Former DOJ Lawyer Says Holder Dropped Black Panther Case For Racial Reasons
June 30, 2010 ? Filed Under Politics, U.S. News
A former DOJ lawyer is speaking out about the Justice Department?s decision to drop a no-brainer case of voter intimidation against the Black Panthers.
J. Christian Adams felt so strongly about the decision that he resigned from the DOJ over it. He says Holder?s decision to drop the case after the government had already won it was motivated by race.
"There is a pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases," Adams told Fox News? Megyn Kelly.
Adams says the dismissal is a symptom of the Obama administration?s reverse racism and that the Justice Department will not pursue voting rights cases against white victims.
"In voting, that will be the case over the next few years, there?s no doubt about it," he said.
I?ve said many times on this site that Eric Holder is the most dangerous and radical person in the Obama administration. The man supposedly brought in to clean-up the ?politicized? Justice Department of George W. Bush, has instead created the most highly politicized Justice Department in US history.
Everything radical leftist Holder does has a political motivation behind it. Whether it?s trying 9/11 terrorists in federal court, dropping the case against the Black Panthers, or trying to prosecute CIA interrogators.
Eric Holder is a menace. The sooner we can throw his ass out the better off the country will be.
I said at the time of Holder?s confirmation that any Republican who votes to confirm him should not be re-elected. Holder was a corrupt scumbag when he worked under Janet Reno and he?s a corrupt scumbag today.
I still remember Lindsey Graham voting for Holder because ?elections have consequences? ? which is what he?s been saying at Elena Kagan?s SCOTUS hearing as well.
Seriously,this is soo obvious.Chalk up another victory for liberals and what they stand for.....DOUBLE STANDARDS.
Could you imagine if 2 KKK members did the same thing and Bush and his attorney general dismissed the case.....Let the riots begin and rightfully so.
Replies
24Beach Fanatic
Walk the Walk, please source your information if you are going to cut and paste.
Edited
SoWal Expert
I definitely missed something - white people aren't allowed to vote now? 
SoWal Insider
You can bet your sweet ass if that had been some Aryan skin head boys with sticks patrolling a polling place declaring that a white man was going to win the election one way or another....they would already be in prison. :roll:
Beach Fanatic
Goldilocks Approach to Race Needed
We need a Goldilocks approach to race issue:
The Obama administration is accused of being too fast on the Sherrod case & too slow on the Black Panthers case.
Can't they get it "just right"?
We need a Goldilocks approach to race issue:
The Obama administration is accused of being too fast on the Sherrod case & too slow on the Black Panthers case.
Can't they get it "just right"?
Beach Fanatic
Walk the Walk - this case is rank hypocrisy by the administration. "The only people who don?t think this was a serious case of voter intimidation seem to be apologists for the administration who want to sweep this case under the table and make excuses for the inexcusable conduct of the political appointees who are running the Civil Rights Division and the Justice Department."
Edited
Beach Lover
Walk the Walk, please source your information if you are going to cut and paste.
You guys and your "list your source". Don't you read and watch the news? Don't you keep current with things going on and reported on? I have notced that if the post falls under your political leanings you don't ask for a source or proof, but let someone express an opinion or post about something that doesn't lean your way and you start shouting "prove it".You guys have learned your talking points well, if
all else fails-----intimidate!
SoWal Expert
I am sure it was not because the person selectively edited an article and then failed to give a source. :roll:
From what I believe is the same article:
"The Justice Department has defended its move to drop the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations while dismissing charges against the others "based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law."
Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler dismissed Adams' accusations as a "good faith disagreement" with ulterior motives. "It is not uncommon for attorneys within the department to have good faith disagreements about the appropriate course of action in a particular case, although it is regrettable when a former department attorney distorts the facts and makes baseless allegations to promote his or her agenda," she said in a written statement.
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. But the administration moved to dismiss the charges in May 2009. Justice attorneys said a criminal complaint, which resulted in the injunction, proceeded successfully."
