Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-21-2010, 05:51 PM
MS Fowler's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Littlestown PA ( 6 miles south of Gettysburg)
Posts: 2,278
Its back--DOJ inplicted in NBP

Just when you began to think the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation might go away--its back--Bigger than ever.


Top Obama DOJ Officials Involved in Decision to Drop Black Panther Case According to Evidence Obtained by Judicial Watch
PR Newswire


– Tue Sep 21, 12:15 pm ET

WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 –
Withheld Records Contradict Testimony by Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez that No Political Leadership was Involved in the Decision

WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released a draft Vaughn index prepared by the Department of Justice (DOJ) that shows that the two top political appointees at the DOJ were involved in the decision to dismiss the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense (NBPP). The index, obtained pursuant to a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, contradicts sworn testimony by Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, who testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that no political leadership was involved in the decision.

The Vaughn index produced by the DOJ describes documents that are currently being withheld in their entirety. The index details a series of internal DOJ emails regarding the Black Panther case between the highest political appointees inside Justice, including former Deputy Attorney General David Ogden and the Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli.

For example, a May 10, 2009 email from Associate Attorney General Perrelli, the third highest ranking official in the DOJ, asks Deputy Associate Attorney General and former Democratic election lawyer Sam Hirsh, "Where are we on the Black Panther case?" The email also includes Deputy Attorney General Ogden's "current thoughts on the case."

Another email from former Acting Assistant Attorney General Lorretta King, dated May 12, 2009, was distributed to Attorney General Eric Holder through Odgen and Perrelli. Entitled, "Weekly Report for the Week ending May 8, 2009," the email "Identifies matters deemed significant and highlights issues for the senior offices, including an update on a planned course of action in the NBPP (New Black Panther Party) litigation."

The index produced to Judicial Watch seemingly contradict testimony by Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on May 14, 2010. The Commission, an independent, bipartisan unit of the federal government charged with investigating and reporting on civil rights issues, initiated a probe of the DOJ's decision to drop its lawsuit. During the hearing, Perez was asked directly regarding the involvement of political leaders in the decision to dismiss the Black Panther case.

COMMISSIONER KIRSANOW: Was there any political leadership involved in the decision not to pursue this particular case any further than it was?

ASST. ATTY. GEN. PEREZ: No. The decisions were made by Loretta King in consultation with Steve Rosenbaum, who is the Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General.

Perez also suggested that the dispute was merely "a case of career people disagreeing with career people."

The index describes 122 documents (totaling at least 611 pages) that the Obama Justice Department is withholding from the public in their entirety. A federal court hearing in the matter is scheduled on October 5, 2010 in Washington, DC, before U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton.

"This new evidence shows that the Obama team lied when it said politics did not influence the Black Panther dismissal," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "We now know that top political leaders inside Obama Justice Department were involved in the call to drop the Black Panther case. And we also know that at least one top Justice official said otherwise under oath. In the meantime, we will ask the Court to require the Obama Justice Department to release these (and other) secret documents about this scandal and its cover-up."

The DOJ filed its lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party following an incident that took place outside of a Philadelphia polling station on November 4, 2008. A video of the incident, showing a member of the New Black Panther Party brandishing police-style baton weapon, was widely distributed on the Internet. According to multiple witnesses, members of the New Black Panthers blocked access to polling stations, harassed voters and hurled racial epithets. Nonetheless, the DOJ ultimately overruled the recommendations of its own staff and dismissed the majority of its charges.

Visit www.JudicialWatch.org to access the draft Vaughn index produced to Judicial Watch.

SOURCE Judicial Watch


Even though your main stream "objective" media has refused to cover/ investigate, the truth seems to be leaking out.
DOJ is corrupt, and is doing race-based justice.

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-21-2010, 05:58 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Cape Cod Massachusetts
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Fowler View Post
Just when you began to think the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation might go away--its back--Bigger than ever.


Top Obama DOJ Officials Involved in Decision to Drop Black Panther Case According to Evidence Obtained by Judicial Watch
PR Newswire


– Tue Sep 21, 12:15 pm ET

WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 –
Withheld Records Contradict Testimony by Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez that No Political Leadership was Involved in the Decision

WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released a draft Vaughn index prepared by the Department of Justice (DOJ) that shows that the two top political appointees at the DOJ were involved in the decision to dismiss the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense (NBPP). The index, obtained pursuant to a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, contradicts sworn testimony by Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, who testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that no political leadership was involved in the decision.

The Vaughn index produced by the DOJ describes documents that are currently being withheld in their entirety. The index details a series of internal DOJ emails regarding the Black Panther case between the highest political appointees inside Justice, including former Deputy Attorney General David Ogden and the Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli.

For example, a May 10, 2009 email from Associate Attorney General Perrelli, the third highest ranking official in the DOJ, asks Deputy Associate Attorney General and former Democratic election lawyer Sam Hirsh, "Where are we on the Black Panther case?" The email also includes Deputy Attorney General Ogden's "current thoughts on the case."

