The following editorial examines the true racist nature of the Obama Administration which had touted itself as post-racial and forward looking. What we have been encumbered with is a nightmare conflation of liberal bean counting and black liberation theology promoting black dominance, unequal rights, retribution, race wealth transfer to minorities and naked demagoguery and contemptuousness.
All with the blessings of the “man” who was to bring us into a new age.
The View from Crackerland
Robert T. Smith March 07, 2011
Certainly the recent vexation expressed by Eric Holder over being questioned regarding the New Black Panther voter intimidation case -- i.e., his defense of "my people" -- depicts a new low in race relations here in America. The liberal media and many politicians are curiously not outraged at what is an arguably race-based federal civil rights case.
We were told of a post-racial era that all Americans would enjoy as the outcome of the election of America's first African-American president. As so eloquently described by one of Mr. Holder's people, this post-racial era is not so evident in the view from here in Crackerland.
Post-election of President Obama, the only racial agreement apparent to those of us who reside in Crackerland was Eric Holder's admonition that we are cowards to not discuss awkward racial issues here in America. Here, then, is an offering to contribute to the discussion.
Here in Crackerland, there was some consternation when we noticed then-presidential candidate Obama's unique past and the unusual relationships he had throughout his life. There seemed to be an underlying racial anger and confusion as a mixed-race person in his autobiography Dreams from My Father. An example is Mr. Obama's being so moved by the notion that "white folks' greed runs a world in need."
Mr. Obama's long-term black liberation theology minister and mentor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, represents many other African-American religious leaders. These leaders have perspectives and sermons that seem to be a whole lot more about justifying their racism than supporting Christian theology itself. There is an apparent seemless link between black liberation theology and the racist, bigoted radicals in the Nation of Islam and among the New Black Panthers. Our view from Crackerland was of Mr. Obama as a relatively unknown politician infused with an adult life of racist relationships and thoughts.
Here in Crackerland, we noticed an almost 100% voting rate for Mr. Obama from the African-American community. Difficult to miss were the many formerly non-Democrat African-American persons who stated their support for Mr. Obama based solely on his color -- a clearly racist vote.
As viewed from Crackerland, this affiliation between the Democratic Party and the African-American community appears to be based on the promise that the Democrat politicians will provide for the living conditions desired by the African-American community. The individualism of Crackerland recognizes these government-supplied conditions as dehumanizing, reducing people to veritable chattel of the government. Human chattel of the government is not a condition we crackers wish upon any person, irrespective of race.
Here in Crackerland, we took note that Mr. Obama was elected by both cracker and non-cracker alike. However, it didn't take long for the signs of racism to appear in association with our new president.
The invocation by Reverend Lowery at Mr. Obama's swearing in ceremony seemed a bit inappropriate for such an auspicious, racially historic occasion. The Reverend Lowery was intent on bringing racial issues to the forefront, and he used the occasion and captive audience to vent his lingering racism by means of a recitation of hopes for the various non-white races while admonishing those who are white to embrace what is right. This appeared here in Crackerland to imply that whites somehow had prevented and/or are preventing the other races from achieving their desired hopes -- a racist lie.
The history of America we learned here in Crackerland included hundreds of thousands of dead crackers in the Civil War, decades of cracker-led civil rights struggles, an altering of the very foundation of America's Constitution and laws facilitated by the crackers, and billions and probably trillions of cracker dollars poured into the non-cracker communities -- all of which was only incidental in the Reverend Lowery's mind to doing what is right. Arguably, the view from Crackerland was that the Reverend Lowery outed himself as a racist and perhaps a bigot while serving as an integral part of Mr. Obama's historic day for race relations in America.
Here in Crackerland, we pursue happiness for ourselves and our families' benefit, because self and family are the basic building blocks of society. In Crackerland, we set a lofty ideal in our founding documents and celebrate unalienable rights for all men, endowed by our Creator and not arbitrarily assigned by government officials based on race. We inhabitants of Crackerland don't wake up thinking about how to stick it to other Americans, cracker or non-cracker; we work for ours and expect you to work for yours.
We crackers see our pursuit of happiness realized as the property, money, land, and all other possessions we work hard for, and not as community property to be confiscated by government officials and dispensed to others based on racial status and conditions. The relationship between redistributive socialism and black liberation theology in which President Obama has been steeped and which he has embraced in his policy decisions is viewed by us here in Crackerland as both racist and the antithesis of Americanism.
The racism we see from Crackerland in our current Obama administration, those surrounding the administration, and those who support it looks a whole lot more like retribution than like a brave discourse on race relations here in America. We were told of a post-racial era that all Americans would enjoy as the outcome of the election of America's first African-American president, but that is not so evident to many of us here in Crackerland.
