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.
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.
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!"
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?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!"
True enough. I take it the order was "no carrying sticks at the polls" or something like that.
I don't know. Why do you think NBPP members were wielding nightsticks? To scratch their backs?
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.
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.
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 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.
Depends on the neighborhood. I imagine someone would have been smart enough to call the police were actual intimidation taking place.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.
You're white right?
Nearly translucent.
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
BoniVore continues his hilarious ankle-biting, stretching, dissembling.
Please tell me how this makes sense at all, any more than saying that Ron Paul is as bad as Hitler.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
Six 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.It appears to be a doofus with a stick.and this already appears to be a self-evident case of voter intimidation.
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).What else is there to prove, really? Two NBPP thugs were brandishing clubs and shouting racial insults to voters. We agree on this, yes?
Does that really meet the statutory definition of intimidation?
What would you expect the penalties to be for only these two actions?
"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.
And, it was.
All allegations investigated and none sustained.
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.
Seriously, besides the vague Bull affidavit that proves nothing, what is the case against the scary black men?
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?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
