So many...

[Yonivore]

...fucking moving targets with this administration.



Birds of a feather

Or why the Obama administration is not prosecuting the New Black Panther Party for intimidating voters into voting for, you know who.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_orkXxp0bhEA/R-Gkv4UnhgI/AAAAAAAAFdA/3SKWESmu8eU/s400/080319-nbp-before.jpg
In March 2008, the New Black Panther Party endorsed Barack Obama for president. The Obama campaign allowed the New Black Panthers to post its endorsement on his Web site.

This caused conservatives to howl because once again (http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-black-panther-party-scrubbed-from.html), Obama was aligned with black racists, like his preacher and mentor of 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose sermon, “The Audacity of Hope,” inspired Obama’s memoir, “The Audacity of Hope.”

Gateway Pundit howled (http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/obama-may-want-to-rethink-his-new-black.html).

Michelle Malkin noticed (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/03/19/the-new-barack-obama-logo-agent-of-left-wing-same-old/) it.

The Obama campaign pulled the endorsement ad.

Segue to today. The Obama administration is blocking prosecution of the New Black Panther Party. My interpretation is President Obama is looking out for the thugs who endorsed him. (http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/29/document-drop-witness-affidavit-in-nbpp-voter-bullying-case/)

There is a danger in constantly dividing people by race. A very big danger. The legacy of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King deserves better. He turned his back on violence. It is time that the president on who stands on those shoulders did the same.

Prosecute.
Instead, he's trying to appoint a woman, who's a member of the Hispanic equivalent of The New Black Panthers, to the U. S. Supreme Court.

I heard someone say this the other day, "This is Chicago Politics writ large." Nothing more.

[ChumpDumper]

So how would the two scary black men know how any one particular voter voted?

Please explain fully.

[Yonivore]

So how would the two scary black men know how any one particular voter voted?

Please explain fully.
The point of the post is that Political appointees in the Justice Department ordered bureaucratic employees of the Justice Department to drop the case.

Nice try at bait and switch. It doesn't matter what they knew or didn't know, what they were doing is illegal. Why isn't the Obama administration going to pursue prosecution?

It's been suggested it's because of this:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_orkXxp0bhEA/R-Gkv4UnhgI/AAAAAAAAFdA/3SKWESmu8eU/s400/080319-nbp-before.jpg
Tell me why I should believe othewise.

[ChumpDumper]

It's an extremely weak case if its only basis is Bull's affidavit. He's got two black men standing in a public area. Where's the beef?

Props to Bull for not bothering to make his corrections on his word processor. Very professional.

There is no reason you should believe otherwise -- you're an idiot and that can't be helped.

[Yonivore]

It's an extremely weak case if its only basis is Bull's affidavit. He's got two black men standing in a public area. Where's the beef?

Props to Bull for not bothering to make his corrections on his word processor. Very professional.

There is no reason you should believe otherwise -- you're an idiot and that can't be helped.
The incuriosity continues...

[ChumpDumper]

If you've got more than the Bull affidavit, show it.

I am mainly curious as to why Bull would submit such a weak affidavit.

[Yonivore]

If you've got more than the Bull affidavit, show it.

I am mainly curious as to why Bull would submit such a weak affidavit.
neGbKHyGuHU

From the Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/career-lawyers-overruled-on-voting-case/?feat=home_cube_position1&):


Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.
"Documents," "interviews," and the video seem to say there is more than just the Bull affidavit.


The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms.

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.
For your benefit, I hasten to point out that the word "including" means the affidavit wasn't the only piece of evidence the DOJ accumulated in the months they were pursuing the case.

In this instance it is hard to see a legitimate motive for dropping the case. DOJ dismissed two defendants completely and as to the third, settled for an order that he not bring a weapon to a polling place in Philadelphia until 2012. One of the three Panthers is a member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee.

By the way, did you know this organization campaigned for Barack Obama in 2008? The Obama campaign proudly displayed a New Black Panther endorsement on it's official web page until someone pointed out just how fucking stupid that was.