Cowards, as Mr. Holder so ineloquently characterized them, should step aside so that this discussion will not have to be absurdly carried on into posterity. With slavery and civil rights issues distant in the rearview mirror of America's history, the changes in our social structure over time, and the integration of all Americans into all portions of our society regardless of race, this black/white race discussion is now bizarre within the context of racial reparations. It can be viewed now only as a purely political power play.
In his first 2 years as “president”, Obama has revealed himself not to be the leader of all Americans but instead of only certain select groups. We have seen his racist ideologies and proclivities through myriad examples (Reverend Jeremiah Wright; 10 year membership in black liberation theology, racist, anti-American Trinity United Church of Christ; National of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan; Attorney General Eric Holder and the culture of racism (black rights trump white rights) at the Dept. of Justice; the Cambridge police incident; etc.)
His pro-union stance has been quite evident even before the election. It has only solidified with their assistance in electing him “president”. The vehemence of this position and the extents that he goes to support and protect them are … indefensible. To wit: his illegal arrogation of assets from GM to the unions instead of secured holders in violation of constitutional law.
In Wisconsin now as well as elsewhere, he is insinuating himself in local situations, siding with the unions and against the state’s taxpayers and citizens. His words and actions are unwarranted, divisive and destructive.
None of this is a surprise which is why the sooner that he is gone, the better it is for the average hardworking American.
Obama: I will 'paint the nation purple with SEIU'
After viewing the video below we can now say with certainty which side President Obama is on concerning the Wisconsin public union protests. Mr. Obama is not a public union supporter, he is their national leader. This is rapidly becoming a nationwide manufactured "crisis", as orchestrated by SEIU and Obama's Organizing for America. Is this what he meant when he said he would make us a nation of purple states?
The corrupt and coercive actions of the Obama Administration know no limits. Exacerbating this egregious situation is the negligence and patent complicity of the news media in its lack of reportage on any of these issues. By not getting called out and criticized publically, Obama and his elitist, racist and radical cronies have no disincentive to cease these activities.
The story below, written by an attorney who had worked in the Justice Dept. under Holder and was intimately acquainted with policies and culture, details Attorney General Eric Holder’s brazen arrogance and tampering with the New Black Panther Investigation as well his threats to those in the Dept. who refuse to toe his “policies”.
Holder Uses New York Times to Tamper with New Black Panther Investigation
J. Christian Adams
Attorney General Eric Holder recently made statements to the New York Times so detached from reality that they could have been written by scheming Republican operatives for fun. In particular, Holder tells the Times that the lawless dismissal of voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panthers is “a made up controversy.” I have written about Holder’s accelerating detachment from reality in the interview, along with Jen Rubin.
Putting aside the fact video exists of the armed uniformed thugs in Philadelphia, Holder did something even worse than flirt with kooky conspiratorial characterizations of the fallout from the Black Panther dismissal.
When Holder announced to the New York Times that there “is no there there,” he let the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) know what he believes the outcome of their ongoing investigation into the dismissal should be. In other words, he tampered with their investigation.
Holder’s close friend Deputy Attorney General James Cole will have the power to veto any critical conclusions by OPR.
Multiple attorneys, including me, have testified under oath that the Obama Civil Rights Division will not enforce civil rights laws in a race-neutral fashion. Numerous attorneys still at the Justice Department have confirmed the substance of our testimony to the Washington Post. Numerous other attorneys no longer at the Justice Department have also confirmed our testimony.
Holder’s response to the New York Times? It’s a “made up controversy.”
Holder’s performance to the New York Times is more than simply ludicrous, it is meddlesome. When Holder made these partisan campaign-style attacks, he meddled with two ongoing investigations in a way that previous Attorney Generals would never do.
The DOJ OPR is currently investigating whether or not Steve Rosenbaum, Loretta King, and other DOJ political appointees used improper considerations when they ordered the dismissal of the New Black Panther case.
The problem is that Eric Holder sits atop the chain of command for every OPR attorney working on the investigation. Eric Holder, and his newly recess-appointed Deputy Attorney General James Cole, oversee OPR.
They have the power to fire, and as was recently exercised, hire the head of OPR. The incoming head of OPR, Robin Ashton, was just named by Holder. Ashton will have the power to tamper with any findings in the New Black Panther investigation, and bring them more in line with Eric Holder’s pronouncements to the New York Times.
