[Merged] Are Holder and Obama racists? / DOJ dismisses Black Panther case - Page 5

Puppycow · 8th July 2010, 08:42 PM

While I don't think it's a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and the republicans are trying to make a much bigger issue out of it than it merits, they probably shouldn't have dropped the charges. If there's not enough evidence, let a judge decide that.

But it's not something I'll lose a second of sleep over. It's not like they actually attacked anyone or actually prevented anyone from voting, or even tried to. The guy had a weapon where he shouldn't have had a weapon. It's like speeding or running a red light, which I don't condone, but it's not the worst crime in the world. When the police told him to leave, he left.

quixotecoyote · 8th July 2010, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

While I don't think it's a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and the republicans are trying to make a much bigger issue out of it than it merits, they probably shouldn't have dropped the charges. If there's not enough evidence, let a judge decide that.

But it's not something I'll lose a second of sleep over. It's not like they actually attacked anyone or actually prevented anyone from voting, or even tried to. The guy had a weapon where he shouldn't have had a weapon. It's like speeding or running a red light, which I don't condone, but it's not the worst crime in the world. When the police told him to leave, he left.

I wouldn't minimize it like that, but then I think posing aggressively in public with a weapon is kind of a big deal. It probably doesn't rise to the level of voter intimidation, given that from what I can tell its not a commonly available charge, but I don't think it's comparable to a traffic violation.

BeAChooser · 8th July 2010, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by joobz

Why is equivalent treatment under the law considered "payback".

Then David should be more concerned about the "low standards" of the law than the "low standards" of the Politics forum.

ProBonoShill · 8th July 2010, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Wow, that is pretty weak even by the low standards of the Politics forum.

Hey what can I say, weak posts get weak retorts.

Travis · 9th July 2010, 12:56 AM

Prosecutors make decisions on whether to bring charges based on evidence all the time. It's kinda their job. They don't just bring everything in front of a judge and ask "is this enough now?"

Upchurch · 9th July 2010, 03:38 AM

Oh, a sane discussion. Thank you.

Originally Posted by Travis

Prosecutors make decisions on whether to bring charges based on evidence all the time.

...based on evidence, time, and money.

I don't know which factors were at play here, but there is nothing inherently nefarious about not prosecuting a particular case.

Besides, it has to be hard to prove voter intimidation when the video evidence shows people freely walking in and out of the polling place.

joobz · 9th July 2010, 04:00 AM

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

Then David should be more concerned about the "low standards" of the law than the "low standards" of the Politics forum.

This is in no way a logical response to my statement.

Why is equivalent treatment under the law considered "payback"?
DO you believe Bush's DoJ were being racist by not seeking criminal action?

Dancing David · 9th July 2010, 04:02 AM

Um charges were not dismissed against Samir Shabazz, the case was not outright dismissed. And the other thread has much relevant discussion in and amongst the usual Politics forum nonsense.

Part of the issue is the actual statute has no interpretive values of what consititutes intimidation and historically a high bar has been set.

ETA
From
http://www.usccr.gov/NBPH/05-14-2010...ng.pdf#page=17

Quote:

At the outset, let me emphasize with respect to Section 11(b) decisions that these are hard cases. Very few such cases have been brought. In fact, we can find records of only three cases filed by the government under Section 11(b) since its inception.

joobz · 9th July 2010, 04:14 AM

Originally Posted by applecorped

Does it merit further investigation?

I still don't know if they should have dropped charges. The claim is that past precedent makes the cases hard to prosecute. However, I do not know how true that is.

In either Case, The King guy is a little...off kilter.

Quote:

Malik Zulu Shabazz: Beck has had me on before, I’ve been on Sean Hannity about 20 times, he’s under orders not to have me on, Bill O’Reilly’s under orders not to have me on. This is all a conspiracy. I would say a Zionist conspiracy, but you would say “He’s too conspiratorial.”

But it’s some kind of conspiracy going on, to keep the truth out, and to keep us off the airwaves, to keep talking about us, but not talk to us. So we’ll see Glenn Beck live in person. I don’t think his rally should be allowed to happen

Upchurch · 9th July 2010, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by joobz

This is in no way a logical response to my statement.

