Civil Rights Commission sends letter to DOJ: We want to talk to your lawyers about the Panthers case

posted at 7:42 pm on July 14, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via the Standard, you’ll find a copy below. If you’ve read J. Christian Adams’s op-eds for Pajamas Media and the Washington Times, you’re already familiar with pretty much of all it. The Commission on Civil Rights — which, as any lefty will instantly remind you, is currently controlled by conservatives — subpoenaed several DOJ lawyers about the Black Panthers case that was dropped. The Department told the recipients to ignore the subpoenas; Adams decided he couldn’t do that and resigned, thereby freeing him to testify. The key bit of new information here is that the Commission evidently found Adams’s testimony credible enough to renew its demand to talk to another lawyer who dealt with the Panthers case, and even to urge Thomas Perez (head of the DOJ’s civil rights division) to begin an investigation of his own into Adams’s allegations. If the case is indeed a one-off nothingburger that’s part of no larger pattern of enforcement within the Department, then sending his subordinates over to testify is the best thing Perez could do to make this go away. If Adams is lying, let the relevant people go in there and say so. Otherwise he’ll haunt them forever.

Be sure to follow that last link and read Abigail Thernstrom’s skeptical take on the Panthers furor, too. Not just because her point is interesting, but because she happens to be vice chair of the Commission.

GAR to TP_07-14-10-1

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

DOJ will pull an Obama trick. They’ll IGNORE the letter. See? No problem!

GarandFan on July 14, 2010 at 7:49 PM

bout time.
Now how will KP and the obamabots respond?

shooter on July 14, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Civil Rights Commission sends letter to DOJ: We want to talk to your lawyers about the Panthers case.

DOJ: Screw off.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 14, 2010 at 7:49 PM

This is exactly what Holder doesn’t want. This will set his agenda for social justice back several years. Let the lies begin. Holder is in a corner.

seven on July 14, 2010 at 7:52 PM

pretty cool way to read the document.
On a more serious note, I believe the left wing media elites are so dogmatic that racism is some kind of white original sin of the United States that to even countenance the bigotry of these groups would devastate their groupthink.

rob verdi on July 14, 2010 at 7:52 PM

My gosh, Christian you did plow up snakes! Be safe and thank you. I hope this gets someones attention to stop this bho and team.
L

letget on July 14, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Now how will KP and the obamabots respond?

This doesn’t contradict her point that the only real evidence produced thus far is Adams’s testimony. That’s why I’m saying the subpoenas should be honored. If he’s a liar, let his ex-colleagues go in and say so.

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

From the Abigail Thernstrom link:

The incident involved only two Panthers at a single majority-black precinct in Philadelphia. So far — after months of hearings, testimony and investigation — no one has produced actual evidence that any voters were too scared to cast their ballots.

Really? that’s the standard? Video and witnesses are not enough? That’s like me shooting into a crowd and not being charged with anything because nobody got hit with the bullets.

Dash on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Dear Abigail,

Can’t we do both? Investigate the DOJ for dropping this case after it was already won AND fighting discriminatory gerrymandering?

GnuBreed on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Now how will KP and the obamabots respond?

shooter on July 14, 2010 at 7:49 PM

That we`re afraid of scary black men?

ThePrez on July 14, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Holder is creating a distraction. He is very very busy with the Arizona case. He is actually championing the civil rights down there for the weary and down trodden illegals.

seven on July 14, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

If all Adam’s information was fraudulent, you would think the DOJ would be more than anxious to go in front of the Commission and clear their names.

kingsjester on July 14, 2010 at 7:55 PM

We need someone in the Civil Rights section to Kick ass. Confront the “Cowards”.
Wonder if Holder has seen any cowards? Maybe when he shaved this morning?

seven on July 14, 2010 at 7:56 PM

I just hope something comes of this. In this Obama Regime climate tho . . . . Still one can hope the real hope not the hOpe!

Sherman1864 on July 14, 2010 at 7:58 PM

If Adams is lying, let the relevant people go in there and say so.

So if Adams is telling the truth and the ‘relevant people’ go in there and lie, it’s all over?

Skandia Recluse on July 14, 2010 at 8:01 PM

I personally think people are embarassed to pieces over this. That’s why it’ll get ignored.

It’s just flat-out embarassing.

AnninCA on July 14, 2010 at 8:02 PM

… It started with a simple break-in of the Democratic headquarters and lead to the resignation of President Nixon …

Oh please, oh please, oh please, oh please …

Rod on July 14, 2010 at 8:04 PM

Has any of this been covered by the network news yet?

