The following article is a trenchant and eye-opening expose of Attorney Eric Holder and the Dept. of Justice (which should be more aptly renamed the Dept. of Reverse Discrimination and Liberal Policy Enforcement). What was supposed to be an agency charged with protecting and defending the equal rights for all Americans has become a partisan, discriminatory, corrupt, arrogant and incompetent one that will commit unlawful, anti-American acts in order to advance the Progressive agenda under Obama.
As the author Hillyer noted:
“Under attorney general Eric Holder, the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) is dangerously politicized, radically leftist, racialist, lawless, and at times corrupt. The good news is that it's also often incompetent. This means the Holderites can bungle their leftist lawlessness so badly that even the most reticent of judges are obliged to smack them down.”
Regarding specific issues and examples, it was revealed that:
“… the department failed for more than a year to update its website to reflect the new law protecting military voters -- but it spent what must have been an immense amount of taxpayer-supported staff time building a 2,314-word web page telling felons how to recover their voting privileges. Yet the department enjoys no statutory authority to deal with felon voting at all. Who needs the law when you can bolster the numbers of a key Democratic constituency?”
Within the DOJ there was a culture of blatant and illegal reverse discrimination with a pro-black philosophy as identified:
There “… is a serious misuse of power under the false color of law. The New Black Panther case is almost a perfect microcosm of this Holderite habit -- in multiple ways. It featured political interference in a case already won. It featured officials dropping a case without even reading the briefs. The two lawyers acting in political-appointee capacity who were most directly involved in dropping the case have both been sanctioned by courts for ethical breaches. Both have been believably accused, under sworn testimony by a highly respected witness, of consciously refusing to force civil rights laws to benefit white people.”
We have been vehemently calling for the removal of Attorney General Holder from his position – either by resignation or Congressional intervention. His actions on numerous occasions have been illegal and racist and at times even unconstitutional. Added to this are his overall incompetence, judicial ineptness and ignorance of the Constitution that are unparalleled in our Country’s history.
With the Democrat’s’ complete domination of this country and the legislative process by virtue of their control of the House, Senate and White House, it has been impossible to launch investigations regarding political improprieties – and that has been dangerous at best. This unopposed power has led to their contemptuousness of the average American and ostensibly corrupt, illegal and actions which includes the foisting wildly unpopular legislation on the public by whatever means possible.
Despite their promises of transparency and integrity, their reign has been anything but and they flouted it to their constituents. Now, hopefully, they may very well pay for their despicable transgressions.
They will have to answer to Congressman Darrell Issa, the chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee – and he is very serious about this responsibility.
We hope those who have violated public trust and committed corrupt or illegal acts will be punished to the maximal extent possible.
Are you listening Charlie Rangel? Maxine Waters? Eric Holder? Bill Clinton? Etc.
The Question Everyone is Asking: Who gets the first subpoena?
Ed Lasky November 03, 2010
There are many reasons to celebrate the Republican takeover of the People's House this morning. One of them will be the ability of Republicans to pull away the curtain and see what the Obama team has really been up to as it bullied Americans over the last two years.
Congressman Darrell Issa will be very busy as head of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, holding hearings and calling in federal officials to testify about a wide variety of actions: the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case being among them. The BP Spill, as the Daily Beast points out, may also be target for Issa:
Issa, for his part, has put out a detailed list of the top priorities he believes Democrats have stifled. At the top is the federal response to the Deepwater Horizon drilling disaster and the subsequent oil spill. At the time, Issa accused the White House of putting image over policy in its response, hammering the administration for dispatching a political aide to the scene. A larger investigation would reopen a wound for the White House, which fought off constant criticism during the episode.
The work of Inspectors General -- and how Barack Obama and his team-axed Gerald Walpin for what appears to be partisan reasons to protect an ally of the President -- may also be in Issa's scope.
These investigations can be serially rolled out right up to the campaign season of 2012.
The Republicans won't stop there: Americans want answers to questions about waste and fraud in the stimulus program, recidivism rates among released Gitmo terror suspects, political favors and taxpayers dollars flowing to friends and family of Democratic leaders. The list goes on and on. While Issa denies plans to hold Issa Inquisitions, we can take that with a grain of salt.
From Al Kamen's column in the Washington Post:
The possibilities are numerous. First, of course, might be Attorney General Eric Holder, for wanting to try alleged Sept. 11 terrorists in Manhattan, or for dropping charges against the New Black Panther Party of intimidating white poll-watchers and hypothetical white voters in an all-black Philadelphia precinct.
