The American Spectator : Panther Case: No Shot in the Dark

Text Size

Streetcar Line

Panther Case: No Shot in the Dark

By Quin Hillyer on 10.4.10 @ 6:09AM

A guided tour to the Department of Justice's perfidy on the Black Panthers.

Even after an above-the-fold, front-page story in the Washington Post, the establishment media seems determined to sit back and wait rather than do any "enterprise reporting" on the New Black Panther Party voter-intimidation case and, more importantly, on the much bigger and broader policy and ethics questions swirling around it. This is a serious dereliction of journalistic responsibility. For those reporters who actually want to do their jobs, and for all of you readers who rightly continue to insist that this is an important topic, herewith is a guided tour to the Panther scandal and its broader implications.

The uncontroverted story on Election Day, 2008
Panthers Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, in black paramilitary garb, stood outside the polling place in close formation, Shabazz brandishing a night-stick, while they used racial epithets and threatening language and gestures. Witnesses reported seeing at least several voters take stock of the situation and turn around and leave without voting. Former Kennedy family civil rights lawyer Bartle Bull, who was on the scene, said it was the worst example of voter intimidation he had ever seen. Not one person, in any forum, has ever contested these basic facts. Ever.

The charges
A team of Department of Justice (DoJ) career attorneys led by former ACLU attorney and multiple award-winning lawyer Christopher Coates brought civil rights charges against both Panthers on the scene, plus against national Panther leader Malik Zulu Shabazz and the national party as a whole, based on statements made by Shabazz and other Panther leaders indicating that the stationing of Mr. Jackson and the other (unrelated) Shabazz was part of a nationwide effort. The attorney team wanted to secure a nationwide injunction against all the defendants, prohibiting them from any similar activity in future elections. (The Panthers also would have been subject to repaying the DoJ for legal costs expended during the proceedings.) The Panthers failed even to contest the charges. The judge was ready to enter a default judgment against them, but just when the lawyers were ready to submit the paperwork, Obama political-appointee superiors pulled the plug. Charges were completely dropped against Zulu Shabazz, the party, and Mr. Jackson -- the latter a registered Democratic Party poll-watcher and local elected Democratic Party official. Samir Shabazz received an injunction against brandishing a weapon within 100 feet of polls -- already illegal anyway -- only within the city limits of Philadelphia and only for the next four years.

The DoJ lawyers
In addition to the aforementioned Mr. Coates, the other major career attorney who brought the case also has an excellent court record. J. Christian Adams won commendations for protecting the rights of black voters in South Carolina, and received promotions under both the Bush and the Obama administrations. Yes, he has a history as a political conservative. So what? Has anybody challenged his lawyership or integrity? Nope. Has any of his sworn testimony been proved false? No: It all has been backed by others in affidavits and in other sworn testimony.

Meanwhile, in an unusual move, the Obama team asked DoJ's appellate division to weigh in on the case -- and both appellate lawyers, Diana K. Flynn and Marie K. McElderry, came down on the side of pursuing all the cases, not just the one against Samir Shabazz. Ms. Flynn, like Mr. Coates, does not have major Republican ties: Indeed, she has been cited in news reports as having given information damaging to Bush political appointees accused of improperly using political considerations in hiring decisions.

On the other hand, the two lawyers with most immediate authority in overruling the career team both have checkered records. Both Loretta King and Steve Rosenbaum have earned sanctions from federal courts for ethical violations. Mr. Rosenbaum worked on a case on behalf of ACORN in the 1990s with Barack Obama. Ms. King is a hyper-partisan liberal who issued one of the most absurdly tendentious voting-law rulings imaginable, telling a black-majority North Carolina town that it is incapable of electing its own "candidates of choice" unless the candidates are identified as Democrats. Both King and Rosenbaum have occupied "career" positions at DoJ, but both were serving in temporary "political" positions during the time the Panther case was dropped.

