IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Black Panthers , Bradley Schlozman , department of justice , Eric Holder , J. Christian Adams , Malik Zulu Shabazz , minutemen , racism charges , voter intimidation

Reply
Old 6th July 2010, 06:01 PM   #1
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Are Holder and Obama racists? / DOJ dismisses Black Panther case

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...-2010-midterms

Quote:
07/06/10

Earlier today I had the opportunity to attend the United States Commission on Civil Rights’ hearing on the U.S. Department of Justice and the New Black Panther Party litigation. The testimony by the hearing's lone witness, former DoJ lawyer J. Christian Adams, was nothing short of extraordinary.

During the 2008 presidential election, members of the New Black Panther Party were caught on videotape brandishing a nightstick and hurling racial taunts at white and black voters as they sought entry to a polling station in Philadelphia.

Following the irrefutable evidence caught on film of voter intimidation, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against three individuals and the Black Panther Party itself for violating Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act — which prohibits intimidation, threats and coercion. When none of the named defendants nor the New Black Panther Party showed up for trial in April 2009, a default judgment was entered in favor of the government.

… snip … After the government had won its case in the absence of the defense to present itself, the Department of Justice abruptly changed course and sought to voluntarily dismiss the charges against three of the defendants while giving a slap on the hand to another by telling him that he was not able to go to Philadelphia polling stations through the 2012 elections.

… snip …

In emotional testimony, J. Christian Adams, until last week a member of the DoJ's Voting Section — he resigned in protest over the department's handling of the case — told a stunned hearing room why he felt the case had been dropped. In no uncertain terms, Adams noted that senior officials within the Obama Justice Department had told employees that they were not to bring voting-rights cases where the alleged victim in the case was white.
UNBELIEVEABLE.

Holder is not only throwing out the rule of law, but this sounds like racism is rampant in Obama's DOJ.

Is this really the kind of change you Obama supporters wanted?

I'm serious.

Do any of you have the guts to honestly and forthrightly address the issue the above news raises?
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:02 PM   #2
applecorped
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
He earned it.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:12 PM   #3
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
I honestly and forthrightly call ******** on Adams.

Afterall, just because he's a Teabagger who happened to write this screed last year, comparing Obama to an appeaser, doesn't mean we shouldn't buy his every word on "The New Black Panthers", right? But wait, there's more!

He's part of the politicized DOJ, where they checked for Teabags at the door before hiring?

http://mediamatters.org/research/201007020053

Quote:
Several attorneys in the Division also told us that Schlozman was open about his disdain for and lack of trust in the attorney staff of the Division. Appellate Section Chief Diana Flynn told us that in conversations with her, Schlozman alternately referred to the Appellate Section lawyers hired during prior administrations as "Democrats" and "liberals," and said they were "disloyal," could not be trusted, and were not "on the team." Flynn said Schlozman pledged to move as many of them out of the Division as he could to make room for the "real Americans" and "right-thinking Americans" he wanted to hire.
And Scholzman hired Adams. Yep, he's on the team alright.

Weren't you just on here claiming not to be a knee jerk right winger?
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:15 PM   #4
GreNME
Philosopher
 
GreNME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,276
Obama and Holder are Democratic Party members, therefore...

Obama and Holder are obviously racist.
__________________
Like love, criminals will always find a way. -- foxholeatheist

The kind of pacifism I endorse is brought about by eliminating one enemy combatant at a time.-- JoeyDonuts
GreNME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:16 PM   #5
Juniversal
CIA + FBI + NWO Employee
 
Juniversal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,145
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Is this really the kind of change you Obama supporters wanted?

I'm serious.

Do any of you have the guts to honestly and forthrightly address the issue the above news raises?
Yes indeed. That's exactly the change we wanted. Thanks Obama and Holder for keeping the white man down.
__________________
"God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Juniversal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:24 PM   #6
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Oh, and the author of this piece on The Hill is Ron Christie.