When Holder made wild assertions about the dismissal of the New Black Panther case to the New York Times, you can be sure every single person working down the chain of command on the investigation took note. For them to reach a finding contrary to Holder’s statements guarantees a bureaucratic headwind from the highest levels of the DOJ. That’s a career killer inside Justice. Few can be expected to have the courage to confront the falsehoods of an Attorney General from within the bureaucracy. There aren’t many with the courage of DOJ lawyer Christopher Coates.
The DOJ Inspector General is also investigating the circumstances surrounding the dismissal of the New Black Panther case and hostility toward racially equal enforcement of civil rights laws under Eric Holder. I have already given lengthy interviews with the IG about this hostility, as have many others.
Yet Eric Holder has announced his opinion of the investigation in the interview. The IG is just looking into “a made up controversy,” he says.
America might soon long for the good old days of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. When the DOJ OPR and IG were investigating conduct during his tenure, he had the sense and integrity to withhold comment.
Instead of telegraphing his views to the investigative authorities as Holder did, Gonzales made it clear it wouldn’t be appropriate to comment while an investigation was ongoing.
Holder doesn’t care even about the appearance of impropriety. He plainly let the investigators inside OPR and the IG know what he thinks they should conclude.
Worse, Holder almost taunts the majority of Americans who believe men wielding weapons at the entrance to a poll and hurling racial slurs is a serious matter, no matter the race of the perpetrators. All “made up,” he shockingly concludes, providing sanctuary to armed thugs from the highest levels of our government.
Unfortunately, we are reminded of the breadth and magnitude of Attorney General Eric Holder’s ineptness nearly every day which places our country at ever increasing risk for terrorism and global disparagement from foes as well as friends and paints us more like a country devolving into a banana republic. Add to this his contemptuous attitude to non-minority Americans, (reverse) racist philosophy and enforcing unequal justice based on race and we have an odious situation which must be rectified expeditiously.
For quite a long time , we have been calling for him to be removed from office by whatever means necessary – preferably by his resignation or firing by Obama (see most recent one: Attorney General Eric Holder Must Be Fired). Increasingly, many prominent politicians and other individuals are also denouncing his actions and incompetence and publicly calling his ouster (see commentary below by Rep. Michele Bachmann).
It is abundantly clear, however, that the probability of Holder resigning or being fired by Obama is as remote as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton admitting to their roles as opportunist racist demagogues.
It just won’t happen - yet. They are both peas from the same pod: arrogant, self-righteous, ideologically radical left, racist and place their self interests far ahead of those of this country.
WE MUST KEEP TRYING – ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
Time For Attorney General Eric Holder To Resign
Rep. Michele Bachmann December 2, 2010
The Wikileaks debacle is the latest proof that Eric Holder has no understanding of the dangerous times we live in. His ineptness, as head of the Department of Justice, is putting our nation in a vulnerable position.
Earlier this week, the Wikileaks website jeopardized our nation’s security and diplomacy by releasing hundreds of thousands of U.S. State Department documents. The same site put our troops at risk when it released thousands of classified U.S. military documents in July. As far back as March, the Pentagon declared Wikileaks to be a threat to national security. Meanwhile, the Attorney General, our nation’s chief law enforcement officer, has been busy cracking down on dozens of websites that sold things like counterfeit purses. Eric Holder simply has the wrong priorities.
During his tenure as Attorney General, Holder short-circuited the interrogation of the underwear bomber by ordering that the terror suspect be given Miranda rights within the first hour of questioning. Holder’s use of civilian trials for terror suspects proved to be a failure last month when a civilian jury acquitted a man on 284 of 285 counts. This was after a judge refused to allow the testimony of a key prosecution witness, even though our military had captured the suspect after a gunfight in Pakistan and linked him to deadly bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
Eric Holder has also had a slew of lesser problems, like his outspoken criticism of Arizona’s immigration law before he had even read the law, his dropping of charges in the New Black Panthers voter intimidation case, and his failure to investigate fraud allegations and the misuse of taxpayer dollars in the recent Pigford claims settlement.
The time has come for Eric Holder to step down as Attorney General of the United States. As a member of Congress and a mother of five children, I am concerned about the very real threats facing our country. We need a chief law enforcement officer who understands those dangers and knows how to respond.
In the following article, James Lewis theorizes that the Obama’s somewhat publicly “indifferent” position on the intimate searches by TSA agents is his way of implementing “Black Revenge” on the masses of largely white people. Interestingly, because of affirmative action, a disproportionate of the agents are black.
The theory, which is a very interesting one, is well supported by evidence including his attitude and previous incidents and actions. Obama has clearly not been race neutral. His actions are one of a very racist, anti-White bigot. They are inexcusable and should not be tolerated.