Mr. Rosenbaum consulted at least 58 times by e-mail with Sam Hirsch, a political appointee and former top lawyer for the national Democratic Party. Also deeply involved in the decision was political appointee Tom Perrelli, a former Harvard Law Review managing editor under Obama who raised half a million dollars for the Obama campaign. Mr. Perrelli visited the White House on numerous occasions that almost always coincided with key developments in the Panther case.

The political involvement
It is hard to stress just how important this point is, at least for establishing the relative credibility of the major players. Again and again (and again and again), Obama appointees have told the media and testified under oath that the decision to punt away these cases were made exclusively by "career" appointees -- later modified to say that the career appointees did vaguely keep "political" higher-ups informed of their decisions. Setting aside the technical dispute of whether King and Rosenbaum (the supposed decision-makers) were acting in political capacities at the time, this claim does not even come close to passing the smell test. Mr. Hirsch's 58 email messages, including a dozen up the line to Mr. Perrelli (and mentions of at least some consultation as well with the top two people then in the department, Attorney General Eric Holder and Deputy AG David Ogden), show on their face that the political appointees were not merely passive recipients of information, but active participants in deciding to drop the case. This raises issues of potential perjury by civil rights division chief Thomas Perez -- who testified otherwise to the US. Commission on Civil Rights -- and also raises the same questions that sent the media into a tizzy when President Bush fired eight U.S. attorneys in 2006. Namely, this: Did political appointees not just implement policy, but actually interfere with a particular case for political reasons? To do the latter is a way of obstructing justice, and is highly improper.

The political question gets more serious if the White House interfered. That's why two Washington Times reports from January, detailing Mr. Perrelli's White House meetings, are so important. Less than two weeks ago, the non-profit watchdog group Judicial Watch, which unearthed the existence of the Hirsch e-mails, filed suit to get more information about those Perrelli meetings. One question curious reporters ought to be asking is, who is the unnamed official who sat in on certain of those meetings? Was it Van Jones? Was it Rahm Emanuel? Was it the president himself?

What also is clearer than ever, after sworn testimony by Mr. Coates, is that current and former officials with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund have shown unusual interest in, and weighed in about, this case from the very start. Again, was that outside involvement of the sort that amounts to undue political interference with law enforcement?

The important policy questions
Almost from the moment the story broke about the case being dropped, writers following the case (including, but far from limited to, yours truly) have said this is far more than just a case about an incident at a single polling place, but instead was about the hugely important question of whether the Obama DoJ has adopted a policy long favored in the bowels of the DoJ's Civil Rights Division. The alleged policy is to enforce civil rights laws only to protect racial or language minorities, but not to protect whites (and maybe Asians as well) from black perpetrators -- even in jurisdictions where whites are a small minority and black officials hold immense power.

Nobody, absolutely nobody, will say on the record that this would be an acceptable or lawful policy -- because it is manifestly lawless. Even Michael Yaki, the member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights who has played point man for the administration's defense, said this in open hearing on July 16: "If someone made that statement [about choosing not to enforce the laws equally] within the Department of Justice, that person should be fired. That person should be tossed out on their ear in two seconds flat." Mr. Yaki has since written to this publication that his comment was taken out of context (it wasn't), because he said it was clear that he does not believe this sort of thing is indeed going on at DoJ. Well, since then, Mr. Coates has provided sworn testimony to that effect, and provided all sorts of examples of how and when those statements were made and their attitudes implemented. Most important is that Mr. Coates said he officially recommended more than a year ago that DoJ take enforcement actions against eight states that were not scrubbing their voter rolls of dead people and felons -- and, as is a matter of public record, DoJ still has not acted.

Mr. Adams, for his part, has filed notice letters to 16 states that private citizens may sue them to force what looks like clear violations of the voter-scrubbing statute. Again, if DoJ were doing its job, rather than following the policy to whose existence Messrs. Coates and Adams testified, then these suits would not even be on the radar.

The sworn testimony of both attorneys is highly credible. Numerous other employees of DoJ were in attendance when some of these policy statements were made. They should be asked to testify about these issues -- and no conceivable legal privilege could be cited to block such testimony, because no "deliberative process" on any particular case was involved.