Quote:
Ronald I. "Ron" Christie (born c.1969) is an American government relations expert and Republican political strategist, who has also worked as a member of former Vice President Dick Cheney's staff.
I mean, is there anything so ridiculous you won't believe it? Anything at all?
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:26 PM   #7
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Would you folks agree that this is a very serious charge and should be investigated ... by putting people under oath if necessary? I have no problem dealing with the consequences if it turns out that Adams is lying. Then he should be soundly punished ... even charged with perjury if he lies under oath during that investigation. But are you folks willing to do the same if it turns out he is telling the truth about this? Are you willing to call for Holder's dismissal if this is true? Yes or no? Or was all that talk about "hope" and "change" only empty rhetoric on your part?
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:28 PM   #8
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
A former Dick Cheney staffer writes an editorial that paints a negative picture of Obama? What's not to believe without any skepticism whatsoever?

eta: Unaboogie beat me to it.

Last edited by Upchurch; 6th July 2010 at 06:30 PM.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:29 PM   #9
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN67KJdd6Mw
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:30 PM   #10
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Wow, just read the comments on that article. Just over the top Stormfront stuff.

Quote:
None of this is a surprise. READ HIS STUPID BOOKS! Look where he went to CHURCH. Look at the guy he chose to be his MENTOR. Look at the guy he chose to MARRY him and his wife. Look at the guy he chose to BAPTISE his kids. A White Hating, Jew Hating, America hater.I said it when he first got elected. This is gonna be New york City under David Dinkins. the Blacks are gonna Run Riot, and they're gonna do it with impunity. Just ask AL SHARPTON, Ask the Jews in CROWN HEIGHTS.Obama is a RACIST, pure and simple.
Or...

Quote:
For those who thought electing a black man president would solve the division in the country, you can go buy a gun now or leave the room.
Teabaggers are despicable. Great job, BAC. You certainly chose something fragrant here.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:34 PM   #11
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
A former Dick Cheney staffer writes an editorial that paints a negative picture of Obama? What's not to believe without any skepticism whatsoever?
Never the less, Upchurch, this is a very serious charge coming from a lawyer who was in the DOJ at the time this happened. Regardless of his politics, don't you think this merits investigation? And if he's lying, and he gets caught at the lie, how does that hurt Holder or the Obama administration ... or those of your political persuasion? It doesn't. Seems to me that could only strengthen your side. So the only reason I can see for you not wanting to investigate this or answer the question I asked is that you actually fear this is true. Because that being proven would seriously hurt the administration and those of your political persuasion.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:35 PM   #12
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
More from the comments section

Quote:
Obama and his administration push anything for African-Americans and it is a clear transfer of wealth in progress from U.S. taxpayers and property owners to blacks.
Yep, totally dispassionate reporting you've linked to. Nothing racist about these folks. I suggest a special prosecutor.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:40 PM   #13
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Never the less, Upchurch, this is a very serious charge coming from a lawyer who was in the DOJ at the time this happened. Regardless of his politics, don't you think this merits investigation? And if he's lying, and he gets caught at the lie, how does that hurt Holder or the Obama administration ... or those of your political persuasion? It doesn't. Seems to me that could only strengthen your side. So the only reason I can see for you not wanting to investigate this or answer the question I asked is that you actually fear this is true. Because that being proven would seriously hurt the administration and those of your political persuasion.
Yep. If Holder has nothing to hide, what would it hurt for accusations from GOP strategists to be taken seriously and given the imprimatur of official investigation, led by fellow Teabaggers in and election year? And so what if it's a racially charged accusation based on nothing more than the word of a known Teabagging freak?

I mean, how can this hurt the Democratic Party in any way? What. Could. Go. Wrong?
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:42 PM   #14
YoPopa
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,484
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
More from the comments section



Yep, totally dispassionate reporting you've linked to. Nothing racist about these folks. I suggest a special prosecutor.
COMMENTS section? Incredible what lengths you'll go to in trying to defend racism. Anyone can enter comments and it's not unheard of for trolls to post comments.
YoPopa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:45 PM   #15
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by YoPopa View Post
COMMENTS section? Incredible what lengths you'll go to in trying to defend racism. Anyone can enter comments and it's not unheard of for trolls to post comments.
Right, it's my fault Teabaggers are all a bunch of racists who keep saying and posting racist things, especially when commenting about a racially tinged charge that depends on the the word of a known partisan and former Cheney staffer.