Though not mentioned directly in the article, Obama’s patent racist views are evidenced, for example, by his greater than 10 year association and close relationship with and acceptance of the racist hate-mongerer Rev. Jeremiah Wright, reverence for Louis Farrakhan, and support for Attorney Eric Holder and his pro-black/ anti-white discriminatory actions within the Dept. of Justice
TSA Groping and Obama's Black Revenge Narrative
James Lewis 11-25-2010
The growing TSA groping scandal is another Obama political fiasco, almost a comical way for an American president to commit political suicide. TSA's groping of little kids and their moms instead of going for the bad guys who blew up the Twin Towers fits the narrative of radical black revenge. Now all the rich white folks are treated as police suspects. Let's see how they like it! Or as the hippies used to say, "Up against the wall, m-f!"
The cops are the traditional target of radical Left scapegoating, and even more so for Black Leftists. Obama showed it when Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., himself a racial demagogue, was stopped by an interracial team of cops while breaking and entering into his own house at night. Gates immediately cried "police brutality!," and Obama immediately fell into line. Stupidly, in public. Obama paid a political price for that knee-jerk reaction, but he did not learn from it.
Gates is director of the W.E.B. DuBois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard, where they dig out new and ever more outrageous reasons to be mad at white folks. It's their version of "research." DuBois was a Communist during the Stalin years, and he was surely well-known to Frank Marshall Davis, Obama's surrogate father in Hawaii.
So Obama hates the cops, even the ones who risk their lives to protect black communities all over the country. In the TSA he has found his perfect instrument of symbolic revenge. If you remember how Hillary Rodham Clinton treated men in uniform at the White House, no matter what the uniform was, you'll get the idea.
Now everybody who flies over Thanksgiving, the quintessential American family holiday, will be dissed by uniformed cops, many of them black, because affirmative action rules the roost at the TSA. If you don't get the role-reversal joke, you're not listening to Obama.
You can bet your last dollar that Rev. Jerry Wright gets the joke. So do Louis Farrakhan; Father Pfleger, the Catholic race-monger; and everybody except Justice Clarence Thomas and Congressman Alan West, who are not laughing. Actually, they get it, too, but it looks more like tragedy than comedy to them. (Colin Powell, as usual, has gone missing in this one.)
The revenge narrative is central to Obama's personal identity, a lot of which is purely imaginary. Don't forget that he is living Dreams from My Father -- not the reality of his father, because he never knew his father at all.
When Obama bowed low for the international cameras to the King of Saudi and then dissed the Queen of England, it made no sense to Americans. But it makes perfect sense in Obama's narrative of revenge. The swarthy King Abdullah in the racial revenge narrative stands for the despised third world. The fact that Africa was raided for centuries by Arab slave raiders, and the fact that the Quran legitimates abject slavery, has no bearing on Obama's revenge fantasy, because facts don't matter in the world of fantasy. Queen Elizabeth is not a human being, but just the white symbol of British Imperialism. The pre-medieval King of Saudi, a generation away from camel-riding tent-dwellers, stands for the Wretched of the Earth. It's all part of the revenge fiction of the Left.
Obama lives in a world of good and evil. The White Hats are evil, the Black Hats good in this Western B flick.
As usual, the world of psychiatry has a name for this. It's called "splitting," and it's one of the common features of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which we know Obama suffers from. Splitting is the tendency to treat others as either all good or all evil. It's a sort of paranoid feature of NPD. Obama has NPD mixed with oppositional-defiant disorder, which is why he actually gives his opponents the fickle finger of fate, right in public where the press can take the pictures. Perhaps Obama is cursed with paranoid thinking; we don't really know. He might be fragile. We know he becomes painfully bored when he is not taking a victory lap, and that is also diagnostic of NPD.
But Obama's inner circle know all that, because they've seen it, especially when Obama's fantasy world runs into reality. That's why Obama had to try to make nice to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for two whole years before figuring out what everybody else has known for thirty. French President Sarkozy has called Obama "aliené," which means "alienated from reality." I hope that's not true, but you can be sure that every intelligence agency and foreign ministry in the world has brought in squads of psychiatrists to figure it out. At the last summit meeting, even the European socialists rebelled against Obama's loose money policy. Two years ago, they would have worshiped at his feet.
That may be why David Axelrod got out of the White House lickety-split when he realized American voters were catching on. So did Rahm Emmanuel. Michelle Obama seems strangely distant these days, going on separate vacations, and only Valerie Jarrett hangs on in the inner circle to protect the Emperor. Obama has become Richard Nixon.