Welcome to futility.

WildCat · 9th July 2010, 05:20 AM

Originally Posted by joobz

In either Case, The King guy is a little...off kilter.

Man, those Zionists are busy!

leftysergeant · 9th July 2010, 05:51 AM

Of those witnesses identified whom I have been able to research at all, none of them strike me as entirely credible. As soon as i hear one of them slip in something to the effect of "ACORN! Squawk!" I am out of there and not looking back.

It is generally also futile to prosecute a schizo, and there are signs that Shabazz may be kind of unravelling at the edges.

He's known by how many self-selected names?

leftysergeant · 9th July 2010, 06:28 AM

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

What can be the problem with the evidence in this case? There is a sworn affidavit by a highly regarded democrat who observed what happened, is knowledgeable about what constitutes voter intimidation, and who says this was a very serious case of intimidation.

There is also a link in another thread to a video of him babbling about ACORN as though they were evil incarnate. Whether or not he was at one time a "highly respected Democrat," he has clearly gone over to the dark side now, or may be losing his marbles. That is the defect in the evidence.

Quote:

And there is a video to prove that the men were there, were brandishing a night stick, were dressed in paramiltitary garb and were standing right in from of the polling place doors.

Get your facts straight. ONE of them was and he is a known nut job.

Quote:

Now why would they not contest the charges unless they felt they had another way of getting off? Which suggests we probe whether these defendants or anyone representing them had behind the scenes contacts with any members of the Obama administration.

Totally speculative and inadmissible.

Quote:

How can you settle the debate on whether DOJ officials made a racist decision per Adam's claims, if you aren't willing to even investigate the matter or take sworn statements from the parties involved? What I see going on is a whitewash by the Obama administration and his supporters at JREF. So much for hope and change.

Given the fact that it is nearly impossible to get any action on more blatant attempts at voter intimidation and disenfranchisement, this case is only worth the expense from the point of view of the lunatic right.

Lurker · 9th July 2010, 07:08 AM

I would prefer the administration be a bit tougher on these violations. That they have not been so in the past nor in the present won't really keep me up at night. Very isolated incidents, while regrettable, have no impact. If it became more systematic or widespread then I would have a bit more trouble sleeping and would start agitating for action.

leftysergeant · 9th July 2010, 07:14 AM

Before a penny is thrownm down the rat hole trying to get a felony conviction agaisnt an obviously mentally ill person, there are voting irregularities of far greater consequence with which the government should deal.

Like how does a space case who nobody heard of beat a sitting government official in votes counted on an unreadable electronic voting system but get his butt handed to him on paper ballots? That warrants an investigation.

Shabazz is just a shiney thing that the rightwhackers are waving right now to deflect attention from real oddities like South Carolina.

joobz · 9th July 2010, 07:30 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Man, those Zionists are busy!

On that, it seems, MagZ and Shabazz agree.

Unabogie · 9th July 2010, 08:11 AM

One part of the job of a prosecutor is to only bring charges where he reasonably expects conviction. It is NOT to just bring charges everywhere and "let the courts sort it out". If they did that, our courts would teem with frivolous charges brought by prosecutors looking to cover their asses. After all, no one can get in trouble for just filing charges and letting the judge hear it out. That's awful public policy!

If the Bush DOJ declined to bring these charges, you can reasonably assume a conviction would have been unlikely. When you look at the precedent of the statute, this is borne out. So yes, charges should not have been filed in this case under this statute.

BeAChooser · 9th July 2010, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Welcome to futility.

Says the poster who for all intents and purposes called Bartle Bull a liar.

And I asked you whether you'd find three Ku Klux Klan members in their uniforms, with nightsticks (or even without), standing in front of a polling place, menacing.

But you didn't respond.

Was that a futile query on my part, Upchurch?

Arrow · 9th July 2010, 04:49 PM

Yeah, I wish the DOJ had done more to go after these Black Panther members. They don't seem much different than the Klan in reverse.

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/07/09...-black-racism/

Cleon · 9th July 2010, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by NoScotsman

Watching that video I had two thoughts: 1. The Black Panthers still exist???