Joe Caps on July 14, 2010 at 8:05 PM

Where did my post go?

Let me repeat it.

Is there any doubt that this Administration is RACIST?

During the 2008 campaign, First Lady Racist In Chief Michelle Obama came to my city(Pop. 150,000) and created a controversy by granting an interview with a black-owned newspaper with a circulation of 600. She totally DISSED the mainstream, white-owned newspaper, circulation 50,000.

Do you need more proof?

David2.0 on July 14, 2010 at 8:06 PM

I’m a little ignorant on this, but if the DOJ simply ignores subpoenas issued against their members, who or what exactly is there in place to enforce them?

Fuzzlenutter on July 14, 2010 at 8:09 PM

I’m a little ignorant on this, but if the DOJ simply ignores subpoenas issued against their members, who or what exactly is there in place to enforce them?

Fuzzlenutter on July 14, 2010 at 8:09 PM

God?

Rod on July 14, 2010 at 8:10 PM

That’s what I thought.

Thanks, Rod…

Fuzzlenutter on July 14, 2010 at 8:11 PM

This doesn’t contradict her point that the only real evidence produced thus far is Adams’s testimony.

Only? His testemony had a lot of gravitas. Certainly a lot more than did her blathering “reporting”.

That’s why I’m saying the subpoenas should be honored. If he’s a liar, let his ex-colleagues go in and say so.

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Do you really think he is a liar?

Luka on July 14, 2010 at 8:12 PM

DOJ to Civil Rights Commission: Oh Yeah? So sue us. Now where you gonna find a lawyer?

borntoraisehogs on July 14, 2010 at 8:12 PM

Holder was a little cocky when he admitted he hadn’t read the AZ law. He is so busy. wonder if he has the time to read this? It is a little shorter. He of course is packed with attorneys, many of which were dispatched to NOLA to interceed on the BP leak.

I did notice how swiftly the DOJ handled the swift trials of the Gitmo folks in NYC. Bam. Closing Gitmo was swift.

Just kidding!!

seven on July 14, 2010 at 8:17 PM

That’s why I’m saying the subpoenas should be honored. If he’s a liar, let his ex-colleagues go in and say so.

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Do you really think he is a liar?

Luka on July 14, 2010 at 8:12 PM

I think Allah is married to KP. Or in his dreams. Or at least he is seriously infatuated with her.

(Which is okay ’cause so am I – not married to her … but, you know … like her … a lot … but only if Allah says it’s okay … I mean … uh … never mind … bye …)

Rod on July 14, 2010 at 8:22 PM

It is with great regret that I must alert you to evidence of the possible unequal administration
of justice in the Civil Rights Division.

-
Obama… ‘You gotta stop watchin Fox News…’

RalphyBoy on July 14, 2010 at 8:25 PM

Really? that’s the standard? Video and witnesses are not enough? That’s like me shooting into a crowd and not being charged with anything because nobody got hit with the bullets.

Dash on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Especially the witness testimony of Bartle Bull, a longtime civil rights activist and former aide to Sen. Robert F. Kennedy’s 1968 presidential campaign.

According to Bull:

Mr. Bull said in a sworn statement dated April 7 that he was serving in November as a credentialed poll watcher in Philadelphia when he saw the three uniformed Panthers confront and intimidate voters with a nightstick.

Yet according to Abigail Thernstrom (emphasis mine):

The incident involved only two Panthers at a single majority-black precinct in Philadelphia. So far — after months of hearings, testimony and investigation — no one has produced actual evidence that any voters were too scared to cast their ballots.

Here you have Mr. Bull, a person that dedicated his early years to ensure the voting rights of minorities were protected (probably at a great risk to himself and his family’s safety considering the times) then to have these Black Panthers do what he fought so hard to stop (again at his own peril) so blacks and other minorities had a say in their government is the ultimate slap to the face!

To make matters worse, after being slapped in the face by these Black Panther cretins he then has to witness the DOJ (tasked with prosecuting such offenses) look the other way because the perpetrators of the offense are black! To a civil rights hero like Mr. Bull this has to be equivalent to being pissed on!

Further proof Obama and his administration should be impeached for dereliction of duty!

Liberty or Death on July 14, 2010 at 8:26 PM

Coates, another credible Civil Rights division attorney involved in the case who raised objections to the DoJ’s dismissal was relegated to South Carolina.

onlineanalyst on July 14, 2010 at 8:27 PM

Holder will do a Ray Nagin, when it comes to returning illegally seized firearms, on this one.