Another email from former Acting Assistant Attorney General Lorretta King, dated May 12, 2009, was distributed to Attorney General Eric Holder through Odgen and Perrelli. Entitled, "Weekly Report for the Week ending May 8, 2009," the email "Identifies matters deemed significant and highlights issues for the senior offices, including an update on a planned course of action in the NBPP (New Black Panther Party) litigation."

The index produced to Judicial Watch seemingly contradict testimony by Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on May 14, 2010. The Commission, an independent, bipartisan unit of the federal government charged with investigating and reporting on civil rights issues, initiated a probe of the DOJ's decision to drop its lawsuit. During the hearing, Perez was asked directly regarding the involvement of political leaders in the decision to dismiss the Black Panther case.

COMMISSIONER KIRSANOW: Was there any political leadership involved in the decision not to pursue this particular case any further than it was?

ASST. ATTY. GEN. PEREZ: No. The decisions were made by Loretta King in consultation with Steve Rosenbaum, who is the Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General.

Perez also suggested that the dispute was merely "a case of career people disagreeing with career people."

The index describes 122 documents (totaling at least 611 pages) that the Obama Justice Department is withholding from the public in their entirety. A federal court hearing in the matter is scheduled on October 5, 2010 in Washington, DC, before U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton.

"This new evidence shows that the Obama team lied when it said politics did not influence the Black Panther dismissal," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "We now know that top political leaders inside Obama Justice Department were involved in the call to drop the Black Panther case. And we also know that at least one top Justice official said otherwise under oath. In the meantime, we will ask the Court to require the Obama Justice Department to release these (and other) secret documents about this scandal and its cover-up."

The DOJ filed its lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party following an incident that took place outside of a Philadelphia polling station on November 4, 2008. A video of the incident, showing a member of the New Black Panther Party brandishing police-style baton weapon, was widely distributed on the Internet. According to multiple witnesses, members of the New Black Panthers blocked access to polling stations, harassed voters and hurled racial epithets. Nonetheless, the DOJ ultimately overruled the recommendations of its own staff and dismissed the majority of its charges.

Visit www.JudicialWatch.org to access the draft Vaughn index produced to Judicial Watch.

SOURCE Judicial Watch


Even though your main stream "objective" media has refused to cover/ investigate, the truth seems to be leaking out.
DOJ is corrupt, and is doing race-based justice.
And coming out like this now, just in time for the November 2 overthrow of the regime! Priceless!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-21-2010, 06:14 PM
Skid Row Joe's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: #KeepingAmericaGreat!
Posts: 7,071
Priceless indeed!

We need more of this to get out about the corrupt obama whitehouse.


In additon to Judicial Watch - here's some worthwhile organizations at the grassroots level, to defeat the leftwing liberal extremists.

BigGovernment.com
Americans for Prosperity
SickofSpending.com
Judicial Vision
Commerce Council
Brotherhood Coalition
Citizens Opposed To Lawsuit Tyranny
Fair Litigation Association
Jury Watch - This one's very active in Texas btw!
Tort Reform Committee
Freedom Network
Market Partnership
Enterprise Advocacy
G.U.N. - Gun Owners United Now
American Rifle Association
Citizens United
Heartland Organization

Last edited by Skid Row Joe; 09-21-2010 at 07:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-21-2010, 06:37 PM
Pooka
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 664
This story falls apart in the first sentence. Can you spot the BIG lie in the first line?

I will check back tomorrow and provide the answer if no one spots it.

HINT: The word that show how phony this press release is at the end of a line; not at the end of a sentence.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-21-2010, 06:44 PM
Skid Row Joe's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: #KeepingAmericaGreat!
Posts: 7,071

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
This story falls apart in the first sentence. Can you spot the BIG lie in the first line?

I will check back tomorrow and provide the answer if no one spots it.

HINT: The word that show how phony this press release is at the end of a line; not at the end of a sentence.
LMAO!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-21-2010, 06:56 PM
Pooka
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 664
The lie is there.

All you have to do is read it slowly. It jumps right out at you.

Then read the rest of the article and you will see it is nothing but opinion.

But then, as Rush always says, "That's my opinion and I am entitled to it!"

That Rush... Always talking about his entitlements.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-21-2010, 07:00 PM
Skid Row Joe's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: #KeepingAmericaGreat!
Posts: 7,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
The lie is there.


All you have to do is read it slowly. It jumps right out at you.

Then read the rest of the article and you will see it is nothing but opinion.

But then, as Rush always says, "That's my opinion and I am entitled to it!"

That Rush... Always talking about his entitlements.
Here's yer "jumpin'" when Googled......LMAO!

Keep tryin' though!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-21-2010, 07:09 PM
Pooka
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 664
There 'seemingly' appears to be canals on Mars.

See how easy that is?

So are there canals on Mars? Is this fact or fiction? All one has to do is look at Mars and 'seemingly' they are there.

Keep trying! No one has found the lie yet, and I just threw the 'seemingly' comment out there just to show how devoid of facts this press release is.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-21-2010, 07:14 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Cape Cod Massachusetts
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
There 'seemingly' appears to be canals on Mars.

See how easy that is?