They don't. The "New Black Panther Party" started as a split from the Nation of Islam by some of its crazier (!) members. They've been consistently denounced by the living ex-Panthers, and IIRC Bobby Seale even tried suing them a few years ago for their use of the name.

leftysergeant · 9th July 2010, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

Says the poster who for all intents and purposes called Bartle Bull a liar.

Bull shot himself in the foot when he was taped whining about ACORN. He's gone over to the dark side.

Quote:

And I asked you whether you'd find three Ku Klux Klan members in their uniforms, with nightsticks (or even without), standing in front of a polling place, menacing.

I assume, then, that you would be cool with rounding up and disarming all the unofficial militias.

BeAChooser · 9th July 2010, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

There is also a link in another thread to a video of him babbling about ACORN as though they were evil incarnate.

Yes, lefty, we know you think ACORN is a fine, respectable organization that can do no wrong.

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Get your facts straight. ONE of them was and he is a known nut job.

My facts were right. I said, A nightstick.

But you are right in calling the man a nut. But if he's known to be one, why is he still a member in good standing of the New Black Party? And just to show how big a menace this man and this organization potentially are to society, check out what Shabazz, the new head of the NBP, said recently about King Samir and what he says the NBP stands for:

http://videos.mediaite.com/video/New...-Chairman-Mali

King Samir talked of killing crackers and "white babies". And Shabazz seemed very hesitant to go on record whether he condoned killing "white babies" and most certainly implied that his organization might approve of killing cops. Why is the Obama administration going out of it's way to protect these two and the NBP?

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Quote:
Now why would they not contest the charges unless they felt they had another way of getting off? Which suggests we probe whether these defendants or anyone representing them had behind the scenes contacts with any members of the Obama administration.

Totally speculative and inadmissible.

Says lefty the lawyer.

BeAChooser · 9th July 2010, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Before a penny is thrownm down the rat hole trying to get a felony conviction agaisnt an obviously mentally ill person

This mentally ill person was standing in front of a polling place in paramilitary garb threatening people and carrying a nightstick.

Dancing David · 9th July 2010, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Before a penny is thrownm down the rat hole trying to get a felony conviction agaisnt an obviously mentally ill person ...

Mentally ill people are charged , tried and sentenced to felonies all the time, happened to clients of mine even.

The complaint was filed, redress was given.

leftysergeant · 9th July 2010, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

This mentally ill person was standing in front of a polling place in paramilitary garb threatening people and carrying a nightstick.

It's not like he was part of some vast Democratic Party conspiracy to overthrow the Constitution.

It was a case of a nutjob acting out.

Upchurch · 9th July 2010, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

This mentally ill person was standing in front of a polling place in paramilitary garb threatening people and carrying a nightstick.

In fact, he was so threatening, that people are entering and leaving the polling place freely and standing around talking on the phone behind him. And did you see the frightening way they left when the cops asked them to?

joobz · 9th July 2010, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

But you didn't respond.

No you didn't respond.

Originally Posted by joobz

This is in no way a logical response to my statement.

Why is equivalent treatment under the law considered "payback"?

Why this case?
Why now?

Actually, don't bother answering. We already know.

Here's your response of why you didn't complain when minutemen were not charged.

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

I'm not here to advocate for your politics, joobz.

partisan politics gussied up as a demand for justice.

Travis · 10th July 2010, 01:55 AM

I'm trying to imagine a world where the prosecutors can't drop charges and every complaint and accusation has to result in a trial.......it would not be pretty.

Cicero · 10th July 2010, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by Unabogie

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

"Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us...er=rss&emc=rss

Cicero · 10th July 2010, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

In fact, he was so threatening, that people are entering and leaving the polling place freely and standing around talking on the phone behind him. And did you see the frightening way they left when the cops asked them to?

I wonder why the guy tried to conceal the nightstick when the cops arrived on the scene? After all, he said he was "security" for the polling station. Did he think he was doing something illegal?