Same MO for Ken Salazar when it comes to offshore drilling. Just do a rope-a-dope “we’re so incompetent as a group you can’t pin anything on anybody and so what if nothing gets done?”. Contempt of court citations? Taxpayer pays the moneys, not me. Job security? I got better job security than a SCOTUS judge as long as Junior is running things and his slimy butt appears clean. Ever hear of George Soros? He has Junior’s ass covered and Junior has mine, long as I enable whatever he wants.

Holder thinks he can beat anyone because he has pulled so much shady stuff already without any comebacks. In fact, I submit his dubious record was an endorsement to choose him as AG. Of course he has contempt for the system…it should have vomited him out on a desert isle or in Zimbabwe, if it was competent and wise. Ditto for his boss.

Of course they find whitey disgustingly stupid. So many of us kiss their rears. I would laugh too.

Harry Schell on July 14, 2010 at 8:33 PM

Sure the incident in Philadelphia is small potatoes and did anyone say they didn’t vote because they felt intimidated? Why does a respected organization like the NAACP vote to label a movement as racist? Based on what? I know that many may think that this is payback for years of suffering but that’s not how it works. All of these are just more “Shut up!” moments.

Cindy Munford on July 14, 2010 at 8:36 PM

Look out folks; you know what happens when you corner a rat…

Keemo on July 14, 2010 at 8:37 PM

That’s why I’m saying the subpoenas should be honored. If he’s a liar, let his ex-colleagues go in and say so.

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

This is a very good point. Put everyone under oath. I get so tired of all these people just saying whatever the hell they want and not getting to the truth.

Let’s see how it all turns out if you have something to lose for lying about it.

BigWyo on July 14, 2010 at 8:37 PM

Now THAT’S good readin’!

madmonkphotog on July 14, 2010 at 8:37 PM

DOJ will pull an Obama trick. They’ll IGNORE the letter. See? No problem!

You mean like:

These aren’t the lawyers you’re looking for. The commission can go about its business. Move along now.

Socratease on July 14, 2010 at 8:38 PM

Socratease on July 14, 2010 at 8:38 PM

Or ‘We’ll actually have to read the letter to know what’s in it.’

BigWyo on July 14, 2010 at 8:39 PM

How long have we been discussing this? Has anyone seen this covered in the state run media?

d1carter on July 14, 2010 at 8:43 PM

Coates, another credible Civil Rights division attorney involved in the case who raised objections to the DoJ’s dismissal was relegated to South Carolina.

onlineanalyst on July 14, 2010 at 8:27 PM

I’ll put this forward one more time: this goes all the way to the top.

No doubt about it. All the players are a phone-call away from the ego-maniac in the white-house.

A call came saying “drop this” and down the pipe it went.

Think not? Look at NASA, at BP, at Arizona.

When this Hugo Chávez wanna-be is not playing golf, he’s on the phone making demands.

Rod on July 14, 2010 at 8:44 PM

To answer the question, -what recourse does the CRC have, when the laws were passed that set up the CRC, it was determined that if CRC subpoenas were ignored, the CRC could go to the A-G to get help with enforcement of them. They did not foresee at the time that the A-G would be the one refusing to honor them!

The CRC could try and go to a federal court for help with their subpoenas, but the court would likely read the law as written and find that there was nothing they could do. If the Republicans had one of the chambers, they could call hearings. Democratics certainly won’t.

slickwillie2001 on July 14, 2010 at 8:46 PM

This doesn’t contradict her point that the only real evidence produced thus far is Adams’s testimony. That’s why I’m saying the subpoenas should be honored. If he’s a liar, let his ex-colleagues go in and say so.

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

I have to respectfully disagree with you AP. There is a video that clearly shows the Black Panthers in question were dressed to intimidate (military like uniforms) one was wielding a baton (weapon) and as the following witness testimony of Bartle Bull demonstrates:

“In my opinion, the men created an intimidating presence at the entrance to a poll,” he declared. “In all my experience in politics, in civil rights litigation and in my efforts in the 1960s to secure the right to vote in Mississippi … I have never encountered or heard of another instance in the United States where armed and uniformed men blocked the entrance to a polling location.”

Mr. Bull said the “clear purpose” of what the Panthers were doing was to “intimidate voters with whom they did not agree.” He also said he overheard one of the men tell a white poll watcher: “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.”