FOXNews.com - Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case for Racial Reasons
From what I believe is the same article:
"The Justice Department has defended its move to drop the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations while dismissing charges against the others "based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law."
Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler dismissed Adams' accusations as a "good faith disagreement" with ulterior motives. "It is not uncommon for attorneys within the department to have good faith disagreements about the appropriate course of action in a particular case, although it is regrettable when a former department attorney distorts the facts and makes baseless allegations to promote his or her agenda," she said in a written statement.
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. But the administration moved to dismiss the charges in May 2009. Justice attorneys said a criminal complaint, which resulted in the injunction, proceeded successfully."
FOXNews.com - Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case for Racial Reasons
Beach Lover
We need a Goldilocks approach to race issue:
The Obama administration is accused of being too fast on the Sherrod case & too slow on the Black Panthers case.
Can't they get it "just right"?
they were also a little fast on the professor and the policeman too...
Beach Fanatic
You guys and your "list your source". Don't you read and watch the news? Don't you keep current with things going on and reported on? I have notced that if the post falls under your political leanings you don't ask for a source or proof, but let someone express an opinion or post about something that doesn't lean your way and you start shouting "prove it".You guys have learned your talking points well, if
all else fails-----intimidate!
Intimidate...I don't think so. Sorry you took it that way.
I am simply asking for a source for the information--that's what I learned in Journalism 101! Always source your materials--otherwise, how can your reader give any credibility to what's printed? or understand the frame of reference? W/out a source, it is just meaningless words.
I've no idea whether I agree or not, when I saw it was an unsourced piece that had been cut and pasted, I went on to the next item.
If we want to have a civil discussion, we need to know if one is posting an opinion, linking to an article, or rambling....
IMO.
Beach Fanatic
Did anyone really think that things would be that much different with a new President. You simply change the players in the same game.
Beach Fanatic
Walk the Walk, please source your information if you are going to cut and paste.
That would be helpful.
Beach FanaticAuthor
Beach Fanatic
Walk the Walk I didn't have any trouble finding the source of your article.
I Googled the title you supplied in your post. No apologies needed. Some around here get their panties in a twist when articles or comments don't serve the liberal agenda so they complain about cut and paste as if it were some heinous crime along with no link.
I Googled the title you supplied in your post. No apologies needed. Some around here get their panties in a twist when articles or comments don't serve the liberal agenda so they complain about cut and paste as if it were some heinous crime along with no link.
Beach Fanatic
You guys and your "list your source". Don't you read and watch the news? Don't you keep current with things going on and reported on? I have notced that if the post falls under your political leanings you don't ask for a source or proof, but let someone express an opinion or post about something that doesn't lean your way and you start shouting "prove it".You guys have learned your talking points well, if
all else fails-----intimidate!
Glenda's right.
If you are going to cut and paste, it is professional courtesy to the author that you link back to the column.
Moderator
Justice attorneys said a criminal complaint, which resulted in the injunction, proceeded successfully."
FOXNews.com - Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case for Racial Reasons
The alleged "injunction" is a total sham.
"The Justice Department has defended its move to drop the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations while dismissing charges against the others "based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law."
It bars the one single guy from appearing at Philadelphia polls with a weapon. That's it. No teeth...
It doesn't stop him from doing it anywhere else...
Take a minute and 19 seconds of your time to see this guy's true colors...
YouTube- The Obama Administration Protected Black Panther Who Advocates Killing White Babies
SoWal Expert
And the reason WHY that is all they could charge him (or others) with is a lack of evidence that holds up in court.
YouTube videos of someone being a butthead are not grounds for charges.
There are a lot of things I find distasteful that are not illegal and people figure out just what they can do to avoid charges or legal action - your experiences w/ Westboro Baptist should certainly bear that out.
The only thing he did that they can prove was illegal was to be near a polling station w/ a stick (weapon), so they have legally barred him from those polling stations.
YouTube videos of someone being a butthead are not grounds for charges.
There are a lot of things I find distasteful that are not illegal and people figure out just what they can do to avoid charges or legal action - your experiences w/ Westboro Baptist should certainly bear that out.