I wonder how the cops got the idea that these two guys were trying to "stop people from voting?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFOKn...eature=related

joobz · 10th July 2010, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Cicero

"Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us...er=rss&emc=rss

that link doesn't contradict Unabogie's statement.

joobz · 10th July 2010, 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by Cicero

I wonder why the guy tried to conceal the nightstick when the cops arrived on the scene? After all, he said he was "security" for the polling station. Did he think he was doing something illegal?

Good point. The guy's a jerk and likely knew he went over the line. It's probably another reason why the indictment on him wasn't dropped.

Of course, he willingly left at the officer's request so....

Originally Posted by Cicero

I wonder how the cops got the idea that these two guys were trying to "stop people from voting?"

People called in. If I call the police to say that my neighbor's are peeing on my lawn, they will show up, regardless if my complaint is true or not.
The Police's job is to maintain peace. The actual conviction and deciding if wrong doing was going on is up to the courts.

Unabogie · 10th July 2010, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by joobz

that link doesn't contradict Unabogie's statement.

Joobz, education is great and valuable except when it's the education of a liberal elitist. Then it's nothing but an ivory tower. Or worse. Like Barack Obama. Who's educated, but none of it means anything because the guy can't even speak without reading off a teleprompter. Or a climate scientist, who only uses his status as a "professor" in order to lie about things for monetary gain and can't even write software.

But when a Teabagger went past high school, it's a sign of great intelligence, notwithstanding his penchant for watching Glen Beck (and taking him seriously) , or his belief that his taxes went up and Barack Obama is a secret Muslim Kenyan Socialist Usurper and over-priced gold is a wise investment.

leftysergeant · 10th July 2010, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by Cicero

"Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us...er=rss&emc=rss

They had the money to go to college. Maybe even to a prestigious college. That doesn't mean they are bright. I can think of at least a few drooling morons who managed to attend Ivy League universities, even get elected to high government office, who never spent a day in the same room with an objective fact.

leftysergeant · 10th July 2010, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by joobz

People called in. If I call the police to say that my neighbor's are peeing on my lawn, they will show up, regardless if my complaint is true or not.
The Police's job is to maintain peace. The actual conviction and deciding if wrong doing was going on is up to the courts.

Does nobody else find it odd that there is video of some rightwhacker standing out in front of the polling place shrieking about being intimidated by the big scary black man, but no video of the black man actually intimidating anyone? This was a Repuiblican activist on camera. The were looking for ways to manufacture outrage all year.

It doesn't smell right.

Cicero · 10th July 2010, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

They had the money to go to college. Maybe even to a prestigious college. That doesn't mean they are bright. I can think of at least a few drooling morons who managed to attend Ivy League universities, even get elected to high government office, who never spent a day in the same room with an objective fact.

Wow! I never thought I'd see you run down POTUS Obama like that. Don't you think you are being overly harsh?

Cicero · 10th July 2010, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by joobz

that link doesn't contradict Unabogie's statement.

No need. Unabogie is self-contradicting.

thaiboxerken · 10th July 2010, 02:39 PM

This is so silly. It reminds of of when Rush Limbaugh tried to blame Obama because some black kids beat up a white kid in a school bus.

Cicero · 10th July 2010, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by joobz

Good point. The guy's a jerk and likely knew he went over the line. It's probably another reason why the indictment on him wasn't dropped.

Of course, he willingly left at the officer's request so....

Well, the cops have side arms; he only had a nightstick. Not to mention both of them knew they were being recorded on video. But why would they resist? They already got the exposure they wanted.

Quote:

People called in. If I call the police to say that my neighbor's are peeing on my lawn, they will show up, regardless if my complaint is true or not.
The Police's job is to maintain peace. The actual conviction and deciding if wrong doing was going on is up to the courts.

Of course they will show up, but they wouldn't go over to your neighbor and say, "You can't pee on his lawn" just because you made a complaint. I imagine they would say your neighbor complained about you peeing on his lawn, unless they actually saw your neighbor, member in hand.

joobz · 10th July 2010, 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by Cicero

Well, the cops have side arms; he only had a nightstick. Not to mention both of them knew they were being recorded on video. But why would they resist? They already got the exposure they wanted.

I agree. Publicity is what they wanted it and conservative news outlets are giving it to them.