Not only that, but the story told by Mr. Coates about Civil Rights Division hostility to race-neutral enforcement of the law is entirely believable on another count. The fact -- not opinion, fact -- is that despite Bush administration efforts to politicize hiring at DoJ, the career ranks of the department skew heavily to the political left. In 2008, as of two weeks before the last election, DoJ attorneys in the DC metro area alone had donated more than $150,000 to the Obama campaign. The Civil Rights Division long has been known to skew particularly heavily to the left of left. Anybody who has spent any time with the liberal academicians who dominate most law schools today knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the policies allegedly embraced by the Obama Justice Department reflect views rampant in liberal legal circles. To even claim otherwise is to tell a bald-faced lie.

Page: 1 2 >

About the Author

Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (72) | Leave a comment

Ret. Marine| 10.4.10 @ 7:10AM

Getting the ghosts, otherwise called media to cover what appears to be out right law (s) breaking by political appointees in this regime is going to be a tab bit more persuasive than a write, or two from this author. It will take a massive voter turn out, a return to law and order, investigations into the dealing with groups like ACORN, and their lawyer, known today as the great pretender-n-thief of the law, abamas Bin Ly'n, his general of injustice, holdem holder, and the entire abuse of the system to curry favor to the entities of voter fraud. My guess is they will continue to ramp up the voter fraud scheme throughout the Nation in hopes of dodging the bullet headed their way because they know if the R's get back to the control panel and assign investigators to the vast amount of cases of voter fraud the d's will not be able to eat the cake they have been cooking all these years.
I watched this on the communist news network, CNN, and right at the beginning I was aware of the lies, obstruction of justice and the claims by others were not aligning to one another. What does one expect when the electorate hurled in the house of the people an individual with no back ground, other than being a lawyer and trainer of the ACORN types, no verifiable references to any real job, any back ground check, a legitimate one at least, would have brought out many inconsistencies as to who this pretender claimed to be but was not. And we are to be surprised at the law breaking from this bunch, not in the least, it was expected by those who illegally placed them where they are. But good luck with all of this, Me, I'm keeping the powder dry for a very real gut feeling it will be needed sooner than most expect.

Patriot| 10.5.10 @ 11:31AM

Amen, brother. Semper Fi !

Eric Rasmusen| 10.4.10 @ 7:27AM

Excellent column, in writing and substance, exposition and persuasiveness. One quibble, though, on: "the same questions that sent the media into a tizzy when President Bush fired eight U.S. attorneys in 2006. Namely, this: Did political appointees not just implement policy, but actually interfere with a particular case for political reasons? " Nobody disputes the propriety of the President choosing political appointees based on their political views. Indeed, that is what he is supposed to do. Similarly, nobody should dispute his firing political appointees based on politics--- particularly if the appointee is making decisions in individual cases for anti-Administration political reasons.

Texas Mom 2010| 10.4.10 @ 11:52AM

Justice should be blind not political. When the Justice Dept under any president starts making decisions based on political considerations that is when it must be halted muy pronto!

Alan Brooks| 10.4.10 @ 6:59PM

"Justice should be blind not political. When the Justice Dept under any president starts making decisions based on political considerations that is when it must be halted muy pronto!"

But you will secretly make exceptions for GOP appointees.
Doesn't matter what you say.

Tom Osterman| 10.4.10 @ 11:29PM

Bush was then, Obama's DOJ is now, giving a pass to blatant thuggery because the Democrats benefited. Something to think about over the next four weeks.

At least be an honest partisan.

Alan Brooks| 10.4.10 @ 11:52PM

If intense pressure isn't put on the GOP, they will make the same mistakes again.
Why would Republicans need the tea party if the GOP knew what to do?

coal carrier| 10.4.10 @ 7:57AM

The silent Administration.
I don’t remember the DOJ coming out and explaining why the case was dropped. Was it a technicality? Was it because the two thugs weren’t told that they were being taped?
Rules on the left are not the same as the rules for the rest of us.