Are you any more curious? I doubt it.

[George Gervin's Afro]

obviously president obama had direct knowledge.


thanks yoni



:rolleyes

[George Gervin's Afro]

neGbKHyGuHU

From the Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/career-lawyers-overruled-on-voting-case/?feat=home_cube_position1&):


"Documents," "interviews," and the video seem to say there is more than just the Bull affidavit.


For your benefit, I hasten to point out that the word "including" means the affidavit wasn't the only piece of evidence the DOJ accumulated in the months they were pursuing the case.

In this instance it is hard to see a legitimate motive for dropping the case. DOJ dismissed two defendants completely and as to the third, settled for an order that he not bring a weapon to a polling place in Philadelphia until 2012. One of the three Panthers is a member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee.

By the way, did you know this organization campaigned for Barack Obama in 2008? The Obama campaign proudly displayed a New Black Panther endorsement on it's official web page until someone pointed out just how fucking stupid that was.

Are you any more curious? I doubt it.



curious about what yoni?

[Yonivore]

curious about what yoni?
Why Holder had his Department drop the case.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Why Holder had his Department drop the case.

What other case has the DOJ dropped? What cases did Bush's DOJ drop? DO you have any idea? Curious?

Why do you think Holder had the DOJ dropped the case? 2 votes?

[Yonivore]

What other case has the DOJ dropped? What cases did Bush's DOJ drop? DO you have any idea? Curious?
If one had been brought to my attention, I might have been. Do you know of one?

[George Gervin's Afro]

If one had been brought to my attention, I might have been. Do you know of one?

Why do you think Holder had the DOJ dropped the case? 2 votes?

[Yonivore]

In this case the Justice Department filed a complaint under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act (which prohibits any attempt to “intimidate, threaten or coerce” any voter) against the New Black Panther Party.

Neither the New Black Panther Party nor any of the individual defendants responded to the suit. The federal judge therefore ordered the Civil Rights Division to file a default judgment. However, without providing any grounds for doing so the Division moved to dismiss the complaint — in essence forfeiting the case.

That isn't curious?

[Yonivore]

Why do you think Holder had the DOJ dropped the case? 2 votes?
I have no idea, it's be a good question for him to answer. Don't you think?

[George Gervin's Afro]

I have no idea, it's be a good question for him to answer. Don't you think?

You won't believe any explanation so just admit you know this is an inside job.

[Yonivore]

You won't believe any explanation so just admit you know this is an inside job.
So, you're not curious?

[George Gervin's Afro]

So, you're not curious?

why should i be?

[Yonivore]

why should i be?
I find it curious the DOJ, at the behest of Eric Holder, dropped a voters rights case it spent months developing and had essentially won...and, did so against defendants that endorsed President Obama during the election.

Yeah, I think you should be. But, I can't make you be curious.

[ChumpDumper]

neGbKHyGuHU

From the Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/career-lawyers-overruled-on-voting-case/?feat=home_cube_position1&):


"Documents," "interviews," and the video seem to say there is more than just the Bull affidavit.So where are they? Let's see them all.

I am very curious to see all the documentation concerning this. I appreciate your compiling them all for me in advance.


For your benefit, I hasten to point out that the word "including" means the affidavit wasn't the only piece of evidence the DOJ accumulated in the months they were pursuing the case.The Bush DoJ?

Yeah, I can see their pursuing a flimsy-ass case that would make Obama supporters look bad. I can also see it's being dropped by a less partisan DoJ -- you know, one that doesn't fire US attorneys for not pursuing flimsy voting rights cases like the Bush administration did.

[Yonivore]

So where are they? Let's see them all.

I am very curious to see all the documentation concerning this. I appreciate your compiling them all for me in advance.
In the hands of the DOJ that threw the case out the window. If you're that curious, I suggest you contact them.


The Bush DoJ?