Originally Posted by Cicero

Of course they will show up, but they wouldn't go over to your neighbor and say, "You can't pee on his lawn" just because you made a complaint. I imagine they would say your neighbor complained about you peeing on his lawn, unless they actually saw your neighbor, member in hand.

But they will ask my neighbor to leave the property as a measure to keep the peace.

8th July 2010, 08:42 PM	#161
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yokohama, Japan Posts: 27,086	While I don't think it's a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and the republicans are trying to make a much bigger issue out of it than it merits, they probably shouldn't have dropped the charges. If there's not enough evidence, let a judge decide that. But it's not something I'll lose a second of sleep over. It's not like they actually attacked anyone or actually prevented anyone from voting, or even tried to. The guy had a weapon where he shouldn't have had a weapon. It's like speeding or running a red light, which I don't condone, but it's not the worst crime in the world. When the police told him to leave, he left.
	__________________ A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare

8th July 2010, 08:51 PM	#162
quixotecoyote Howling to glory I go Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 10,379	Originally Posted by Puppycow While I don't think it's a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and the republicans are trying to make a much bigger issue out of it than it merits, they probably shouldn't have dropped the charges. If there's not enough evidence, let a judge decide that. But it's not something I'll lose a second of sleep over. It's not like they actually attacked anyone or actually prevented anyone from voting, or even tried to. The guy had a weapon where he shouldn't have had a weapon. It's like speeding or running a red light, which I don't condone, but it's not the worst crime in the world. When the police told him to leave, he left. I wouldn't minimize it like that, but then I think posing aggressively in public with a weapon is kind of a big deal. It probably doesn't rise to the level of voter intimidation, given that from what I can tell its not a commonly available charge, but I don't think it's comparable to a traffic violation.
	__________________ If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.

8th July 2010, 09:47 PM	#163
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716	Originally Posted by joobz Why is equivalent treatment under the law considered "payback". Then David should be more concerned about the "low standards" of the law than the "low standards" of the Politics forum.
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716

9th July 2010, 12:56 AM	#165
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 24,124	Prosecutors make decisions on whether to bring charges based on evidence all the time. It's kinda their job. They don't just bring everything in front of a judge and ask "is this enough now?"
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale Humor blog

9th July 2010, 04:00 AM	#167
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	Originally Posted by BeAChooser Then David should be more concerned about the "low standards" of the law than the "low standards" of the Politics forum. This is in no way a logical response to my statement. Why is equivalent treatment under the law considered "payback"? DO you believe Bush's DoJ were being racist by not seeking criminal action?
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

8th July 2010, 10:03 PM	#164
ProBonoShill Master Poster Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 2,323	Originally Posted by Dancing David Wow, that is pretty weak even by the low standards of the Politics forum. Hey what can I say, weak posts get weak retorts.

9th July 2010, 03:38 AM	#166
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,923	Oh, a sane discussion. Thank you. Originally Posted by Travis Prosecutors make decisions on whether to bring charges based on evidence all the time. ...based on evidence, time, and money. I don't know which factors were at play here, but there is nothing inherently nefarious about not prosecuting a particular case. Besides, it has to be hard to prove voter intimidation when the video evidence shows people freely walking in and out of the polling place.

9th July 2010, 04:02 AM	#168
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: central Illinois Posts: 39,700	Um charges were not dismissed against Samir Shabazz, the case was not outright dismissed. And the other thread has much relevant discussion in and amongst the usual Politics forum nonsense. Part of the issue is the actual statute has no interpretive values of what consititutes intimidation and historically a high bar has been set. ETA From http://www.usccr.gov/NBPH/05-14-2010...ng.pdf#page=17 Quote: At the outset, let me emphasize with respect to Section 11(b) decisions that these are hard cases. Very few such cases have been brought. In fact, we can find records of only three cases filed by the government under Section 11(b) since its inception.
	__________________ 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; 9th July 2010 at 04:08 AM.