That could play to the tea party base, but maybe better to go deep on Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson, for being mean to polluters and enacting cap-and-trade regulations before Congress actually passes a bill. That would please mining, oil and other heavy polluters.
Then there's former president Bill Clinton -- no executive privilege anymore -- and the White House, for a job offer to Rep. Joe Sestak (D) to get him out of the Pennsylvania primary. That might be immensely satisfying to Issa personally, since he's really steamed about it. (On the other hand, Clinton's polls are up these days, and pursuing this could seem too political and unstatesmanlike.)
Treasury Secretary Tim "Bailout" Geithner is another fine target, if you're looking to rev up anger over the management -- not the actual Bush-signed legislation -- of the TARP billions. Or the Energy or Transportation Departments, for their management of the stimulus money. Good ties to jobs and deficit-cutting in those areas.
For excellent waste, fraud and abuse, Issa might want to subpoena Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and CIA chief Leon Panetta about those pallets of cash shipped to Afghanistan to show Washington's deep respect for certain warlords -- and the presidential palace, where about half the money went.
Then there are issues concerning czars -- given power in a way that circumvented the Senate rules regarding appointments. Subpoenas can also tie up the Consumer Czarina Elizabeth Warren who makes Ralph Nader look like a Robber Baron of old. Subpoenas can also play a role in examining the nuts and bolts of ObamaCare and the process by which rules and regulations will be formulated and waivers granted. Issa's chief of staff has been called the Democrats Worst Nightmare.
Sounds like the Taxpayers' Best Dream to me. Let the subpoenas fly.
A continued flow of evidence regarding the Dept. of Justice and the New Black Panther Party case reveals egregious violations of the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act as a consequence of unequal treatment and rights of Americans based on ethnicity. That is, the top on down mandate was to throw out any discrimination cases brought against minority defendants, especially blacks yet vigorously investigate the converse.
Many heads in the department should roll including Attorney Eric Holder and possibly even Obama. Their racist, depraved actions warrant their expeditious firings.
Travesty Of The Justice Department
Investor’s Business Daily 09/27/2010
Justice: Those who thought hope and change meant equal enforcement of the law were wrong. A top DOJ official testifies about a deliberate policy of not prosecuting minorities or protecting the rights of anybody else.
So much for post-racial justice. First, documents were unearthed showing the Department of Justice lied when it insisted that dropping the New Black Panther Party voter-intimidation case was a decision made by career attorneys, not by political appointees trying to avoid offending a key administration constituency.
Now we have the explosive testimony last Friday of Christopher Coates, former voting chief of the Civil Rights Division, before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission.
Coates said the Panther decision was "the result of their deep-seated opposition to the equal enforcement of the Voting Rights Act against racial minorities and for the protection of white voters who have been discriminated against."
Coates' testimony supported earlier accusations made by J. Christian Adams, formerly one of those career lawyers in the Voting Section.
Adams had told the commission that DOJ officials "over and over and over" showed "hostility" to prosecution of voter-intimidation cases involving "black defendants and white victims."
Adams testified that Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, a political appointee, himself overruled a unanimous recommendation for continued prosecution by Adams and his associates of voter intimidation of white voters by members of The New Black Panthers at a Philadelphia polling place in 2008.
Adams had also testified that Julie Fernandes, a deputy assistant general in the Civil Rights Division in charge of voting matters, told Voting Section leadership that the Obama administration would not file election-related cases against minority defendants — no matter what the alleged violation of the law.
Coates verified Adams' testimony about Fernandes, and also said he had been "specifically instructed" by Loretta King, acting assistant attorney general for civil rights, "not to ask any other applicants whether they would be willing to, in effect, race-neutrally enforce the VRA (Voting Rights Act)."
Coates said he had started asking applicants about race-neutrality in voting cases after he noticed internal harassment directed at lawyers and paralegals who in 2005 had helped prosecute the voter intimidation case of Ike Brown, a twice-convicted felon and political activist who ran the Democratic Party in Noxubee County, Mississippi. Like the Panthers, Brown is black.
When the head of the Civil Rights Division, Thomas Perez, testified before both Congress and the commission that the Panther case was dropped because it was considered legally and factually defective, and that the decision was made by career attorneys, not political appointees, he lied.