Barack Obama is neither complex nor sophisticated. He is a very simple man, so simple that Americans can't figure him out, because we are always fooled by his Harvard Law School act. The liberals confuse vocabulary with intelligence. The one is not the other. Obama believes he is what Ken Hamblin only played as a joke on talk radio: the Black Avenger.
This is not because Obama has ever lost a penny by being black, or half-black, but because in his imagination, growing up, he identified with the narrative of third-world revenge. That's what he heard from his Marxist professors all through college. You can read all about it in The Wretched of the Earth, the classic and phony tale of another imagineer, Frantz Fanon.
In Asia and Europe, Frantz Fanon's "wretched of the earth" are now beginning to prosper, since they threw out Marxist socialists. India, China, South Korea, and Eastern Europe are doing well. Africa is still suffering from the likes of Mugabe.
But the revenge narrative of Marxism is still taught in American colleges and universities, and at Harvard Law, it is taken for gospel. In all the reality-challenged ivory towers of academe, they are still hoping that it's 1917, and the Romanovs are about to be shot by Lenin in a basement.
The Black Avenger is a childlike revenge fantasy, but Obama is a very childlike man. Don't forget his long history of abandonment, first by his father when he was a baby, and soon after by his mother in middle childhood. Barry Soetoro suffered from multiple estrangements as he was bundled from Hawaii to Indonesia and then back again, while Mom stayed with her second husband in Jakarta. If you think that being abandoned hurts when you're an adult, just think about how it feels to a lost and lonely child.
It seems that Obama created a fantasy self out of childlike materials. His fantasy fitted the one held by his Left-wing mentors, who did not love him for being himself. They loved him because he fulfilled their wish for another Lenin to arise and reverse all the humiliations of America's rejection of communism.
The Left has put communism into a racial context by turning class warfare into race warfare. Or haven't you noticed? What else do you think affirmative action is about? It is the Left's revenge, by exploiting the most vulnerable group they could find: American blacks. American workers are too happy with prosperity. You need a really embittered group of people to empower the Left, and if the members of that group aren't mad enough, you make them madder and madder. Peace and love don't empower the Left. Racial rage and scapegoating does.
It should be said that personality disorders are not technically forms of madness. These are character flaws so prominent that they get people into bad trouble. Character flaws are not incompatible with understanding reality. People like Obama are not unusual, and sometimes they do well in real life. Hollywood is rife with narcissists, and so is Manhattan. Washington, D.C. wouldn't exist if it wasn't for all the politicians with diagnosable personality disorders.
But in the fabled old days when politicians traded favors in boozy, smoke-filled rooms, Obama's personality would have been spotted in five minutes. The Democratic Party before 1968 would have let him thrive as a Chicago politician as long as he didn't touch anything important. The old Daley Machine could have used him.
But elect a man to the presidency who may be psychologically fragile, to keep his finger on the nuclear button? Please. Get serious.
Well, the Left and the media have given us Barack Hussein Barry Soetoro Obama, the man without a stable identity, who has only his imaginary fiction to guide him through life.
If they back off from the TSA groping scandal, expect more "dis the white folks" scandals, because that's what guides Obama's personal psychology. If you were wondering what Obama would do after his midterm losses, now you know the answer.
Just pray it doesn't get worse.
On the O’Reilly Factor, John Stossel illustrated what affirmative action is with a metaphorical bake sale. That is, he charged Asians $1.50 for the same cupcake that a white pays $1.00 and blacks and Hispanics $.50. This is obvious discrimination that everyone can see and understand as evidenced by the responses in the video below.
When it comes to admission to colleges, for example, this same parallel applies. Asians have to score much higher on their SAT’s to get in the same schools as whites whereas Hispanics are admitted with much lower scores and blacks even lower than that. No matter how you evaluate this, it is racism; that is, how a person is treated (admission to college) is based on race and not on abilities.
THIS IS RACISM! (Technically, it can be considered to be reverse racism.)
“Affirmative” action is a euphemism for sanctioned reverse racism. It is “negative” for the vast majority of more deserving or qualified individuals who are discriminated against because of these race based policies.
We see the same unequal treatment or opportunities in other areas such as bidding for federal, state or municipal contracts. This has become government mandated racism brought to you by the compassionate liberals. It is, however, a technical violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and it should not be condoned or accepted.
Affirmative action needs to be relegated to the trash heaps of history. This includes not only governmental related programs but also in education and the private sector. The state of Arizona with the successful approval of its Proposition 107 in the recent elections is the most recent state to ban this legislated discrimination.
We strongly recommend that the remaining states should pursue passage of similar legislation. Federal affirmative action policies should also be deep-sixed.
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.
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.
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.