9th July 2010, 04:14 AM	#169
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	Originally Posted by applecorped Does it merit further investigation? I still don't know if they should have dropped charges. The claim is that past precedent makes the cases hard to prosecute. However, I do not know how true that is. In either Case, The King guy is a little...off kilter. Quote: Malik Zulu Shabazz: Beck has had me on before, I’ve been on Sean Hannity about 20 times, he’s under orders not to have me on, Bill O’Reilly’s under orders not to have me on. This is all a conspiracy. I would say a Zionist conspiracy, but you would say “He’s too conspiratorial.” But it’s some kind of conspiracy going on, to keep the truth out, and to keep us off the airwaves, to keep talking about us, but not talk to us. So we’ll see Glenn Beck live in person. I don’t think his rally should be allowed to happen
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

9th July 2010, 05:05 AM	#170
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,923	Originally Posted by joobz This is in no way a logical response to my statement. Welcome to futility.

9th July 2010, 05:20 AM	#171
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 59,856	Originally Posted by joobz In either Case, The King guy is a little...off kilter. Man, those Zionists are busy!
	__________________ Vive la liberté!

9th July 2010, 05:51 AM	#172
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Of those witnesses identified whom I have been able to research at all, none of them strike me as entirely credible. As soon as i hear one of them slip in something to the effect of "ACORN! Squawk!" I am out of there and not looking back. It is generally also futile to prosecute a schizo, and there are signs that Shabazz may be kind of unravelling at the edges. He's known by how many self-selected names?

9th July 2010, 06:28 AM	#173
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Originally Posted by BeAChooser What can be the problem with the evidence in this case? There is a sworn affidavit by a highly regarded democrat who observed what happened, is knowledgeable about what constitutes voter intimidation, and who says this was a very serious case of intimidation. There is also a link in another thread to a video of him babbling about ACORN as though they were evil incarnate. Whether or not he was at one time a "highly respected Democrat," he has clearly gone over to the dark side now, or may be losing his marbles. That is the defect in the evidence. Quote: And there is a video to prove that the men were there, were brandishing a night stick, were dressed in paramiltitary garb and were standing right in from of the polling place doors. Get your facts straight. ONE of them was and he is a known nut job. Quote: Now why would they not contest the charges unless they felt they had another way of getting off? Which suggests we probe whether these defendants or anyone representing them had behind the scenes contacts with any members of the Obama administration. Totally speculative and inadmissible. Quote: How can you settle the debate on whether DOJ officials made a racist decision per Adam's claims, if you aren't willing to even investigate the matter or take sworn statements from the parties involved? What I see going on is a whitewash by the Obama administration and his supporters at JREF. So much for hope and change. Given the fact that it is nearly impossible to get any action on more blatant attempts at voter intimidation and disenfranchisement, this case is only worth the expense from the point of view of the lunatic right.

9th July 2010, 07:08 AM	#174
Lurker Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 4,189	I would prefer the administration be a bit tougher on these violations. That they have not been so in the past nor in the present won't really keep me up at night. Very isolated incidents, while regrettable, have no impact. If it became more systematic or widespread then I would have a bit more trouble sleeping and would start agitating for action.
Lurker Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 4,189

9th July 2010, 07:14 AM	#175
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Before a penny is thrownm down the rat hole trying to get a felony conviction agaisnt an obviously mentally ill person, there are voting irregularities of far greater consequence with which the government should deal. Like how does a space case who nobody heard of beat a sitting government official in votes counted on an unreadable electronic voting system but get his butt handed to him on paper ballots? That warrants an investigation. Shabazz is just a shiney thing that the rightwhackers are waving right now to deflect attention from real oddities like South Carolina.

9th July 2010, 07:30 AM	#176
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	Originally Posted by WildCat Man, those Zionists are busy! On that, it seems, MagZ and Shabazz agree.
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

9th July 2010, 08:11 AM	#177
Unabogie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9,692	One part of the job of a prosecutor is to only bring charges where he reasonably expects conviction. It is NOT to just bring charges everywhere and "let the courts sort it out". If they did that, our courts would teem with frivolous charges brought by prosecutors looking to cover their asses. After all, no one can get in trouble for just filing charges and letting the judge hear it out. That's awful public policy! If the Bush DOJ declined to bring these charges, you can reasonably assume a conviction would have been unlikely. When you look at the precedent of the statute, this is borne out. So yes, charges should not have been filed in this case under this statute.