Texas Mom 2010| 10.4.10 @ 11:56AM

It is Animal Farm Orwellian rules, "all pigs are equal but some are 'more equal' than others"! I have always thought that elected Dems in particular seem to feel that they are 'more equal' than the rest of us... Hence their disdain of the TEA party.

Eric Cartman| 10.4.10 @ 8:00AM

Conclusion
Come on, upcoming Republican majority in the house. Do your jobs.

(But don't hold your breath because the Republicans are like the abused wife who thinks, "Well, maybe if I just don't nag him about this one thing - and make him his favorite Tuna Helper dish tonight - he'll stop punching me is the face and be nice to me. Come on, Tuna Helper, help make Brian Williams like me! " They always go back to their abuser. Putzes.)

R Martin| 10.4.10 @ 8:00AM

Quin, you should know why the media are not doing their jobs. They're all still tired from exhaustively investigating the curious case of Valarie Plame.

Melvin| 10.4.10 @ 8:04AM

A JAG lawyer once told me, "When a lawyer loses their credibility, they lost it forever." This is the current dysfunction with the DOJ. Thanks to Eric Holder this organization has lost it's credibility with the American people.

Petronius| 10.4.10 @ 8:55AM

It's meaningless to the thugs in the hood. Dey makes deir own law in da streets. Got dat?

Tim*| 10.4.10 @ 8:22AM

We are in A War With The Liberal Media .

Bankrupt The Liberal Media .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

Rise Up !

LDT| 10.4.10 @ 8:31AM

Black Panther Gate
Mark Rich pardon
Terrorist's lawyers in the DOJ
Providing Miranda rights to foreign terrorists
I wonder what we have become? A famous cartoon character said it right " the enemy is sighted....the enemy is us".

Bob S| 10.4.10 @ 10:02AM

That would be Pogo. He was paraphrasing a quote from some British general (I believe) who had stated "We have met the enemy and he is ours". Pogo changed "ours" to "us".

TR| 10.4.10 @ 11:32AM

It was said by American Naval Commander Perry in reference to defeating the British fleet in the Battle of Lake Erie during the War of 1812.

wodiej| 10.4.10 @ 8:33AM

If you are surprised by this, raise your hand.

Appleby| 10.4.10 @ 11:06AM

If you're French, raise both hands. [rim shot]

Ned| 10.4.10 @ 2:34PM

LOL!!!!

excellent Appleby! love your stuff...

NavyBrat| 10.4.10 @ 9:02AM

Sad, but not unbelieveable. Let's remember that King Samir Shatbag was captured on video on South Street in Philly talking about having to "kill some cracker babies."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLWmo2kCa8o

Tell us again, Mr. Holder, who the true "race cowards" are?

"Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right; here I am, stuck in the middle & SCREWED!"

Redstateboy| 10.4.10 @ 9:45AM

While True the Lame-Stream Media hasn't done Schitt to inform the public about this blantant wrong.. there are plenty who know enough of the details to know the Hussien Administration is as criminal and derelict as there's ever been.

Steve A| 10.4.10 @ 9:50AM

I think KS Shatbag should get out of Philly & take his act on the road. He can even bring some of his pals along & make his stump speech down here in the Commonwealth of VA. See how that works out for him.

Texas Mom 2010| 10.4.10 @ 12:02PM

He should come visit Texas, we have concealed carry here and we are proficient enough to be accurate.
"an armed society is a polite society!" .....don't know who said but it makes logical sense!

Skinner| 10.4.10 @ 4:12PM

FYI Texas Mom,
The quote is from a Robert A. Heinlein book, "Beyond This Horizon".
The full quote text of his quote is even better:

"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life".

p-squared| 10.4.10 @ 10:03AM

This illustrates the cancerous conditions within all our government, not just parts of the DOJ. Progressives infest all facets of federal service, so none of us should be surprised when this kind of thing pops up. It is oftentimes NOT the political appointees who do the damage; it is more likely to be the politically motivated career types who do the real dirty work.

jawin| 10.4.10 @ 4:25PM

Precisely. Aside from the fact laws mandate certain protections for all employees, your point alone provides addtional impetus to the need for the dissolution and legal barring all government unions.

