOVE Act Violations in Seven More States