9th July 2010, 04:48 PM	#178
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716	Originally Posted by Upchurch Welcome to futility. Says the poster who for all intents and purposes called Bartle Bull a liar. And I asked you whether you'd find three Ku Klux Klan members in their uniforms, with nightsticks (or even without), standing in front of a polling place, menacing. But you didn't respond. Was that a futile query on my part, Upchurch?
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716

9th July 2010, 04:49 PM	#179
Arrow Thinker Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 147	Yeah, I wish the DOJ had done more to go after these Black Panther members. They don't seem much different than the Klan in reverse. http://michellemalkin.com/2010/07/09...-black-racism/
Arrow Thinker Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 147

9th July 2010, 05:01 PM	#180
Cleon King of the Pod People Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 25,586	Originally Posted by NoScotsman Watching that video I had two thoughts: 1. The Black Panthers still exist??? They don't. The "New Black Panther Party" started as a split from the Nation of Islam by some of its crazier (!) members. They've been consistently denounced by the living ex-Panthers, and IIRC Bobby Seale even tried suing them a few years ago for their use of the name.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

9th July 2010, 05:28 PM	#181
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Originally Posted by BeAChooser Says the poster who for all intents and purposes called Bartle Bull a liar. Bull shot himself in the foot when he was taped whining about ACORN. He's gone over to the dark side. Quote: And I asked you whether you'd find three Ku Klux Klan members in their uniforms, with nightsticks (or even without), standing in front of a polling place, menacing. I assume, then, that you would be cool with rounding up and disarming all the unofficial militias.

9th July 2010, 05:44 PM	#182
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716	Originally Posted by leftysergeant There is also a link in another thread to a video of him babbling about ACORN as though they were evil incarnate. Yes, lefty, we know you think ACORN is a fine, respectable organization that can do no wrong. Originally Posted by leftysergeant Get your facts straight. ONE of them was and he is a known nut job. My facts were right. I said, A nightstick. But you are right in calling the man a nut. But if he's known to be one, why is he still a member in good standing of the New Black Party? And just to show how big a menace this man and this organization potentially are to society, check out what Shabazz, the new head of the NBP, said recently about King Samir and what he says the NBP stands for: http://videos.mediaite.com/video/New...-Chairman-Mali King Samir talked of killing crackers and "white babies". And Shabazz seemed very hesitant to go on record whether he condoned killing "white babies" and most certainly implied that his organization might approve of killing cops. Why is the Obama administration going out of it's way to protect these two and the NBP? Originally Posted by leftysergeant Quote: Now why would they not contest the charges unless they felt they had another way of getting off? Which suggests we probe whether these defendants or anyone representing them had behind the scenes contacts with any members of the Obama administration. Totally speculative and inadmissible. Says lefty the lawyer.
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716

9th July 2010, 05:47 PM	#183
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Before a penny is thrownm down the rat hole trying to get a felony conviction agaisnt an obviously mentally ill person This mentally ill person was standing in front of a polling place in paramilitary garb threatening people and carrying a nightstick.
BeAChooser Banned Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,716

9th July 2010, 06:10 PM	#184
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: central Illinois Posts: 39,700	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Before a penny is thrownm down the rat hole trying to get a felony conviction agaisnt an obviously mentally ill person ... Mentally ill people are charged , tried and sentenced to felonies all the time, happened to clients of mine even. The complaint was filed, redress was given.
	__________________ 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

9th July 2010, 06:31 PM	#185
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Originally Posted by BeAChooser This mentally ill person was standing in front of a polling place in paramilitary garb threatening people and carrying a nightstick. It's not like he was part of some vast Democratic Party conspiracy to overthrow the Constitution. It was a case of a nutjob acting out.

9th July 2010, 08:20 PM	#186
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,923	Originally Posted by BeAChooser This mentally ill person was standing in front of a polling place in paramilitary garb threatening people and carrying a nightstick. In fact, he was so threatening, that people are entering and leaving the polling place freely and standing around talking on the phone behind him. And did you see the frightening way they left when the cops asked them to?