John Navratil| 10.4.10 @ 10:10AM

This behaviour has but one purpose -- to steal the November election. The failure to purge the voting roles means the felons and the dead will be voting in great numbers and the Black Panther suit dismissal is the green light for polling place shenanigans.

If this elections is close, it is lost. 2000 with Bush and Gore will look like a two third-graders in a fight over a pencil compared to this.

JP| 10.4.10 @ 1:37PM

Outside of the urban enclaves I cannot imagine the Black Panthers having much influence. Besides, they already own most of the urban districts, anyway. And with the advent of PDAs, camera, phones, and You Tube, it is much easier to document and publish real time accounts of voter intimidation. Now that most local newspapers and tv news organizations are in the hip pocket of the Dems, it is up to individuals to record these cases. And hopefully, the GOP come Jan 3 will have a much larger presence in Congress. The GOP could have Holder and his underlings before several congressional committees every week if they so chose.

John Navratil| 10.5.10 @ 10:56AM

It wasn't the Panthers, specifically, to which I refer. It was the green light to anyone to misbehave. If the DOJ will not prosecute anything but oppression of minorities, the field is free for anyone (SEIU, La Raza e.g.) to misbehave.

Eric Cartman with Katie Couric| 10.4.10 @ 10:23AM

Katie Couric: Mr. Holder, you have seen the right-wing, extremist media raise questions about the so-called "New Black Panther Party" case. They say that the two black gentleman who were standing around a polling place represented some kind of "civil-rights" slash "voter intimidation" violation and that the hard-working, and very busy, Obama Administration and your overworked and underpaid DOJ lawyers are not enforcing civil-rights or voting-rights laws when the "victim" is some oppressor white person who is probably trying to steal votes anyway and who deserves to be ignored. How do you address that? Are you ignoring the civil-rights laws?

Eric Holder: No.

Katie Couric: Thank you. Coming next, could Sarah Palin be the Green River Killer? CBS investigates. The first of a ten part, exhaustive investigation raises troubling questions. Where was she during all those murders? Can she prove it? Who are these "alibi" witnesses? Is Trig John Wayne Gacy's love child? We will be right back with our instigation.

Eric Damon| 10.4.10 @ 10:30AM

LOL!!! That just about covers the way the media does things!

Katie Couric| 10.4.10 @ 11:14AM

Katie Couric: Up next, CBS investigates Eric Damon. Who is this right-wing blogger? Does he always agree with right-wing Eric Cartman? Is he now breaking the new "Reported Protection Act" the Obama administration had to enact to protect reporters from criticism? Could he be Sara Palin's accomplice in the Green River murders? An exhaustive ten part CBS investigation into Eric Damon an his alleged foot fetish. We'll be right back with this interesting look and a quiet - maybe too quiet - man.

NavyBrat| 10.4.10 @ 12:34PM

Hillarious as usual, Cartman!!!

PS. You pick up the new Bourdain book?

Eric Cartman| 10.4.10 @ 1:02PM

Hey, NB! Thanks :-)

No, haven't had the time to get it. He did a great show on the Philippines, though. My wife knew a couple of the places he showcased. Maybe for Christmas. Did you see who won Master Chef? I knew Whitney would take it - she had the charm I think they wanted. Only 22. Wow. She's gunna make a great chef.

NavyBrat| 10.4.10 @ 2:08PM

Cartman:

I missed the Master Chef show. I DID see Top Chef DC, however, & was rather pleased at the result. This was the best season yet, for sure.

You're gonna LOVE that Bourdain book. I haven't stopped laughing since I got it.

albert constantine jr.| 10.4.10 @ 3:29PM

Well constructed, except for the last question. John Wayne Gacy was a homosexual serial killer from Chicago. I'm not certain if I recall correctly, but he may have been active in Democratic politics in addition to his numerous clown appearances. In his current (and pre-2006) status in the earth at room temperature (and in Hell quite warmer), he is unlikely to couple with an attractive woman like Sarah Palin. I would imagine CBS News would more likely focus try to score a DNA sample from Randy Weaver for their piece.