Yeah, I can see their pursuing a flimsy-ass case that would make Obama supporters look bad. I can also see it's being dropped by a less partisan DoJ -- you know, one that doesn't fire US attorneys for not pursuing flimsy voting rights cases like the Bush administration did.
The defendants failed to respond to the charges and a default judgement had already been issued.

And, the case was pursued by career DOJ staffers, not political appointees.

But, nice try.

And, if what you're suggesting is true, I think it behooves President Obama to stick to his transparency pledge and let us know.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I find it curious that yoni was never curious during mt rushmore's 8 yrs.

[clambake]

don't play the video........just look at the first frame.......

that must conjure up some disturbing feelings...huh yoni?

[ChumpDumper]

In the hands of the DOJ that threw the case out the window. If you're that curious, I suggest you contact them.So you aren't curious, are you?


The defendants failed to respond to the charges and a default judgement had already been issued.:lol Let's see the summary judgment. Certainly you were curious enough to read that. Oh, that's right -- you aren't that curious.


And, the case was pursued by career DOJ staffers, not political appointees.

But, nice try.From whom do DoJ staffers take their orders?

Nice try.


And, if what you're suggesting is true, I think it behooves President Obama to stick to his transparency pledge and let us know.They did. It's not like you never heard of their decision. If you are really that curious to know more, I suggest you contact them.

[doobs]

Surely, there must be some Obama supporters out there who are upset with this. Replace the NBPP thugs with white guys in white hoods.

Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act:

No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for urging or aiding any person to vote or attempt to vote.

[ChumpDumper]

So far, all I've seen them specifically charged with is being black and holding a nightstick.

I'm curious to see all the other actions alleged here. I'd be fine with pursuing a case if there was one to pursue. All the evidence I've seen so far only points to black men being scary to many posters here.

[FromWayDowntown]

Neither the New Black Panther Party nor any of the individual defendants responded to the suit. The federal judge therefore ordered the Civil Rights Division to file a default judgment. However, without providing any grounds for doing so the Division moved to dismiss the complaint — in essence forfeiting the case.

Actually, by obtaining an order against one of the involved parties, the DOJ got relief and, in essence, did away with any need to get a memorialized default.

Of course, that doesn't fit with the Cult of Obama's Corruption's side of the tale, so such a fact wouldn't understandably be downplayed in favor of more politically motivated misapprehensions about federal procedure.

[doobs]

So far, all I've seen them specifically charged with is being black and holding a nightstick.

I'm curious to see all the other actions alleged here. I'd be fine with pursuing a case if there was one to pursue. All the evidence I've seen so far only points to black men being scary to many posters here.

Well, from what I understand---and I admit, I might be wrong---after the NBPP failed to respond to the DOJ's accusations, all the DOJ had to do was file a motion for default judgment. Instead, they filed a motion to dismiss. That's a bit odd, I think.

As far as specific factual allegations, all I've heard---again, I might be wrong---is that they were twirling their batons in a threatening manner while shouting "you're being ruled by a black man now, cracker!"

[ChumpDumper]

Well, from what I understand---and I admit, I might be wrong---after the NBPP failed to respond to the DOJ's accusations, all the DOJ had to do was file a motion for default judgment. Instead, they filed a motion to dismiss. That's a bit odd, I think.If it was an especially weak case that should never have been brought in the first place, I wouldn't consider it odd at all.


As far as specific factual allegations, all I've heard---again, I might be wrong---is that they were twirling their batons in a threatening manner while shouting "you're being ruled by a black man now, cracker!"That's it? "Threatening manner"? Who was stopped from voting? Who was told to vote one way or another? If these menacing black men were so clearly a threat, why were they not arrested on the spot? Were the people there so petrified with fear at the sight of black men with sticks that they couldn't use their cell phones to actually call the police?

[ChumpDumper]

Actually, by obtaining an order against one of the involved parties, the DOJ got relief and, in essence, did away with any need to get a memorialized default.True enough. I take it the order was "no carrying sticks at the polls" or something like that.