He called their conduct an “outrageous affront to American democracy and the rights of voters to participate in an election without fear.” He said it was a “racially motivated effort to limit both poll watchers aiding voters, as well as voters with whom the men did not agree.”

The video along with Mr. Bull’s statement and others of what occurred is clearly a case of voter intimidation and there is no doubt had the same thing been done by members of the KKK they would have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and rightly so, yet these Black Panther members aren’t being prosecuted?

If we as a nation ever want to move beyond race then we have to be colorblind when it comes to upholding the law, especially when upholding voting rights laws as they are the foundation of our nation!

Liberty or Death on July 14, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Why didn’t these gentlemen show up in court and state their case? If you are charged with a crime and don’t show up on your court date don’t they usually add contempt charges? More menu picking law enforcement. Great idea.

Cindy Munford on July 14, 2010 at 8:56 PM

If we as a nation ever want to move beyond race then we have to be colorblind ….
Liberty or Death on July 14, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Until race-baiting people (like Sharpton and Jackson) and organizations (like the NAACP), whose livelihood and existence depend upon it, are gone, this nation will never be color blind.

Rod on July 14, 2010 at 8:58 PM

Has any of this been covered by the network news yet?

Joe Caps on July 14, 2010 at 8:05 PM

I dare say no. Hardly.

I live in Japan (American citizen and proud of it) and you would at least think they had heard of the rather large oil gusher in the Gulf, for example.

Not so however. Important American news that does not make the news in America does not make the news anywhere else.
People in ignorance served by a rotten press. Seems to be a global problem.

This is a historical time all right. We will either wake up to the evil Obama represents or we will succumb to it.

Yep. One helluva “historical” presidency. I just wish our first black president didn`t have to be such a lOser. Cuz now you get called a racist just for disagreeing with him.

I am no racist. I don`t give a rat`s arse what color the president is.

What I care about are his true colors!And boy how he showing them off!

Sherman1864 on July 14, 2010 at 9:02 PM

Memo

To: Civil Rights Commission

From: DOJ

Re: Subpoenas

Dear Sir:

Pound sand.

/s/

CC

CapedConservative on July 14, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Until race-baiting people (like Sharpton and Jackson) and organizations (like the NAACP), whose livelihood and existence depend upon it, are gone, this nation will never be color blind.

Rod on July 14, 2010 at 8:58 PM

Tru dat playa…unfortunately race baiters such as those you describe (and others) have a vested interest in keeping racism alive even to the point of creating racism where there is none…case in point the supposed rrraaaaaccccciiiiissst Hallmark Card!

Liberty or Death on July 14, 2010 at 9:16 PM

The Democrat party is as acting completely outside the law. Obama just dictates whatever he wants and little men salute and fall in line. He ignores court orders. He ignores American law.
How credible can a President be if he and others within his administration just act with no regards to the law? This is incredible. We have anarchy within our government.

JellyToast on July 14, 2010 at 9:17 PM

AP, did you read Thernstrom’s article? If so then how did you miss the elephant in the room? Thernstrom talks about the difficulty in prosecuting these types of cases. That is classic misdirection. The fact of the matter is the case had already been successfully prosecuted and a default judgment taken against the panthers because they never answered the suit. The difficulty in prosecuting these types of cases is meaningless once a judgment has been taken. The only recourse the panthers had was to file a motion for new trial, which proceeds only on procedural grounds. The DOJ essentially granted the panthers a pardon when the judgment was vacated. The question here is whether it is right or proper for a republican or democrat lead DOJ to go backwards and begin vacating judgments taken during the previous administration. That is a very dangerous precedent, and one that threatens to turn the Department of Justice into the Department of Political Persecution.

wickedcurveball on July 14, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Let me get this straight…is their position that because it was a majority black neighborhood there could not have been intimidation by black people? So are they are saying that they expected %100 of black people in that precinct to vote the exact same way, so no harm, no foul. Riiiight. The Democrats are so racist they can’t even conceive of a black person who might want to vote a different way and/or just be frightened by those thugs. Sickening really.

txmomof6 on July 14, 2010 at 9:24 PM

How can anyone in the Department of Justice legitimately justify ordering subordinates to ignore a lawful subpoena? Isn’t this in and of itself illegal as well as profoundly unethical?

This is beyond absurd.

hillbillyjim on July 14, 2010 at 9:29 PM

We won” is not a blank check.

hillbillyjim on July 14, 2010 at 9:31 PM

How can anyone in the Department of Justice legitimately justify ordering subordinates to ignore a lawful subpoena? Isn’t this in and of itself illegal as well as profoundly unethical?