My bad, fella.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 06:59 PM   #16
YoPopa
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,484
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Right, it's my fault Teabaggers are all a bunch of racists who keep saying and posting racist things, especially when commenting about a racially tinged charge that depends on the the word of a known partisan and former Cheney staffer.
No

Quote:
My bad, fella.
Yes
YoPopa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 07:17 PM   #17
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by YoPopa View Post
Yes
Got it. I'll be sure to take this latest racist Teabagger outrage very seriously. I'm sure it's totally legit.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 07:19 PM   #18
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Never the less, Upchurch, this is a very serious charge coming from a lawyer who was in the DOJ at the time this happened. Regardless of his politics, don't you think this merits investigation?
I question his honesty. His one-time boss broke a treaty the US had agreed to in order to torture people and he said and did nothing. Now he's a righteous, trustworthy guy?


Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
And if he's lying, and he gets caught at the lie, how does that hurt Holder or the Obama administration ... or those of your political persuasion?
Other than sending an open invitation to every crazy with a bone to pick to waste the President's time with frivolous accusations? Not much ...except that thing I just said.


Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
So the only reason I can see for you not wanting to investigate this or answer the question I asked is that you actually fear this is true.
Well, what can I say? You've always been short-sighted.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 07:21 PM   #19
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 27,086
48-hour rule. Yeah, this guy sounds like a partisan hack.

But I'm also curious to hear the explanation as to why the government would dismiss this case. Perhaps there's a good reason that will be forthcoming.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 07:25 PM   #20
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
But I'm also curious to hear the explanation as to why the government would dismiss this case. Perhaps there's a good reason that will be forthcoming.
If there is, 10-to-1 says BAC doesn't believe it, in proper Birther style.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 07:32 PM   #21
mortimer
NWO Janitor
 
mortimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,517
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
If there is, 10-to-1 says BAC doesn't believe it, in proper Birther style.
100,000,000,000 to 1 there's no explanation from the administration.
__________________
"why would i bother?" - Bikerdruid, on providing evidence for his claims
"I view hamas as an organization fighting for the freedom of its people." - Bikerdruid
mortimer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 07:45 PM   #22
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 27,086
Originally Posted by mortimer View Post
100,000,000,000 to 1 there's no explanation from the administration.
Actually, apparently there already has been an explanation, but nobody cared much about this at the time because media attention was not focused on this case.

Quote:
During a May 14, 2010 hearing before the Commission, the head of the Civil Rights Division, Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez said, “The Department concluded that the allegations in the complaint against Jerry Jackson, the other defendant present at the polling place, as well as the allegations against the national New Black Panther Party and its leader, Malik Zulu Shabazz, did not have sufficient evidentiary support. The Department reviewed the totality of the evidence in the applicable law in reaching these decisions.”
So that's the official explanation offered so far.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 07:54 PM   #23
GrouchoMarxist
Cowardly insulter of Buddhism
 
GrouchoMarxist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,146
What's a cracker?
__________________
I can't believe that having said what I said was interpreted as having been what I said when I said it, because I said it where I said it, when I said it, and who I said it to. Only in America!
GrouchoMarxist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 08:15 PM   #24
mortimer
NWO Janitor
 
mortimer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,517
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Actually, apparently there already has been an explanation, but nobody cared much about this at the time because media attention was not focused on this case.



So that's the official explanation offered so far.
Agreed. They beat my odds.

Obviously the video evidence was insufficient to prove what the video evidence proved. I wonder if it was faked.
__________________
"why would i bother?" - Bikerdruid, on providing evidence for his claims
"I view hamas as an organization fighting for the freedom of its people." - Bikerdruid
mortimer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 08:36 PM   #25
GrouchoMarxist
Cowardly insulter of Buddhism
 
GrouchoMarxist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,146
Originally Posted by mortimer View Post
Agreed. They beat my odds.

Obviously the video evidence was insufficient to prove what the video evidence proved. I wonder if it was faked.

They can't view the video. It contains controversial opinions, which have been deemed inappropriate for government access.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_16...-10391695.html
__________________
I can't believe that having said what I said was interpreted as having been what I said when I said it, because I said it where I said it, when I said it, and who I said it to. Only in America!
GrouchoMarxist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 08:44 PM   #26
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 27,086
Originally Posted by mortimer View Post
Agreed. They beat my odds.

Obviously the video evidence was insufficient to prove what the video evidence proved. I wonder if it was faked.
And what exactly does it "prove"? That a crime was committed? Can you cite the relevant law?
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 08:45 PM   #27
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
I question his honesty.
Of course you question his honesty. Nothing wrong with that. And we need to know if he's lying. If he is he needs to be drummed out of the republican party, politics and the law. But if he's not ...

Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Well, what can I say? You've always been short-sighted.
Ah, so now your approach to avoiding seeking a clear resolution to this charge is to make personal attacks on me. I see.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 08:48 PM   #28
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
If there is, 10-to-1 says BAC doesn't believe it, in proper Birther style.
I've posted nothing to suggest I'm a Birther. Yet another dishonest tactic to avoid addressing the real issue raised by Adam's testimony. This is saying as much about you, Upchurch, as it potential says about Holder. Why are you apparently so afraid of find out the truth in this matter? Let's just put everyone involved under oath and get them on the record, and clear this up.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 08:50 PM   #29
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Of course you question his honesty. Nothing wrong with that. And we need to know if he's lying. If he is he needs to be drummed out of the republican party, politics and the law. But if he's not ...



Ah, so now your approach to avoiding seeking a clear resolution to this charge is to make personal attacks on me. I see.
Since when does being proved a liar get anyone drummed out of the Republican Party?
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 08:56 PM   #30
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 27,086
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Of course you question his honesty. Nothing wrong with that. And we need to know if he's lying. If he is he needs to be drummed out of the republican party, politics and the law. But if he's not ...
If he is lying, it would be impossible to prove it, unless he changes his story later. It's just one of those he-said-she-said situations. We can never know what was said unless there was a recording device present or they actually admit it.

So the people who want to believe Adams will believe him, and those those who don't won't. The only people who will ever really know are those who were there in the room.

As it stands now, it's an accusation without any direct substantiating evidence.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 09:07 PM   #31
bit_pattern
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 7,406
Originally Posted by GrouchoMarxist View Post
What's a cracker?
A base for delicious cheese and pickles.
bit_pattern is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 09:33 PM   #32
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
So that's the official explanation offered so far.
The problem with that explanation is that it's not the DOJ's job to do that. They already had brought the case before the court and the Black Panthers chose to not even show up. The judge had already ruled on the case as a result.

It was only when there was a change in DOJ management, when Holder came on board, when suddenly the DOJ lost all interest in the case and began looking for ways to effectively dismiss it. That fact fits with the explanation given by Adams.

His charge is so serious that this needs to be resolved one way or the other. Not just ignored. Afterall, on election day a video clearly shows that armed men, members of the New Black Panthers, were intimidating voters. The law against voter intimidation came out of the civil rights era. It would be sad if now democrats and blacks are going to ignore that law when whites are intimidated, just because doing so might benefit them. In the end that will only backfire.

If upper DOJ management did indeed issue an order for it's staff to ignore voting rights complaints by whites, this is outright racism and it can not be tolerated. Not if you want any of us to respect that law, democrats, blacks or the DOJ. Surely democrats would agree since racism has been one of their top concerns for decades. Surely those concerns were at heart color blind.

If Adam's accusation is proven true, all those involved in such an order should be immediately terminated from the DOJ and the government in general, and democrats should sever all connections with them. They've certainly demanded that of any conservatives who've been shown to harbor the least bit of racism. Surely democrats would agree with that, given that one of the first things Holder did when he took office was scold the American people for being cowards about discussing matters of race. Are you folks now afraid to discuss it?

Furthermore, are you people aware that Adams has charged that Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez lied under oath to Congress about the circumstances surrounding the decision to drop the probe. This is very serious. For a cloud like this to be hanging over Perez and Holder, without a clear resolution can only further damage the DOJ. And this is not going away until it is resolved.

Here, listen to what Bartle Bull, a longtime civil rights activist and an aide to Senator Robert Kennedy in the 68 election had to say about what happened and what this means. He was serving in November 2008 as a credentialed poll watcher in Philadelphia when he witnessed the three armed and uniformed Black Panthers confront would be voters. He also made a sworn statement about what he saw and the DOJ did not consider or contact him about it. That is how biased the Holder DOJ has become.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sDoY...layer_embedded

How far the democrat party has fallen from what it was back in 1968. It's sad. And Obama and all of you Obama supporters are now on trial over this, whether you realize it or not.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 09:40 PM   #33
Juniversal
CIA + FBI + NWO Employee
 
Juniversal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,145
I call hyperbole on Adam's statement.