[doobs]

If it was an especially weak case that should never have been brought in the first place, I wouldn't consider it odd at all.

I don't know. Why do you think NBPP members were wielding nightsticks? To scratch their backs?


That's it? "Threatening manner"? Who was stopped from voting? Who was told to vote one way or another? If these menacing black men were so clearly a threat, why were they not arrested on the spot? Were the people there so petrified with fear at the sight of black men with sticks that they couldn't use their cell phones to actually call the police?

I just told you what I understood. I'm not a DOJ lawyer, nor am I a member of the NBPP. Again, imagine white guys in white hoods with nightsticks. In my opinion---and you may not agree with this---the KKK and NBPP are roughly equivalent. I wonder if the result would be different.

[FromWayDowntown]

True enough. I take it the order was "no carrying sticks at the polls" or something like that.

I have no idea what it said, but it's quite conceivable to me that with facts that might be less than ideal to take to court (even if leaving political guys like Yonivore salivating) and faced with trying to uphold a default that might have been difficult to hold on to (no-answer defaults, in particular, can be relatively easy to get reversed; the law frowns on adjudications against people who didn't participate in litigation), DOJ could have reached a deal with counsel for the defendants by which it agreed to drop the non-weapons based charges and to impose a specific order (no weapons at polling places?) upon the defendant who was apparently brandishing a weapon. Again, it would akin to a plea bargain in a criminal context; it would certainly be an understandable settlement for the government to reach in a case that it might have believed was going to be legally difficult to prove if contested.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't know. Why do you think NBPP members were wielding nightsticks? To scratch their backs?Sounds to me like this one particular member was trying to emulate a kind of watered-down display of weaponry the original Panthers used to put on back in the day to show no one should fuck with them. I had never known those displays to be used to intimidate voters, but it's possible they were. Mainly they just caused whitey to freak out, like when the Panthers legally brought guns into state capitol buildings and the like. After sending their pants out to be cleaned, white lawmakers decided the 2nd Amendment wasn't an absolute guarantee after all.


I just told you what I understood. I'm not a DOJ lawyer, nor am I a member of the NBPP. Again, imagine white guys in white hoods with nightsticks. In my opinion---and you may not agree with this---the KKK and NBPP are roughly equivalent. I wonder if the result would be different.Depends on the neighborhood. I imagine someone would have been smart enough to call the police were actual intimidation taking place.

[PEP]

If it was an especially weak case that should never have been brought in the first place, I wouldn't consider it odd at all.

That's it? "Threatening manner"? Who was stopped from voting? Who was told to vote one way or another? If these menacing black men were so clearly a threat, why were they not arrested on the spot? Were the people there so petrified with fear at the sight of black men with sticks that they couldn't use their cell phones to actually call the police?
You're white right?

[ChumpDumper]

You're white right?Nearly translucent.

[Pick of Destiny]

you're an idiot and that can't be helped.



I learned long ago not to debate CD unless your ready to give it all you got and be ready for fist fight and most important do your homework.

Good luck Yonivore :tu

[boutons_deux]

BoniVore continues his hilarious ankle-biting, stretching, dissembling.

[LnGrrrR]

...fucking moving targets with this administration.


Instead, he's trying to appoint a woman, who's a member of the Hispanic equivalent of The New Black Panthers, to the U. S. Supreme Court.

I heard someone say this the other day, "This is Chicago Politics writ large." Nothing more.

:rollin

Please tell me how this makes sense at all, any more than saying that Ron Paul is as bad as Hitler. :lol

[boutons_deux]

Repugs are firing blanks, except for their own sheeples.

Repug extremists purging/blackablling the party moderates and centrists to assure ideological hard-core purity is making them more and more irrelevant, esp at the polls.

