Imagine, multiple witness, including a Well-Respected Democrat Civil Rights Activist hearing “Now you know what it will be like to be ruled by a black man, Cracker!”
Cracker, for the uninitiated is a racial slur for white people. But since it’s is not politically incorrect no one actually cares that it’s a racial slur.
Imagine, a tall Black man with a knight stick and his buddies outside a Philadelphia polling place.
Imagine, They called people “white devils”. They menaced, they tapped their baton. They tried to stop people from entering the polls.
And it is all on tape!!
But since the Ministry of Truth and the Liberal Spin machine will dismiss it as a “republican” ploy enter Lifelong Democrat, and Civil Rights Advocate Bartle Bull.
He’s a long time Robert F. Kennedy civil rights activist, worked in Mississippi in the ’60s. He said it was the worst case of voter intimidation he has ever seen in his 40 years of practicing civil rights laws.
He was There.
He also alleges that ACORN registered at least 400,000 people in the last election that were fraudulent also.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/america-live/index.html#/v/4267253/civil-rights-attorney-on-accusations-vs-doj/?playlist_id=87651
So you have voter fraud and voter intimidation allegations from a Diehard Liberal Democrat!
“But I do know already that the President of the United States has violated his oath of office to enforce the laws of the United States. Because he is not enforcing the Voting Rights Act. Which he swore to do.’ – Bartle Bull.
Text of the Interview with Former DOJ Attorney: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,595683,00.html
Excerpts:
KELLY (FOX): Ok, so you bring the case against these four defendants. The two guys we see on camera, the party and the head of the party. And what happens next?
J Christian ADAMS (Former DOJ): Well you cruise along. The defendants didn’t even appear, they didn’t even answer, the just ignored the charges.
KELLY: They didn’t bother to defend it in any way?
ADAMS: No, it’s like ignoring a speeding ticket. They just blew it off. They didn’t show up for court, they didn’t file any papers, they didn’t do anything.
KELLY: So you get something that’s called a default judgment, meaning a judgment because they didn’t bother to defend it and the judge says to you at the Department of Justice, OK, write up an order and tell me whether you want to make this final essentially.
ADAMS: Yeah, the court had already found and entered the fault against the defendants. It was done. All we had to do is tell the judge what we wanted for punishment.
KELLY: OK, but instead of doing that, something changed at the Department of Justice. What happened?
ADAMS: Well, the case was dismissed on May 15. All the charges were dropped against three of the defendants and the final order against one of the defendants was a timid restraint.
KELLY: So, the only person who wound up facing any punishment was the guy with the baton. And instead of having a permanent injunction, which is what you guys wanted, never let this guy near a polling station to do this, to do this kind of thing again, he got what?
ADAMS: He’s stopped from appearing at the polls with a weapon only in the city of Philadelphia and only for a couple more years.
KELLY: And the other three defendants?
ADAMS: Nothing. They’re dismissed from the case completely.
KELLY: Ok, so what happened at the Department of Justice to get you to the point where you literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory?
KELLY: So, but what was the reason? That’s what I’m trying to get at. You, the trial attorneys, the career lawyers at DOJ said we have a victory. We think this case has merit. And you were told what?
ADAMS: Dismiss the case. That the facts and the law don’t support this. I can’t explain it.
KELLY: What was really going on?
ADAMS: Well, I mean, there is a pervasive hostility to bringing these sorts of civil rights cases. I’ve worked on other ones at the Justice Department. I’ve worked on cases in Mississippi. I’ve represented both black victims of racial discrimination and Hispanic victims and in this case a white victim of racial discrimination. There is a pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases.
KELLY: Do you believe that the DOJ has a policy now of not pursuing cases if the defendant is black and the victim is white?
ADAM: Well, particularly in voting. In voting that will be the case over the next few years, there’s no doubt about it.
KELLY: There isn’t?
ADAM: None, I mean, instructions were, if you had all the attorneys that worked on this case I am quite sure that they would say the exact same thing. And that other attorneys gave instructions that the voting section would not be pursuing these sorts of cases.
Response: The department “is committed to comprehensive and vigorous enforcement of both the civil and criminal provisions of federal law that prohibit voter intimidation. We continue to work with voters, communities, and local law enforcement to ensure that every American can vote free from intimidation, coercion or threats,” Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler Schmaler said.
There’s that word again, “comprehensive”. And could you be a little more political and platitude-y in your response please.
But Adams told Fox News that the department’s decision to dismiss the case reeked of racial politics and corruption.
“I don’t think the department or the fine people who work there are corrupt, but in this particular instance, to abandon law-abiding citizens and abet wrongdoers constitutes corruption,” he said.
Adams said he quit last month after the department ordered attorneys to ignore a subpoena from the commission.
“After being ordered not to comply with the lawful subpoena, after hearing the lies that are being said about the case, after the corruption that we had witnessed in the case, I just said that’s it, that I resign and now I’m no longer there,” he said.
Adams also said the department has been caught lying about the case, including the assertion that the decision to dismiss the charges was made only by Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division.
Citing a Washington Times article, Adams said Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli, the No. 3 official in the department, was responsible for the decision. He also said a written response from the department to the commission revealed that Attorney General Eric Holder was also briefed on the case.
“The initial statements of the department are being proved in hindsight to be false,” he said.
When asked whether Holder signed off on the decision to dismiss the case, Adams said, “I can’t answer that. We were just doing our job. We didn’t even know these things. We thought we had a good case. We thought it’s all going to be over with soon and we’re going to win. And then it wasn’t.”
But Adams noted that a former Justice Department official testified to the commission that it would be “unheard of” for a decision like this to be made without the attorney general’s blessing.
Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez provided false testimony in May to the United States Commission on Civil Rights, which is investigating the department’s decision to drop charges against three members of the radical group in a case that the government won.
Perez told the commission that the facts and the law didn’t support the case against the group.
“I know about the truth…and I know what the truth is and I know to say the facts and law don’t support the Black Panther case is not true,” Adams said, adding that Perez ignored his warnings not to provide false testimony.
“We made it very clear that continuing to say that the facts and the law don’t support this case would not be consistent with the truth,” he said.
Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler called Adams’ allegations “baseless.”
So you catch several Blank Panther radicals brandishing weapons and yelling racial epithets and intimidating people at the polls.
You win the case. It’s a Slam Dunk. It’s all on Tape. You have multiple credible witnesses.
Then your new boss says drop it.
Why?
Because,“the facts and law do not support the case”, they say.
It’s ON TAPE! Slapping you in the face with a 2X4!
So what they are are the power now (Democrats) and they decided what laws are to be enforced and when.
And this was not going to be enforced.
Racism requires the perpetrator to be in a position of power. Obama comes from a “church” of black liberation theology (Rev. Wright). Holder is no newcomer to controversy and the politics of race. Obama holds the office of President of the United States and Eric Holder holds the office of Attorney General of the United States.
Who has the power?
We are from the government and we are here to serve you.
TO SERVE MAN.
“It’s a Cook Book! It’s A Cook Book!”
No comments:
Post a Comment