• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case...

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,745
Reaction score
7,653
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case for Racial Reasons

A former Justice Department attorney who quit his job to protest the Obama administration's handling of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case is accusing Attorney General Eric Holder of dropping the charges for racially motivated reasons.

J. Christian Adams, now an attorney in Virginia and a conservative blogger for Pajamas Media, 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."
...

Adams also accused Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez of lying under oath to Congress about the circumstances surrounding the decision to drop the probe.

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 the final days of the Bush administration, three Black Panthers -- Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson -- were charged in a civil complaint with violating the Voter Rights Act in November 2008 by using coercion, threats and intimidation at a Philadelphia polling station -- with Shabazz brandishing what prosecutors called a deadly weapon.

FOXNews.com - Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Case for Racial Reasons
It was quite incredible they dropped it. I remember thinking WTF is this about... New Justice? Hope? Change?

It's not reverse racism either... if it is racism... it's simply racism... coming from The "Coward" Holder's Justice Department.

.
 

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

I thought it was for political favors but race is a serious charge.
 

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,596
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

The article isnt loading for me but Im assuming this has to do with the BPs "guarding" voting booths and intimidating voters? You would think it would be an open and shut case.
 

Guy Incognito

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
2,818
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

Calling this "racism" or "reverse racism" is nonsensical. There is certainly something to the accusation that Holder's dropping this lawsuit was politically motivated, though that is by no means a certainty. Holder was still within his discretion as AG to drop the ones he did drop (they still pursued the injunction against one of those guys). Maybe he felt like he didn't have a strong enough case to get the injunction for the rest of them. Just because they didn't show up doesn't mean it's "open and shut" for an injunction, the judge still could have denied it, and how would that have looked for the Justice Department? But making this about "reverse racism" in the Obama administration is ridiculous, and turns what is a legitimate issue into an overblown Fox News/WSJ talking point.
 
Last edited:

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

The article isnt loading for me but Im assuming this has to do with the BPs "guarding" voting booths and intimidating voters? You would think it would be an open and shut case.
Oh its obvious racism on the part of the black panthers. They are dressed all in black with batons and white person after white person said they tried to block them calling them white trash, honkey, etc.

Even an uber liberal came out and said what they were doing was a clear violation of the law.

This was a complete coverup. Whether it was race or poliitcs or both is another question but I wouldn't put it past Holder for a second to be about race.
 

Guy Incognito

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
2,818
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

Oh its obvious racism on the part of the black panthers.
No argument there, although to be fair to the original Black Panthers, these guys have nothing to do with the real Black Panthers, which don't exist anymore, and the Huey Newton foundation publicly condemned this organization long ago.

Even an uber liberal came out and said what they were doing was a clear violation of the law.
Well, that "uber liberal" has his own axe to grind against Obama since before this incident, so take his word with a grain of salt.

And the guys doing the voter intimidation might have clearly violated the law, but that isn't the same as clearly getting a civil injunction. Holder has to consider what he can actually prove in court.

This is a trumped up issue without a doubt.
 
Last edited:

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,596
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

Oh its obvious racism on the part of the black panthers. They are dressed all in black with batons and white person after white person said they tried to block them calling them white trash, honkey, etc.

Even an uber liberal came out and said what they were doing was a clear violation of the law.
Pretty much; 1. Voter Intimidation and 2. Illegaly providing "security". In NY only election officials or local/state police can legally provide security.
 

Mason66

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
25,970
Reaction score
6,157
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

No argument there, although to be fair to the original Black Panthers, these guys have nothing to do with the real Black Panthers, which don't exist anymore, and the Huey Newton foundation publicly condemned this organization long ago.



Well, that "uber liberal" has his own axe to grind against Obama since before this incident, so take his word with a grain of salt.

And the guys doing the voter intimidation might have clearly violated the law, but that isn't the same as clearly getting a civil injunction. Holder has to consider what he can actually prove in court.

This is a trumped up issue without a doubt.
Holder didn't have to prove anything in court.

The case was already decided. The defendants never showed up to answer the charges so a default judgemente was issued against all of them.

Then the Justice Department threw out the convictions against all but one and then watered down the punishment on the last one.

Why would the Justice Department throw out convictions if it is not politically motivated? I can't think of a reason.

If the defendants don't show up to defend their position, then the charges stand.

I have never heard of a prosecutor then going back and throwing out convictions out of the goodness of their heart.

There are a lot of questions about this case and I hope we see answers soon.

There will never be a more clear case of votor intimidation and to not have convictions in this case is just crazy.
 

Guy Incognito

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
2,818
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Former Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping New Black Panther Cas

The case was already decided. The defendants never showed up to answer the charges so a default judgemente was issued against all of them.
That's not quite accurate. Just because they didn't show up does not mean a default judgement is going to be entered against them. The judge can't give an injunction for no reason. Holder does have to show that there is a reason for the injunction whether the defendants show up or not, that's just how it works. Just because the defendant isn't there to answer it, the plaintiff still can't get an injunction if the plaintiff cannot show cause, which in this case might have been hard to show against some of the intimidators. One of them did get slapped with an injunction, and I'm betting with was the one carrying the baton. It might have been harder to show cause for the others, that's a judgment call

Then the Justice Department threw out the convictions against all but one and then watered down the punishment on the last one.

Why would the Justice Department throw out convictions if it is not politically motivated? I can't think of a reason.

If the defendants don't show up to defend their position, then the charges stand.
They weren't ever "charged" with anything and there were no "convictions" to water down, this was a civil suit for an injunction.

I have never heard of a prosecutor then going back and throwing out convictions out of the goodness of their heart.
Me neither, there was no prosecutor, this was civil.

There are a lot of questions about this case and I hope we see answers soon.
Maybe that's true, but we need to understand the situation first in order to proceed. Holder seems pretty clearly to have been within his discretion, but the allegation that the career attorneys wanted to go ahead with the suit and the administration decided to drop it does make it look like there was some politicization. But making it into an overblown issue with accusations of racism like WSJ and Fox News are doing isn't going to help get to the bottom of things.

There will never be a more clear case of votor intimidation and to not have convictions in this case is just crazy.
I pray you're right about this, but I highly doubt it.
 
Top Bottom