Cabermon| 10.4.10 @ 11:00AM

A hypothetical:
What if a voter with a legal concealed carry permit, upon being threatened, had confronted the gents with his sidearm, with the possibility of popping a cap in one of the gentlemen's asses?
Sadly, we'll never know since (I'm guessing) Philly doesn't allow concealed carry by citizens.

TR| 10.4.10 @ 11:38AM

He, of course, would have been immediately subdued by suddenly materializing poilice, arrested, and charged with a hate crime. He would have been subjected to a thorough media background investigation with everyone he has ever associated with being subjected to the same media assault. He would have been front cover news until he was sentenced to life.

The poor B;ack Panther victims would receive millions in taxpayer money in settlements from the City for their suffering.

Obama lied
Freedom died

Anthony| 10.4.10 @ 11:14AM

The rat's nests, and all those who occupy them, that comprise the four corners of deceit in America need to be cleaned out.
November 2nd is when the American people call in the Terminex man.

Spyder308| 10.4.10 @ 11:45AM

This is a big deal. There are around a dozen of these "scary" black panthers, and I feel we should spend millions investigating them. Just like we spent $65 million on the witch hunt of President Clinton and all his friends. No one would agree with this stupid idea if we were talking about white panthers.

Steve A| 10.4.10 @ 12:01PM

Stop the press! It's a liberal worried about spending $$!

kilroy| 10.4.10 @ 2:18PM

These no problum now evybudy knos they names. problum soun soved.

Bruce Berger| 10.4.10 @ 3:29PM

Spyder,

Like most libs you try to change the subject. The issue is not how many black panthers there are, but the corrupt practices inside the DOJ. Think for yourself.

Anthony| 10.4.10 @ 3:48PM

Hey moron, it wouldn't cost more than a two day trial to put these Black Panther goons on trial. This trial would be so easy, a 1st year law student would get a conviction, maybe even a half wit like you.
Funny, you mock the idea of trying the "scarey"Black Panthers, but we know for a fact that you and your fellow brain-dead leftists sure as hell think Gov. Palin is scary!! Talk about warped values.
But Holder is a leftist hack, just like you like them. He was, when your white trash president was lying, obstructing justice, and witness tampering, and remains a hack today.
Oh, but Billyboy sure knew how to abuse a good cigar, not to mention a 20 year old!
Go back under your rock where you belong.

Spyder308| 10.4.10 @ 7:34PM

1. 1/2 governor Palin is not scary herself, she is ignorant and a profiteer. What is scary is that anyone would want such a person administering the country.
2. The last Democrat President left a budget surplus. The Reagan and Bush II administrations set the record for running up the debt.
3. The Bush administration decided not to prosecute these guys because there was no case there.

Bruce Berger| 10.4.10 @ 7:57PM

Spyder,

I will repeat. You clearly miss the point. I assume that in the next Republican administration you will endorse the media and everyone looking in the other direction if there are similar allegations of DOJ employees, including political appointees.

Jim Bennett| 10.6.10 @ 11:05AM

1st point: your opinion only. Facts, anyone?
2nd point: VERY simplistic assessment
3rd point: Absolutely wrong. The Bush DOJ decided to pursue a civil complaint because those can typically be resolved in a much quicker fashion than criminal cases. Because there were special elections coming up in Philadelphia in February 2009 (or right around that time, I don't recall), DOJ needed a quick resolution to get some sort of injunction against these reprobates to keep them from pulling the same shenanigans in the next election. I'm not a lawyer, but they may have been able to pursue a criminal prosecution later anyway. Politically speaking, they also may have feared (and, rightfully so, as it turns out) that the incoming administration would not pursue anything against the Panthers, and their time was limited because of only a 6-8 week window between the election and January 20, 2009. So, as described, there was a case there; the Obama administration obtained a default judgment and then simply dropped i from there. If you believe that higher-ups in DOJ had nothing to do with this, then you may just qualify as the most hopey-changey of us all.