In fact, the case is perhaps the most provable case of voter intimidation ever.
Black Panther members were videotaped standing outside a Philadelphia polling place brandishing clubs and, according to witness testimony, uttering racial slurs.
If they were members of the KKK or the Tea Party, would the case have been dropped? We think not.
Dropping the new Black Panther Party case, Coates said in his testimony, "was intended to send a direct message to people inside and outside the civil rights division. That message is that the filing of voting cases like the Ike Brown and the NBPP cases would not continue in the Obama administration."
If Fernandes and King indeed have these views, and if political appointees such as Thomas Perrelli and Thomas Perez made the decision to dismiss the Black Panther case for any reason other than the merits of the case, and then lied about it, they should all be fired.
And so should Attorney General Eric Holder.
Holder's tenure as head of the Justice Department has been a disaster. From the closing of Gitmo to civilian trials of Khalid Sheik Muhammed to instantly Mirandizing the Christmas bomber, Holder and his department have displayed an indifference, even hostility, to equal justice and protecting the rights and lives of the American people. All of them.
Updates on this situation reveal that this decision was also a political one: the Obama Administration didn’t want to rattle its staunchest supporter: the “black community”. This finding alone is an outrage and an action that is both despicably depraved and constitutionally illegal (Fourteenth Amendment).
But then again, Obama is concerned with neither … but we MUST be.
Voting in November will be one of OUR constructive responses. We must also exert pressure to have the abominably incompetent, racist and corrupt Attorney General Eric Holder FIRED.
Black Panthergate
Investor’s Business Daily 09/21/2010
Justice: Despite administration denials under oath, documents obtained by a watchdog group indicate that the decision not to pursue a clear-cut case of voter intimidation was indeed a political decision.
It was perhaps the most clear-cut case of voter intimidation ever. On Election Day 2008, New Black Panther Party members King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were videotaped intimidating voters as they stood, dressed in military garb, outside a Philadelphia polling place.
Their conduct was so egregious that the Justice Department of President Bush charged the three thugs with violations of the 1965 Voting Rights Act through intimidation, threats and coercion. When none of the defendants filed a response or showed up at a subsequent hearing, you'd have thought the Justice Department would have won its suit by default.
But a new administration brought a new, and somewhat jaundiced, perspective. Instead, the Justice Department of President Obama essentially dropped the case in May 2009, letting two of the three walk and issuing a weak injunction against King Shabazz. He was forbidden from showing up at another Philadelphia polling place with another nightstick and intimidating other voters for the next three years, an action that was already illegal. He is presumably free to do the same thing in, say, New Jersey in 2012.
The U.S. Civil Rights Commission wanted to know why the case wasn't pursued and if political considerations were involved. On May 14, Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for civil rights, testified that there was no "political leadership involved in the decision not to pursue this particular case any further than it was" and it was only "a case of career people disagreeing with career people."
The DOJ stonewalled, claiming that all documents involved in the case were "privileged information," that there was nothing to see and we should all move along. The watchdog group Judicial Watch pursued the case, and a court ordered the DOJ to provide it with withheld documents and an explanation of each privilege asserted.
The information that was unearthed reveals that several political appointees were involved in the decision not to pursue the New Black Panther Party. Of particular note was a list of 58 e-mails to or from Deputy Associate Attorney General Sam Hirsch, formerly election attorney for the National Democratic Party.
Christian Adams, the DOJ attorney who resigned to protest the New Black Panther Party decision, describes Hirsch as "a former Democratic Party operative" who, among other activities, "led efforts to impose racial divisions on Hawaii by creating native classifications and powers." Hirsch is a fierce partisan with experience in racial politics.
In testimony before the Civil Rights Commission that he says his bosses tried to block, Adams said Attorney General Eric Holder's department refused to prosecute what he has called "the clearest case of voter intimidation that I've seen since practicing law."
A dozen or so e-mails went up the chain of political command to Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli. Deputy Attorney General David Ogden was also in on the political deliberations, contributing, according to the e-mails, his "current thoughts" on the matter.
Adams told the commission that DOJ officials "over and over and over" showed "hostility" to prosecution of voter-intimidation cases involving "black defendants and white victims." Adams says Perrelli, a political appointee, himself overruled a unanimous recommendation for continued prosecution by Adams and his associates.
So when Perez testified that the decision was made only by career attorneys, not political operatives and appointees, he was not telling the truth about the machinations of the most transparent administration in history.
