Some of you may remember a fairly blatant case of voter intimidation in Philadelphia during the 2008 elections carried out by the New Black Panther Party that was caught on video, with the Panthers using nightsticks, military style uniforms and racial slurs to "make sure a black man wins this election."
About a year ago, President Obama's justice department overruled career DOJ prosecutors and forced them to drop the case against the Panthers, even though The Obama administration won a default judgment in federal court in April 2009 when the Black Panthers didn't appear in court to fight the charges.
Now, J. Christian Adams, now an attorney in Virginia says he and the other Justice Department lawyers working on the case were ordered to dismiss it.
"I mean we were told, 'Drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party,'" Adams told Fox News, adding that political appointees Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division since 2003, ordered the dismissal.
Asked about the Justice Department's claim that they are career attorneys, not political appointees, Adams said "obviously, that's false."
"Under the vacancy reform act, they were serving in a political capacity," he said. "This is one of the examples of Congress not being told the truth, the American people not being told the truth about this case. It's one of the other examples in this case where the truth simply is becoming another victim of the process."
Ever since the case was suspiciously dropped, the United States Commission on Civil Rights has been investigating the department's decision at the request of Republican congressmen who are concerned that this sets a precedent for an escalation of voter intimidation.
In the interview, Adams also accused Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez of lying under oath to Congress about the facts in the decision to drop the case when he testified before the commission in May.
"At a minimum, without sufficient proof that New Black Panther Party or Malik Zulu Shabazz directed or controlled unlawful activities at the polls, or made speeches directed to immediately inciting or producing lawless action on Election Day, any attempt to bring suit against those parties based merely upon their alleged 'approval' or 'endorsement' of Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jackson’s activities would have likely failed," Perez told the commission.
'Sufficient proof?' All they had were videos of the unlawful activity,eyewitness accounts and a prima facie conviction based on failure to appear!
Anybody remember how we were lied to and told that Barack Hussein Obama was going to be 'the post racial president'?
No comments:
Post a Comment