Oldefarte| 10.4.10 @ 12:51PM

Quin, I/we all appreciate your excellent reporting-writing on this [and other] issues, but with all due respect, you're whistling-in-the-graveyard if you truely believe that there's any SNOWBALLS CHANCE IN HADES of the liberal MSM doing its job of telling the truth on issues such as this. Anyone believing otherwise simply must read the first paragraph of the lead story/article on the front page of the NYT to discover otherwise. As to the Justice Dept possible illegal actions, come on and GIVE ME A BREAK! You and everyone with a minimum of common sense knows what's going on here, and the one and only way to stop it is for the taxpayer-voters of this country to [beginning in a month] vote for the defeat of any/every politician that has crawled in the political bed in DC with this group of Chichag thugs now running our country; and to research and implement IMPEACHMENT proceedings if possible against the person who eveyone here knows was a party to these actions/decisions at Justice and who goave the orders for their implementation. If you believe otherwise, then I guess that you're equally amazed at Louisiana Purchase Mary's recent outrage over this administration's refusal to lift the current oil drilling moratorium for Gulf offshore drilling also??????????????????????

Nunya| 10.4.10 @ 1:14PM

I find this entire incident and the lack of media coverage as no surprise. Obozo's administration is corrupt as the day is long, and frankly it just smells of Chicago thug politics. Everyone knows that the "main stream media" is in Obozo's back pocket, the Journo List scandal showed that there were hundreds of leftist media people (I won't call them "journolists") actively trying to get Obozo elected. Holder is an Obozo puppet, it comes to no surprise that he's also corrupt.

Bottom line, the MSM won't do anything about this. If they do, it will come as a GREAT surprise to me.

Will| 10.4.10 @ 1:36PM

Hopefully, Congressman Wolf of Virginia will continue to pursue this matter. Not quite sure what it takes to get public hearings on the matter, but sure hope something happens.

CFORUS| 10.4.10 @ 3:15PM

Where were the dissenters? Are any of them on record opposing these actions? I don't think it would be unreasonable for a new administration and the ensuing AG to reassign the ENTIRE staff of the DoJ's Civil Rights Division, top to bottom. If not for the lack of credibility, a category most would fall under, then for moral bankruptcy. To whore out a division as important as the Civil Rights Division to political ideology is unforgivable.

Mimi| 10.4.10 @ 3:26PM

From the very moment this country elected ...The First Black President, the nation does NOT need or require a Civil Rights Division in the DEPT.OF JUSTICE..... It needs to be shut DOWN!!! Black Americans are FULL-FLEDGE citizens as we all are and this is an outright offence to their equal status...They do not need a put-down or inference that they are inferior. All are equal under the LAW. Racism is in its dying days, all but over.... It's course will survive this administration, whose attempt to ramp it up will not work because of the bright LIGHT on this and all the OUTRAGES!! The old/new path to LIBERTY is thankfully on the rise. After JAN. 1, 2011, The Congressional Hearings will begin....we have some BUSINESS on NOV. 2 to take care of first!!!!!

Oldefarte| 10.5.10 @ 11:06AM

Mimi, I'll extend your EQUALITY fact a tad further, in that the 1954 Brown vs. Bd. of Ed. SCOTUS decision established same. The laws of this country are available to protect any/all discrimination of anyone. Additionally the public educational system [by that decision] established equal ACCESS to education for all. It did not establish equal RESULT, and the benefits of said education are only available to those who TAKE ADVANTAGE of same [and therein lies the REASON WHY some people succeed in life while other do not]. No civil rights division, governmental program,etc can accompolish one's success. It strictly depends upon the willingness of each/every person to work hard at using the free education system in order to become qualified to go forth, work hard at a profession, produce income and achieve THEIR OWN success. I agree with you that the Justice Dept etc is USELESS!!!!