The decision not to prosecute the New Black Panther Party was clearly a political decision designed not to offend a key constituency of the Democratic Party and one of the few bastions of support this administration and the Democrats have left.
The New Black Panther Party should have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law. At least one member of this administration is on shaky legal ground as well.
The Obama Administration has shown a patent bias for minorities, especially for blacks, in many of its comments, actions and legislation. One of the most egregious was the inexplicable dismissal of the voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panther Party (who also happened to be prominently showcased on Obama’s website while campaigning for the Presidency).
Finally, investigative actions are being taken to determine if there are any civil rights violations/discrimination being perpetrated or countenanced by the Obama Administration. The Justice Department now is looking into such issues involving its civil rights division.
There has been an irrefutable pattern which leads to orders emanating from the very top: Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder.
They should be held accountable for their actions.
Probe in New Black Panther case
Jerry Markon September 14, 2010
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."
Smith said Monday he is "pleased" that Fine "has decided to take up a review of possible discriminatory practices by attorneys in the Civil Rights Division. Recent allegations of politicization within the Justice Department raise serious concerns."
Wolf added that the investigation is "very positive."
Xochitl Hinojosa, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said the department "makes enforcement decisions based on the evidence and the merits. We are committed to the evenhanded enforcement of the many statutes in the jurisdiction of the Civil Rights Division's Voting Section." She referred questions about the investigation to Fine's office.
A spokeswoman for Fine confirmed that the review is in its very early stages but would not comment further.
The investigation presents another challenge for the Civil Rights Division, which was strained by employee departures and allegations of politicization during the Bush administration but has been stepping up enforcement. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. is a former civil rights lawyer who has vowed to make the division the department's "crown jewel."
But conservatives contend that the Obama administration has itself become politicized, and they have focused their ire on the New Black Panther case. Filed weeks before the Obama administration took office, it focused on two of the party's members who stood in front of a polling place in Philadelphia on Election Day 2008, one carrying a nightstick and identifying himself as "security." The men were captured on video and accused of trying to discourage some people from voting.
Conservatives took issue with the Justice Department's decision last year to narrow the case, dropping the party and one of the men, and to focus only on the nightstick bearer. Department officials say they did not have sufficient evidence to pursue the case against the other defendants. Justice officials from the Bush administration called the decision political.
Former Justice Department lawyer J. Christian Adams recently told the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which held a series of hearings on the matter, that he believed the case had been narrowed because some in the civil rights division were interested in protecting only minorities.
That allegation was among those cited by Wolf and Smith in their letters to Fine, which triggered the inspector general's review.
The Dept. of Justice, which should be protecting the rights of all Americans and the Constitutionally enumerated equality of all (Fourteenth Amendment), apparently is not fulfilling its mandate. Under Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, a racist bias has suffused the agency. Their ideology is that some people - blacks in particular and Democratically voting Hispanics - are "more equal" than others, specifically Whites. Some of this also stems from Obama's 20 years attending the vitriolic, racist rants of Rev. Wright in church where he preached black nationalism and supremacy. (Then again, Obama "claimed" to have heard nothing controversial. And Bill Clinton "didn't inhale" or "have sex with that woman".)
This sanctioned and enforced racism of blacks over whites is something that all Americans need to be aware of and react and respond to aggressively. If not, our rights will continue to progressively erode and we will find ourselves in a racially very hostile country that may be balkanized.
The video below which recorded in 2002 captures the leader of the New Black Panther Party, Malik Zulu Shabazz, praising Osama Bin Laden “not bowing down” to America. In it he states:
“Let’s talk about this brother, because he’s a bold man… Usama Bin Laden, Mr. Bin Laden. Gotta give him his respect. He’s not bowing down. He’s not cutting [?] the tap dance… Mr. Bin Laden standing up. There’s a man born in Saudi Arabia bringing reform, Mr. Bin Laden. But you’re not supposed to say these things about him. I thought we had free speech.”
Shabazz is one of the men that Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Administration mysteriously and inexplicably dropped charges against in the blatant case (which the government already won) of voter intimidation during the Presidential elections. We would like to know if they were also aware of his strong support of Bin Laden. It would not surprise us and would clearly make the Administration's actions even more egregious.
In the following editorial, David Limbaugh details the unprecedented level of arrogance and condescension spewing from members of the Obama Administration. Their demeanor is one of a ruling elite in an autocracy rather than of a representative government serving at the pleasure of the public.