This is beyond absurd.

hillbillyjim on July 14, 2010 at 9:29 PM

I was thinking about this exact thing earlier. If I were the judge presiding on the case I would hold the person in contempt of a court order and have said person thrown in the slammer until they appear per the subpoena! Such a move may end up being a career ender but damn it some things are too important to ignore!

Liberty or Death on July 14, 2010 at 9:36 PM

Be sure to follow that last link and read Abigail Thernstrom’s skeptical take on the Panthers furor, too. Not just because her point is interesting, but because she happens to be vice chair of the Commission.

I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I can object to racial preferences in the enforcement of Voter Rights case as well as object to interference by federal bureaucrats in state redistricting. Why must I choose?

tommylotto on July 14, 2010 at 9:47 PM

Do you really think he is a liar?

Luka on July 14, 2010 at 8:12 PM

I don’t think that AP thinks he’s a liar. I think what he’s saying is that if he is a liar, this gives them a chance to counter what he’s saying and prove him to be one.

If he’s a liar, it’s to their advantage to let the others respond to the subpoenas. And if he’s exaggerating anything at all, they’ll call him on it.

But the fact that so far their behavior is that of those who are guilty… their bunker mentality… suggests strongly that he’s not lying and that releasing the others to respond to the subpoena would only give them a chance to back him up.

The thing is…they’re stuck now either way. If they release the others to respond to the subpoenas, the truth comes out (and I don’t think in their favor). If they keep blocking, the story will continue to grow on its own in a “what are they hiding” way.

powerpro on July 14, 2010 at 9:47 PM

All we need now is the DOJ to start taking political prisoners.

Mojave Mark on July 14, 2010 at 9:49 PM

I read Abigail Thernstrom’s article and found it an interesting take.

On the one hand, her argument that the NBP voter intimidation incident is a small scale event and not worthy of the furor it has caused seems logical. Numbers-wise, I guess I have to agree. Elections generally aren’t determined by such small numbers (unless you’re Franken!).

However, which votes do we cast aside as unimportant? How do we chose who should be guaranteed to have their vote counted? Who is willing to give up their vote?

So to Thernstrom I say – each vote is important even if it does not affect the outcome of an election; so our right to express our opinion at the election poll is guaranteed. Every person should be able to depend upon their government to protect that right.

People may casually toss aside their vote because they don’t care to participate, and that is their choice. But to be denied, especially by intimidation or deceit, should be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest.

Who’s willing to give up their vote? Not me.

gobblemom on July 14, 2010 at 9:56 PM

should have been prosecuted under section 11 (b) of the Voting Rights Act for their actions of November 2008

Um…weren’t they? And didn’t the DOJ win a default judgment and then abandon it?

Thernstrom speaks with enormous credibility and should not be ignored on this in any way. But she’s missing a very big part of the picture with these racist black punks.

Jaibones on July 14, 2010 at 10:01 PM

A Congressman is sending letters, including one today to the Inspector General of the Justice Department to investigate their handling of this matter.
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2010/07/13/pjm-exclusive-congressman-asks-inspector-general-to-launch-investigation-of-new-black-panther-case/

Maybe this has legs.

txmomof6 on July 14, 2010 at 10:35 PM

Look out folks; you know what happens when you corner a rat…

Keemo on July 14, 2010 at 8:37 PM

Like O’Really did tonight with Marc LaMont Hill, or whatever his name is? That was painful to watch the Professor weakly defend everything Bill threw at him.

His being a PhD proves the origin of that term, namely Piled high and Deep.

Del Dolemonte on July 14, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Civil Rights Commission sends letters to Congress to strike racial and gender bias from the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Bill. In question is Section 342 which changes the employment law from outlawing discrimination to a quota system based on race and gender.
Quota systems are just wrong.

elclynn on July 14, 2010 at 11:23 PM

Re Marc Lamont Hill, I don’t understand BOR’s attraction to this hackjob. Perhaps BOR thinks this is one guy that’s not smarter than he is? This is the guy that Rupert Murdoch announced the firing of at a shareholder’s meeting late last year. A week after that, he was back on BOR. What does he have on BOR?

slickwillie2001 on July 14, 2010 at 11:24 PM

Like O’Really did tonight with Marc LaMont Hill, or whatever his name is? That was painful to watch the Professor weakly defend everything Bill threw at him.

Del Dolemonte on July 14, 2010 at 11:14 PM

Weakest O’Reilley performance ever. He misattributed stuff the Nation of Islam said/did as something the NAACP said/did. Megyn Kelly would’ve ripped him a new one.