[Extra Stout]

If two members of the Ku Klux Klan had stood outside a polling place in rural Georgia in full white-robed regalia brandishing clubs, and one of them had said to a black voter walking by, "You're still gonna be ruled by white men, n*****," and if all this were captured on YouTube, and if the Klan simply refused to participate in the criminal proceedings, would the Department of Justice really have dropped all charges and felt satisfied with an injunction against further carrying of weapons at polling places?

I have a very, very, VERY hard time believing that.

[FromWayDowntown]

If two members of the Ku Klux Klan had stood outside a polling place in rural Georgia in full white-robed regalia brandishing clubs, and one of them had said to a black voter walking by, "You're still gonna be ruled by white men, n*****," and if all this were captured on YouTube, and if the Klan simply refused to participate in the criminal proceedings, would the Department of Justice really have dropped all charges and felt satisfied with an injunction against further carrying of weapons at polling places?

I have a very, very, VERY hard time believing that.

I think that's probably a true dichotomy regardless of who runs DOJ.

[jman3000]

I'm with the conservatives on this one. It should have been pursued. You shouldn't be allowed to brandish a weapon and patrol the outside of a polling place. Although they probably see it as scary black people being mean to the poor white man.. I just see it as a clear cut case of voter intimidation.

[LnGrrrR]

I agree that they should have pursued this case... but there's a chance they dropped it due to a perceived inability to actually convict. How great was the evidence in favor of the prosecution?

[ChumpDumper]

If there was anything truly damning in those court papers, it would have come out in the Washington Times article. As it was, all they quoted was Barlte Bull's vague and poorly written affidavit that wasn't even entered into the record.

From all I've seen, an injunction to keep the one dude from carrying a legal weapon around a polling station was probably all they were going to get -- and it is exactly what they got.

I was really CURIOUS to see what else anyone had on these goofballs. Turns out it's nothing.

[doobs]

If there was anything truly damning in those court papers, it would have come out in the Washington Times article. As it was, all they quoted was Barlte Bull's vague and poorly written affidavit that wasn't even entered into the record.

From all I've seen, an injunction to keep the one dude from carrying a legal weapon around a polling station was probably all they were going to get -- and it is exactly what they got.

I was really CURIOUS to see what else anyone had on these goofballs. Turns out it's nothing.

That's because there has not been an opportunity to fully develop the record---all we really have is a complaint and a youtube video, and the NBPP did not respond to the allegations in the complaint---and this already appears to be a self-evident case of voter intimidation.

What else is there to prove, really? Two NBPP thugs were brandishing clubs and shouting racial insults to voters. We agree on this, yes?

[ChumpDumper]

That's because there has not been an opportunity to fully develop the recordSix months wasn't long enough? Please -- had anybody really been intimidated, there would have been local complaints to the police by -- you know -- voters who were intimidated.
and this already appears to be a self-evident case of voter intimidation.It appears to be a doofus with a stick.


What else is there to prove, really? Two NBPP thugs were brandishing clubs and shouting racial insults to voters. We agree on this, yes?It looks like only one had a legal stick (belief in second amendment rights is obviously not absolute, eh?) and one allegedly said the word "cracker" with no reference at all to voting (I didn't have the sound on the video turned up -- if he said it then I freely stipulate that).

Does that really meet the statutory definition of intimidation?

What would you expect the penalties to be for only these two actions?

[boutons_deux]

"as a clear cut case of voter intimidation."

there were many such cases of Repugs and their thugs intimidating voting lines, throwing up road blocks in FL on voting day, blocking ex-felons from voting, etc, etc, in 2000 and 2004.

There was almost riot outside a FL recount office by dubya thugs yelling at recounters inside.

[Yonivore]

"as a clear cut case of voter intimidation."
And, it was.


there were many such cases of Repugs and their thugs intimidating voting lines, throwing up road blocks in FL on voting day, blocking ex-felons from voting, etc, etc, in 2000 and 2004.
All allegations investigated and none sustained.