More then likely the statement, "senior officials within the Obama Justice Department had told employees that they were not to bring voting-rights cases where the alleged victim in the case was white" translates to "senior officials within the Obama Justice Department dismissed controversial voting-rights case where the alleged victim in the case was white and i'm not happy about it".
__________________
"God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Juniversal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 10:10 PM   #34
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
How insane do you have to be to believe a "senior official" told this Teafreak that it was forbidden to charge black people who victimized white people? Really? Knowing that this guy is a Teatard, a senior official told him and only him about the conspiracy? And people buy this? It's beyond silly, and it's amazing that anyone would be such a partisan hack as to actually believe this.

But hey, Teabaggers aren't known for their intelligence or willingness to think critically, hence they're birthers, goldbugs, etc.

So, explain to me again why anyone should spend time doing anything other than mocking this stupidity?
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 10:22 PM   #35
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 49,893
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
How insane do you have to be to believe a "senior official" told this Teafreak that it was forbidden to charge black people who victimized white people? Really? Knowing that this guy is a Teatard, a senior official told him and only him about the conspiracy? And people buy this? It's beyond silly, and it's amazing that anyone would be such a partisan hack as to actually believe this.

But hey, Teabaggers aren't known for their intelligence or willingness to think critically, hence they're birthers, goldbugs, etc.

So, explain to me again why anyone should spend time doing anything other than mocking this stupidity?
I don't know if you realise this, but you are sounding a lot like lefty seargent here. Insults thrown around with carefree abandon does not a convincing argument make. FWIW.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 10:28 PM   #36
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
I don't know if you realise this, but you are sounding a lot like lefty seargent here. Insults thrown around with carefree abandon does not a convincing argument make. FWIW.
You know, you're right, but I don't really care. There's no argument to make when these people throw around absurd and racist charges like this. Perhaps taking the high road would make me look better, but you can't be contending it would in any way change the way these people are acting.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 10:35 PM   #37
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 27,086
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
How insane do you have to be to believe a "senior official" told this Teafreak that it was forbidden to charge black people who victimized white people? Really? Knowing that this guy is a Teatard, a senior official told him and only him about the conspiracy? And people buy this? It's beyond silly, and it's amazing that anyone would be such a partisan hack as to actually believe this.

But hey, Teabaggers aren't known for their intelligence or willingness to think critically, hence they're birthers, goldbugs, etc.

So, explain to me again why anyone should spend time doing anything other than mocking this stupidity?
Because mocking and calling names doesn't really help.

Better to be "the adults in the room" and simply point out all the known facts, Mr. Adams' political connections and the lack of substantiating evidence.

Here is a NY Times article about this

Quote:
The case became a cause célèbre in the conservative media world, and the Civil Rights Commission opened an investigation. The eight-member panel, which has the power to issue subpoenas and issue reports, is controlled by a six-member conservative bloc appointed during the Bush administration.

In testimony before the panel in May, Tom Perez, who became the assistant attorney general for the civil rights division in October 2009, said that “reasonable minds can differ” about the case, but that the acting supervisors had concluded that the case had been over-charged.

Mr. Perez said there was insufficient evidence that the party was responsible for the incident. He also noted that the voter intimidation provision is rarely used, and pointed to similar incidents during the Bush years in which minorities were the alleged victims but the division did not file such a lawsuit.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 12:54 AM   #38
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,124
I see that the idea that the defendants might actually be innocent is not up for debate. Better to just assume them and the Obama admin are guilty, I guess.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Zingiber Officinale

Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 04:50 AM   #39
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...-2010-midterms



UNBELIEVEABLE.

Holder is not only throwing out the rule of law, but this sounds like racism is rampant in Obama's DOJ.

Is this really the kind of change you Obama supporters wanted?

I'm serious.

Do any of you have the guts to honestly and forthrightly address the issue the above news raises?
So what was the basis of the dropping of charges or dismissal?

ETA: It would appear that the person who was threatening voters King Samir Shabazz was the one who did not have charges dropped against him. What evidence is there that Jerry Jackson was intemidating voters?
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar

Last edited by Dancing David; 7th July 2010 at 04:57 AM.
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 05:00 AM   #40
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
His charge is so serious that this needs to be resolved one way or the other. Not just ignored. Afterall, on election day a video clearly shows that armed men, members of the New Black Panthers, were intimidating voters.
And that is armed amn? Is his name not King Samir Shabazz?
Was he not charged with carrying a weapon near a polling place?

What evidence is there (and there may be) Jerry Jackson was intimidating voters?

Who were charges dropped against?
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:40 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.