So are there canals on Mars? Is this fact or fiction? All one has to do is look at Mars and 'seemingly' they are there.

Keep trying! No one has found the lie yet, and I just threw the 'seemingly' comment out there just to show how devoid of facts this press release is.
You better bust out your dictionary reread the word's broader definition!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-21-2010, 07:23 PM
Pooka
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 664
Why bother? When a press release about this comes out from the Department of Justice it will be worthy of attention.

Until then it is just another attempt to keep people stirred up.

Spotted the lie yet?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-21-2010, 08:07 PM
Craig
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I did find a legitimate story on the subject (finally), but it doesn't aven sound close to what is posted above:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/13/AR2010091306427.html
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-22-2010, 06:34 AM
Pooka
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 664
Thanks, Craig.

It appears that the real story here is that the DOJ, under Bush, let a lot of things slide. It is going to take a few years to undo the damage the Bushies did and it is nice to see the DOJ is now working on becoming what it used to be.

As for the self proclaimed 'Prosecutors' in the original story... It appears to me that they are trying to take credit for someone else's actions. Holder would be that someone else along with the two Republican lawmakers.

Since these guys have decided they are Prosecutors how long will it be before they decide they have the power to arrest as well? Someone tried to pull a 'Citizens Arrest' on Karl Rove once and that, as it should have, went nowhere.

It is good to see Republican Congressmen wanting the DOJ restored to where it once was. It looks like things in DC are beginning to normal, and I hope that we have reached the end of the beginning on this process.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-22-2010, 11:11 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Cape Cod Massachusetts
Posts: 1,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
Thanks, Craig.

It appears that the real story here is that the DOJ, under Bush, let a lot of things slide. It is going to take a few years to undo the damage the Bushies did and it is nice to see the DOJ is now working on becoming what it used to be.

As for the self proclaimed 'Prosecutors' in the original story... It appears to me that they are trying to take credit for someone else's actions. Holder would be that someone else along with the two Republican lawmakers.

Since these guys have decided they are Prosecutors how long will it be before they decide they have the power to arrest as well? Someone tried to pull a 'Citizens Arrest' on Karl Rove once and that, as it should have, went nowhere.

It is good to see Republican Congressmen wanting the DOJ restored to where it once was. It looks like things in DC are beginning to normal, and I hope that we have reached the end of the beginning on this process.

I'll bet you're not the only one that's really happy you decided to make your bones in the oil business and not the political arena! And those folks are dwarfed by the many that are ecstatic you didn't pursue a career in law or law enforcement!!!! Or rocket science! Or nuclear engineering! Or odds making!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
This story falls apart in the first sentence. Can you spot the BIG lie in the first line?

I will check back tomorrow and provide the answer if no one spots it.

HINT: The word that show how phony this press release is at the end of a line; not at the end of a sentence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
Keep trying! No one has found the lie yet, and I just threw the 'seemingly' comment out there just to show how devoid of facts this press release is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billybob View Post
You better bust out your dictionary reread the word's broader definition!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
Why bother? When a press release about this comes out from the Department of Justice it will be worthy of attention.

Until then it is just another attempt to keep people stirred up.

Spotted the lie yet?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooka View Post
Thanks, Craig.
As for the self proclaimed 'Prosecutors' in the original story... It appears to me that they are trying to take credit for someone else's actions. Holder would be that someone else along with the two Republican lawmakers.

Since these guys have decided they are Prosecutors how long will it be before they decide they have the power to arrest as well? Someone tried to pull a 'Citizens Arrest' on Karl Rove once and that, as it should have, went nowhere.
pros•e•cute
verb \ˈprä-si-ˌkyüt\
pros•e•cut•edpros•e•cut•ing
Definition of PROSECUTE
transitive verb
1: to follow to the end : pursue until finished
2: to engage in : perform
3a : to bring legal action against for redress or punishment of a crime or violation of law b : to institute legal proceedings with reference to
intransitive verb
: to institute and carry on a legal suit or prosecution
— pros•e•cut•able\ˌprä-sə-ˈkyü-tə-bəl\ adjective
Examples of PROSECUTE
1.The store's owner agreed not to prosecute if the boy returned the stolen goods.
2.The case is being prosecuted by the assistant district attorney.
3.She criticized the government for the way it has prosecuted the war.
Origin of PROSECUTE
Middle English, from Latin prosecutus, past participle of prosequi to pursue — more at pursue
First Known Use: 15th century


As if all but government are excluded from prosecuting! Ha! Ha! This is a prime example of being blinded and rendered senseless by hatred!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-23-2010, 05:58 PM
MS Fowler's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Littlestown PA ( 6 miles south of Gettysburg)
Posts: 2,278
Tomorrow, Friday, should tell the tale. There is to be testimony in this matter.
If the main stream media don't cover it, then they can kiss any credibility goodbye, ( as if they have much, now).
OTOH, if they cover it, and there is no "there" there, then we know it was simply a put up job from the beginning.
The truth will out.
__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-24-2010, 02:10 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Fowler View Post
...The truth will out.
Well? Coates testified. Did he offer anything new?

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page