There was almost riot outside a FL recount office by dubya thugs yelling at recounters inside.
That's not voter intimidation, that's recounter intimidation. And, that was because certain Florida election judges were trying to steal the election for Algore.

[ChumpDumper]

And, it was.Seriously, besides the vague Bull affidavit that proves nothing, what is the case against the scary black men?

[ChumpDumper]

So it's been a couple of days --has anyone else found any other testimony regarding this case?

Or are you just not that curious?

[clambake]

Or are you just not that curious?

well, this is the year of the hit and miss for these guys.

they have to get some wood on the ball at some point.

[Yonivore]

So it's been a couple of days --has anyone else found any other testimony regarding this case?

Or are you just not that curious?
I've got my FOIA request into the DOJ. I'll let you know what they release.

[ChumpDumper]

Post a copy of your FOIA request.

[Yonivore]

Post a copy of your FOIA request.
Suck a dick.

[Wild Cobra]

Suck a dick.
Give him something new. He does that allot already.

[Extra Stout]

One of the blogs I plagiarize says they got their FOIA request into the DOJ. I'll plagiarize the post here once I read what they release.

[Yonivore]

Original ES.

[ChumpDumper]

So that was just another lie.

How incurious of you, Yoni.

[ChumpDumper]

Give him something new. He does that allot already.Did you ever figure out who the teenage boy you are fantasizing about is?

[Wild Cobra]

Did you ever figure out who the teenage boy you are fantasizing about is?
I'm not fantasizing about that avatar. It's you're avatar, it's you who would be fantasizing...

Don't know. Not that important. I'm not a psychologist, so I won't try to figure out your fantasy.

[clambake]

Did you ever figure out who the teenage boy you are fantasizing about is?

he has me on ignore.

are you saying he had a falling out with that whore in the strip joint?

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not fantasizing about that avatar. It's you're avatar, it's you who would be fantasizing...

Don't know. Not that important. I'm not a psychologist, so I won't try to figure out your fantasy.No you're the one who is picturing this teenage boy performing oral sex.

Why is that your fantasy, WC?

[ChumpDumper]

he has me on ignore.

are you saying he had a falling out with that whore in the strip joint?He's pretty obviously not into women.

[clambake]

He's pretty obviously not into women.

i knew that Amanda had to be a guy. did you see how big his hands were when he was flipping us off?

[jack sommerset]

Give him something new. He does that allot already.

:lol

[jack sommerset]

I will not start a thread with this question..... What party has the most fags? Dems or Rep. I think I know the answer but I am curious if they have a poll (haha) 0r if anyone has done a study on this. I think it's pretty obvious but I have been wrong before.

[Wild Cobra]

I will not start a thread with this question..... What party has the most fags? Dems or Rep. I think I know the answer but I am curious if they have a poll (haha) 0r if anyone has done a study on this. I think it's pretty obvious but I have been wrong before.
I would guess that it is about equal, at least when it comes to voting. Listening to talk radio as much as I have, it's amazing how many gays call in and are conservative. I suspect that many gays are closeted conservatives, not admitting to their friend their dark side.

[clambake]

I would guess that it is about equal, at least when it comes to voting. Listening to talk radio as much as I have, it's amazing how many gays call in and are conservative. I suspect that many gays are closeted conservatives, not admitting to their friend their dark side.

oh i get it.




a-man-duh

[ChumpDumper]

It's amazing how many posters here regularly express such an active interest in homosexuality..

They are very curious about it.

[Blake]

bipartisan curious posters......

I'm always amazed at the different conversation levels between the political forum, the club and the nba forum......I just got reemed for gay trash talk over in the nba forum by Kori....

different levels of trash. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

So it's been a couple of days --has anyone else found any other testimony regarding this case?

Or are you just not that curious?Any updates on the explosive, clear-cut voter intimidation case?

Surely it should have lasted longer than one news cycle.

[DarrinS]

Those guys were definitely out of line, but I'm not losing any sleep over them not being convicted of anything.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Original ES.

Ironic, Yoni.