|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Keep tryin' though! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
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? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#13
|
||||||
|
||||||
Quote:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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! |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Well? Coates testified. Did he offer anything new?
|
Bookmarks |
|
|