The only thing he did that they can prove was illegal was to be near a polling station w/ a stick (weapon), so they have legally barred him from those polling stations.
Moderator
And the reason WHY that is all they could charge him (or others) with is a lack of evidence that holds up in court.
YouTube videos of someone being a butthead are not grounds for charges.
There are a lot of things I find distasteful that are not illegal and people figure out just what they can do to avoid charges or legal action - your experiences w/ Westboro Baptist should certainly bear that out.
The only thing he did that they can prove was illegal was to be near a polling station w/ a stick (weapon), so they have legally barred him from those polling stations.
I don't disagree with you at all. Freedom of speech protects his right to be a butthead. The injunction should have read that he was legally barred from polling stations and not those polling stations. There is nothing in place to keep him from doing the same thing at a different station not defined in the injunction.
SoWal Expert
That was the part I questioned too - but wondered if there was something on the books from the Civil Rights era where you could only ban from a certain jurisdiction or district where the offense took place.
Beach Comber
On the other hand...
Now think about this scenario.... You have two KKK in sheets and hoods, slamming and clasping a club from one hand to the other, watching people who enter the polling station, right by the doorway, saying "no matter what, a white man is gonna win today." How do you think Mr. Holder or any other AG would deal with that situation if there was proof of "intimidation" (which is what the law SAYS is illegal) through video, along with three african americans ready to testify against the KKK?? What would happen is those people would be in prison, and rightfully so! If a white AG let the KKK go, dropped the charges, there would be riots all over this country.
You have to love the post-racial Presidency!
And the reason WHY that is all they could charge him (or others) with is a lack of evidence that holds up in court.
YouTube videos of someone being a butthead are not grounds for charges.
There are a lot of things I find distasteful that are not illegal and people figure out just what they can do to avoid charges or legal action - your experiences w/ Westboro Baptist should certainly bear that out.
The only thing he did that they can prove was illegal was to be near a polling station w/ a stick (weapon), so they have legally barred him from those polling stations.
Now think about this scenario.... You have two KKK in sheets and hoods, slamming and clasping a club from one hand to the other, watching people who enter the polling station, right by the doorway, saying "no matter what, a white man is gonna win today." How do you think Mr. Holder or any other AG would deal with that situation if there was proof of "intimidation" (which is what the law SAYS is illegal) through video, along with three african americans ready to testify against the KKK?? What would happen is those people would be in prison, and rightfully so! If a white AG let the KKK go, dropped the charges, there would be riots all over this country.
You have to love the post-racial Presidency!
SoWal Insider
Now think about this scenario.... You have two KKK in sheets and hoods, slamming and clasping a club from one hand to the other, watching people who enter the polling station, right by the doorway, saying "no matter what, a white man is gonna win today." How do you think Mr. Holder or any other AG would deal with that situation if there was proof of "intimidation" (which is what the law SAYS is illegal) through video, along with three african americans ready to testify against the KKK?? What would happen is those people would be in prison, and rightfully so! If a white AG let the KKK go, dropped the charges, there would be riots all over this country.the scenario you described hangs like dead rat from the south's neck. it's part of your heritage.
You have to love the post-racial Presidency!
Banned
From what I've seen on video and read, I can't imagine anyone going to prison over something like this.
Beach Comber
Part of what heritage?
Are you talking about the people from the south? I am from New Jersey so I did not think you were talking about me. haha
the scenario you described hangs like dead rat from the south's neck. it's part of your heritage.
Are you talking about the people from the south? I am from New Jersey so I did not think you were talking about me. haha
Beach Fanatic
the scenario you described hangs like dead rat from the south's neck. it's part of your heritage.
Don't know where you are from but you seem a touch bigoted against Southerners. Too bad. Don't know what you're missing, bless your heart.
SoWal Insider
Are you talking about the people from the south? I am from New Jersey so I did not think you were talking about me. hahayou are exempt....there's no racism in new jersey
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.