9th July 2010, 09:29 PM	#187
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	Originally Posted by BeAChooser But you didn't respond. No you didn't respond. Originally Posted by joobz This is in no way a logical response to my statement. Why is equivalent treatment under the law considered "payback"? Why this case? Why now? Actually, don't bother answering. We already know. Here's your response of why you didn't complain when minutemen were not charged. Originally Posted by BeAChooser I'm not here to advocate for your politics, joobz. partisan politics gussied up as a demand for justice.
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

10th July 2010, 01:55 AM	#188
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 24,124	I'm trying to imagine a world where the prosecutors can't drop charges and every complaint and accusation has to result in a trial.......it would not be pretty.
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale Humor blog

10th July 2010, 11:29 AM	#189
Cicero Banned Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 7,861	Originally Posted by Unabogie But hey, Teabaggers aren't known for their intelligence or willingness to think critically, hence they're birthers, goldbugs, etc. "Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated" http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us...er=rss&emc=rss
Cicero Banned Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 7,861

10th July 2010, 12:00 PM	#190
Cicero Banned Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 7,861	Originally Posted by Upchurch In fact, he was so threatening, that people are entering and leaving the polling place freely and standing around talking on the phone behind him. And did you see the frightening way they left when the cops asked them to? I wonder why the guy tried to conceal the nightstick when the cops arrived on the scene? After all, he said he was "security" for the polling station. Did he think he was doing something illegal? I wonder how the cops got the idea that these two guys were trying to "stop people from voting?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFOKn...eature=related
Cicero Banned Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 7,861

10th July 2010, 12:46 PM	#191
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	Originally Posted by Cicero "Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated" http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us...er=rss&emc=rss that link doesn't contradict Unabogie's statement.
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

10th July 2010, 12:51 PM	#192
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	Originally Posted by Cicero I wonder why the guy tried to conceal the nightstick when the cops arrived on the scene? After all, he said he was "security" for the polling station. Did he think he was doing something illegal? Good point. The guy's a jerk and likely knew he went over the line. It's probably another reason why the indictment on him wasn't dropped. Of course, he willingly left at the officer's request so.... Originally Posted by Cicero I wonder how the cops got the idea that these two guys were trying to "stop people from voting?" People called in. If I call the police to say that my neighbor's are peeing on my lawn, they will show up, regardless if my complaint is true or not. The Police's job is to maintain peace. The actual conviction and deciding if wrong doing was going on is up to the courts.
joobz Tergiversator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 17,998	__________________ What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC. "Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser

10th July 2010, 12:54 PM	#193
Unabogie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 9,692	Originally Posted by joobz that link doesn't contradict Unabogie's statement. Joobz, education is great and valuable except when it's the education of a liberal elitist. Then it's nothing but an ivory tower. Or worse. Like Barack Obama. Who's educated, but none of it means anything because the guy can't even speak without reading off a teleprompter. Or a climate scientist, who only uses his status as a "professor" in order to lie about things for monetary gain and can't even write software. But when a Teabagger went past high school, it's a sign of great intelligence, notwithstanding his penchant for watching Glen Beck (and taking him seriously) , or his belief that his taxes went up and Barack Obama is a secret Muslim Kenyan Socialist Usurper and over-priced gold is a wise investment.

10th July 2010, 12:59 PM	#194
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Originally Posted by Cicero "Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated" http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us...er=rss&emc=rss They had the money to go to college. Maybe even to a prestigious college. That doesn't mean they are bright. I can think of at least a few drooling morons who managed to attend Ivy League universities, even get elected to high government office, who never spent a day in the same room with an objective fact.

10th July 2010, 01:05 PM	#195
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Originally Posted by joobz People called in. If I call the police to say that my neighbor's are peeing on my lawn, they will show up, regardless if my complaint is true or not. The Police's job is to maintain peace. The actual conviction and deciding if wrong doing was going on is up to the courts. Does nobody else find it odd that there is video of some rightwhacker standing out in front of the polling place shrieking about being intimidated by the big scary black man, but no video of the black man actually intimidating anyone? This was a Repuiblican activist on camera. The were looking for ways to manufacture outrage all year. It doesn't smell right.