…and yet, Hill still couldn’t muster any credible defense. When you’re beaten by terminally flawed arguments, your case is weak indeed.

James on July 14, 2010 at 11:30 PM

This doesn’t contradict her point that the only real evidence produced thus far is Adams’s testimony. That’s why I’m saying the subpoenas should be honored. If he’s a liar, let his ex-colleagues go in and say so.

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

The fact that the DOJ is blocking their lawyers from testifying, speaks volumes. If they were innocent of Adam’s charges, their lawyers could prove their innocence.

Their stonewalling proves their guilt.

SoldiersMom on July 14, 2010 at 11:41 PM

The incident involved only two Panthers at a single majority-black precinct in Philadelphia. So far — after months of hearings, testimony and investigation — no one has produced actual evidence that any voters were too scared to cast their ballots.

This directly contradicts one of the things that had Meghan Kelly aflame yesterday. She said that according to testimony there were a few more guys inside the facility guarding the door and there was witness testimony that several older ladies turned away because of the NBP intimidation. So something isn’t right here.

a capella on July 15, 2010 at 12:07 AM

even to urge Thomas Perez (head of the DOJ’s civil rights division) to begin an investigation of his own

duh Thomas Perez who stopped the Panther case would have to investigate Thomas Perez

mathewsjw on July 15, 2010 at 2:48 AM

Whatever the DOJ calls its internal affairs division, it needs to investigate the civil rights division.

Slowburn on July 15, 2010 at 3:23 AM

One bureaucrat investigating another…

right2bright on July 15, 2010 at 7:32 AM

hillbillyjim, the same way Abraham Lincoln got away with ignoring decisions of the Supreme Court during the Civil War: if any two branches are controlled by one party the enforcement mechanisms break down.

SDN on July 15, 2010 at 7:54 AM

What I care about are his true colors!And boy how he showing them off!

Sherman1864 on July 14, 2010

Well, he got the red part down. Don’t see and white and blue, but there is a wide swath of yellow.

Extrafishy on July 15, 2010 at 8:40 AM

Well, he got the red part down. Don’t see and white and blue, but there is a wide swath of yellow.

Extrafishy on July 15, 2010 at 8:40 AM

Could that be what is the problem with Chris Mathews leg?

mechkiller_k on July 15, 2010 at 10:54 AM

This doesn’t contradict her point that the only real evidence produced thus far is Adams’s testimony. That’s why I’m saying the subpoenas should be honored. If he’s a liar, let his ex-colleagues go in and say so.

Allahpundit on July 14, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Indeed, if he is lying, then he is putting his entire life and reputation on the line for his 15 minutes. That would be a huge risk for him to take, especially when the DoJ refuses to let other attorneys testify that he is lying. If he had somehow simply misinterpreted the directive, that could be explained away easily by producing the document and parsing its contents. Otherwise, methinks they doth protest too much.

College Prof on July 15, 2010 at 11:30 AM

So what’s wrong with a New Black Panther party member in militant garb and carrying a night stick?

Oh, and the videos of same NBP member proselytizing on the Philly streets about killing cracker babies?

Must be some kind of new voter drive in the Era of Obama for sure.

Captain America on July 15, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Abigail Thernstrom is so obsessed with the new redistricting rules that she’s failed to see the importance of the Justice Department’s race-based enforcement, so dismisses it carelessly.
.
There was testimony from some voters at that polling place that these thugs intimidated both white and black voters – how can Thernstrom ignore that? And how can she remain unconcerned about the Justice Department illegally blowing off her own Commission’s supoenas?
.
The poor girl’s too easily distracted by her pet redistricting issue, and fails to pay attention to all issues demanding it. That’s still no reason for her to recommend that the rest of the reading world do likewise.

Insufficiently Sensitive on July 15, 2010 at 1:19 PM

From the Abigail Thernstrom link:

The incident involved only two Panthers at a single majority-black precinct in Philadelphia. So far — after months of hearings, testimony and investigation — no one has produced actual evidence that any voters were too scared to cast their ballots.

Move to dismiss, your honor, there is no actual evidence that my client intimidated any tellers into giving him the bank’s money: only the testimony of ONE ex-teller…

/foolishness>

landlines on July 15, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Subpeona means “under penalty.” When do we see some people go to jail for contempt, unless and until and unless they start testifying under oath?

njcommuter on July 15, 2010 at 6:01 PM