Then add to this unabashed racism of black on white and unequal justice and what results is a noxious mixture that will be destructive to our country.
Unprecedented Arrogance
David Limbaugh 7/2/2010
The Obama administration grows more arrogant, cavalier and fundamentally dishonest every day. Just in the past few days, we've seen a number of troubling examples. Frankly, sometimes it's hard to keep up.
In a speech in Wisconsin, Obama was bragging about how wonderful the terrible economy is. You'll recall that during both of President George W. Bush's terms, Democrats, including Obama, castigated him for destroying the economy, despite the existence of empirically verifiable robust growth during some seven of those eight years.
Now that Obama has been in office for a year and a half and his economy is failing by all objective measures, he and his Democrats demand, once again, that we ignore the empirical evidence in front of our faces and bow down to them in reverent gratitude for ensuring that things are not worse than they are.
Everyone knows Obama promised -- he was hardly tentative about his prediction -- that if the nation followed him over the cliff with his harebrained "stimulus" scheme, unemployment would not exceed 8 percent. When unemployment soared above 10 percent, he insisted we be patient to allow his plan to work. Now that it stubbornly remains in the high 9s, he tells us that if he hadn't implemented his stimulus bill, the economy would be much worse (12 or 13 or 15 percent), so we not only are forbidden from criticizing him for this disaster but also must genuflect because only three of the four wheels of the economy are teetering over the edge of the cliff.
He said, "There may be some roads that not only were repaired but also were ... linked up to create a new industrial park that would facilitate long-term economic development beyond this immediate crisis."
Can you imagine the reaction of the liberal media had a Republican president uttered such gibberish? There "may be some roads"? How's that for a non-statement? That were linked up to a new industrial park to facilitate long-term growth? How about some facts here, Mr. Intellectual? Then again, how can you blame him for citing nebulous "facts" and failed economic theory when neither the real facts nor the economic evidence substantiates his claims.
He also said that every economist who's looked at it has said that the recovery did its job. Would someone please get this man a link to The Heritage Foundation's website or any other credible conservative think tank or economist? Time and time again, Heritage scholars have not only argued but also demonstrated why Obama's economic policies don't work in theory and haven't worked in practice. As noted many times before, they have not helped avert a crisis, but have exacerbated already bleak conditions. Sure, all economists agree with him, just as all Americans agree with his socialistic policies.
Moving on, in the past few days, we've also heard from former Justice Department attorney J. Christian Adams, who has confirmed -- from the belly of the beast -- our worst suspicions about Obama and Eric Holder's Justice Department's dismissing a slam-dunk case for voter intimidation against New Black Panther Party members for racial reasons. This is an egregious trampling on the rule of law, an outrage that would subject any Republican president to charges of high crimes and misdemeanors, a scandal of the first order for which this administration isn't even bothering to develop "plausible deniability."
Next, we read about Obama's reaction to Sen. Lamar Alexander's reasonable suggestion that any energy discussion between the president and a "bipartisan" group of senators should include a focus on the oil spill and BP. Obama said, "That's just your talking point," and flat-out refused to discuss the subject. Is he king or what?
Finally, we've also witnessed this week another outburst from that paragon of smugness, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, whom I criticized earlier for mocking members of the press corps for their legitimate questions in lieu of attempting to answer them in good faith.
This time, this little smarmy nerd-thug mocked Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona for claiming Obama told him in a private meeting he would not secure our borders because it would disincentivize Republicans from supporting his effort to pass "comprehensive immigration reform" (read: amnesty). Gibbs accused Kyl of changing his story and basically arguing with himself on the matter, even though Kyl has not retreated an iota from the only relevant assertion: that Obama made the statement in question. Watch the video in which Gibbs clearly intends to create the false impression Kyl had vacillated on his charge and tell me with a straight face we're not dealing with an entirely unprecedented level of arrogance in this White House.
The following video captures the racist vitriol of one of the individuals charged in the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case that occurred in Philadelphia during the Presidential elections. He lost the case that the Bush Administration had originally filed but then the Obama Administration dismissed all charges without explanation.
If this had been the KKK or a white supremacy group, you can be most assured that this case would have been prosecuted to the fullest and you would have read about it ad infinitum in the news media.
Print This Post
Subscribe to Our RSS Feed
Follow Us on Twitter
Comments