DOJ Attorney resigns due to…racism?
posted at 12:14 pm on June 27, 2010 by MadisonConservative
How can this be? How is this possible? This doesn’t make sense! By Neptune’s sceptre, how can that be?
On the day President Obama was elected, armed men wearing the black berets and jackboots of the New Black Panther Party were stationed at the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia. They brandished a weapon and intimidated voters and poll watchers. After the election, the Justice Department brought a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and those armed thugs. I and other Justice attorneys diligently pursued the case and obtained an entry of default after the defendants ignored the charges. Before a final judgment could be entered in May 2009, our superiors ordered us to dismiss the case.
…
Based on my firsthand experiences, I believe the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law. Others still within the department share my assessment. The department abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens victimized by the New Black Panthers. The dismissal raises serious questions about the department’s enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.
This must be a complete and total lie. Why in the world would Obama back up an extremist group like the Black Panthers? Case closed.
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
As we say in Latin…
Surprisibus, surprisibus…
Ragspierre on June 27, 2010 at 12:26 PM
That does not bode well for the future. My guess is the NBP tactics will work fine in certain areas but try that where I live and someone will touch them from far, far away.
chemman on June 27, 2010 at 12:26 PM
Get used to it.
There will be a lot more of it in 2012 and the cops will be coincidentally busy somewhere else.
The question is, “Who, will do what, about it?
Any bets on how long it takes the Dems to start screaming about voter fraud, in order to give cover to their voter fraud artists, in 2010?
God Bless America!
We’re gonna need his help!
paratisi on June 27, 2010 at 1:05 PM
Which neatly sums up this regime’s approach to the rule of law, generally.
Everything this outfit has done is consistent with what one would see in a Banana Republic (can I say that…??? Or is that RAAAAACIST…???)
Ragspierre on June 27, 2010 at 1:07 PM
Good point. As soon as the Dems start screaming about voter fraud, get onto your toes because that means they are engaged in it on a massive scale. After all, if they are doing it the other side MUST be doing it too. It is just the way they think.
GnuBreed on June 27, 2010 at 4:01 PM
The law and abiding by the law, for the most part a voluntary act, is the only thing that separates America from the tyrants and stooges of Africa. Heck even Kenya knew that when they threw Obama’s pappy out on his sorry ass for suggesting otherwise.
tarpon on June 27, 2010 at 4:04 PM
The author to which you’ve linked can not really be said to have resigned because he’s a racist. That’s not fair, MadCon.
The truth is you can say no more than J. Christian Adams is one
Schlozman’s improperly hired attorneys.
http://www.justice.gov/oig/special/s0901/final.pdf
audiculous on June 27, 2010 at 8:43 PM
Submitted for your consideration;
Perhaps MadCon meant that the author resigned because he suspects a racial motivation to the improper dismissal of the charges.
You read “racism” as if it were the motivation of the author.
My guess is, that’s not MadisonConservative’s intent.
massrighty on June 27, 2010 at 9:12 PM
Also, Adams in not mentioned in the document you linked to.
Tarring with a broad brush?
massrighty on June 27, 2010 at 9:15 PM
massrighty
A good and fair point.
I should have posted a second link showing Adams was one of the Schlozman hires .
http://www.mainjustice.com/2009/12/23/the-black-panther-case-a-legacy-of-politicized-hiring/
audiculous on June 27, 2010 at 9:26 PM
I was referring to the racism of the Department of Justice and the Obama administration, not of Adams…as indicated by the end of my post.
MadisonConservative on June 27, 2010 at 9:33 PM
MadisonConservative
thank you, MadCom and
……duh.
(the above was an indication that I understood what you meant and that you’re a clueless jackass needing the prompt. )
audiculous on June 27, 2010 at 9:52 PM
Both citations from the same source. Mainjustice was founded by a former Salon contributor (Mary Jacoby) whose anti-Bush animus is on full display in her writing for them
We can infer that her leanings are somewhat left.
Can we not also question the motive she (or her blog) might have in attacking Schlozman?
And, if we question some of Shlozman’s hires, does that automatically make Adams an improper hire?
It would move the argument if you could source this from an unbiased source.
massrighty on June 27, 2010 at 9:53 PM
massrighty
The report in the first link is an official document of the Department of Justice
U.S. Department of Justice U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Office of Professional Responsibility
that’s not the same source as Main Justice I hope you’ll agree.
You’ll also note, I hope, that the report is dated July 2, 2008, during the Bush admin.
audiculous on June 27, 2010 at 10:07 PM
Your point reqarding the first link is well taken.
However, that doesn’t negate my subsequent points, to wit;
1. That Mainjustice may be a politicized source for condemnation of Adams as a partisan hire.
2. That absent other sourcing, we can’t come to the conclusion that Adams is/was an improper hire.
massrighty on June 27, 2010 at 10:13 PM
mass, if you glance at the report, you’ll see that the impropriety centers around the charge that the hires were based on the political bias of the lawyers given the jobs.
If your willing to spend the time reviewing Adams’ published writings prior to his resignation, and publicly available documents related to his work at DoJ, you might find some basis for my suspicion that Adams wasn’t an unbiased man surrounded by outrageous sinners in the DoJ.
Adams isn’t the rock of righteousness upon which to build.
audiculous on June 27, 2010 at 10:33 PM
What the hell is the point of you posting, might I ask? First, you misinterpret my meaning. Then, I clarify. You then insult me for your mistake. Do they allow internet access in mental hospitals now?
MadisonConservative on June 28, 2010 at 12:52 AM
your info out of date? you in a halfway house or something now?
Look, you thickheaded block of cheddar, it wasn’t my mistake. I understood what you meant. You failed to understand that I chose to treat your thesis derisively.
I read your post.
I laugh at big dummy
I make joke.
Big dummy tell me I wrong
Do some rudimentary research into the subject before you post.
audiculous on June 28, 2010 at 2:07 AM
Nope, that right there is a mistake, it’s your mistake and you’re behaving like a troll. You wrong, Big Dummy.
Pablo on June 28, 2010 at 7:20 AM
You made no joke. You claimed I was calling the lawyer who resigned racist, when in fact I was calling the DOJ racist. Now you’re pretending your very clear mistake was a joke. Take a hike.
MadisonConservative on June 28, 2010 at 8:24 AM