Mimi| 10.5.10 @ 2:30PM

Well O.F. we got one down, and hopefully many more to go.to shrink the Fed. As for some Black Americans if they would only shed their victimhood and delight with their heart and soul in freedom and opportunity as many of their race has done they could go to the moon. The days of giving a "LEG-UP" to any one is over...the good lord gave us humans 2 legs...to be used with all our might to succeed, on our own!!

Mojo Risin| 10.4.10 @ 4:28PM

Just maybe a confident republican house member should inform the culprits in this mess, the liars, that maybe resignation would be less painful than congressional hearings...

Bill| 10.4.10 @ 6:37PM

The conduct of the Panthers was atrocious and actionable. The refusal of the DoJ to pursue the entry of a default judgment was probably legal malpractice for the attorney of record, and whoever passed the order on down to let the case go by is unethical.

But let's just see what the election of 2010 brings. Perhaps they will engage in other equally atrocious activities and we can hold their feet to the fire.

Aaron| 10.4.10 @ 8:04PM

I wish that I had been there that day. I would have shoved that nightstick up there where the sun doesn't shine. Or, if he hit me with it, then it would be Glock time. As Clint Eastwood's character said in the Gran Torino, "Oh yeahhhh."

Rev. Jesse Jackson| 10.4.10 @ 8:31PM

None of this should be a surprise. The lamestream media no longer tells us if a suspect is a black man when there is a crime (especially against whites). "We wouldn't want to profile now, would we." How stupid. Nowadays, we're supposed to be looking for the suspect of a crime and are only told that he is a male, 6 ft. and approx. 200 lbs with a moustache. Is he white? Is he black? Is he latino? Humor us with specifics. Speaking of cover-ups, did ya'll hear about "Beat Whitey Night", something that took place at the Iowa State Fair back in August? No, of course not. To my knowledge, not even Fox reported on it. Had there been a group of 30-40 white guys going around shouting, "It's beat the nigga night!", there would have been such an uproar that now in October we'd still be hearing about it. People had to be hospitalized because these gutless punks had kicked them multiple times in the face. Where's the freakin' uproar! Where was that demon Al Sharpton? Did he show up to rebuke his black brothers and tell them that they were giving blacks a bad name? Of course not. He loves it! Had it been whites beating up blacks, there would have been so many riots by black people calling for whitey's head. The whites, on the other hand, just shut up and take it. God help us.
http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.....tate-fair/

Oldefarte| 10.5.10 @ 11:09AM

Good one.....and as Clint said in Dirty Harry, ARE YOU FEELING LUCKY, PUNK??????????

Long Ben| 10.4.10 @ 8:33PM

Dear Alan Brooks
When the corrupt Bill Clinton razed the entire Department of Justice in consideration of all his past and future criminal diddleings of the levers and priveledges of power , Where was the soiling of britches from all your types ?

Rev. Jesse Jackson| 10.4.10 @ 10:16PM

Dear Long Ben,
You're absolutely right. But a word of advice. Don't waste your time trying to convince poor Alan Brooks. He's a craven coward and nadless pile of crap. Oh! Did I mention that he's an idiot, also? He represents all that is wrong with this country. Churchill said, "If a man is 20 years old and a conservative, it shows that he has no heart. If he's 40 years old and a liberal, it shows that he has no brain." Mr. Brooks, unfortunately, has no brain. How old are you. Mr. Brooks?

Yosemeti Sam| 10.5.10 @ 1:05AM

Ah - the power of cheese - er, the power of GOP HR summoning power before committees!

Osamas Pajamas| 10.5.10 @ 2:12AM

Watch what happens if these New Black Panther thugs try again to interfere with voters and wind up on the ground squirtin' blood all over the place. We need more violence in order to suppress these thugs --- because the thug in the White House and his puppets at DOJ won't do the job. Sounds a lot like the DOJ attack on Arizona law enforcement over the illegal aliens issue, doesn't it?

Sarbo| 10.5.10 @ 2:42AM

I am left wondering why Obama has gone to such extreme lengths to protect two thugs. He is, after all, a ruthless pol who can trow even his gran under a bus.

The article alluded to the possibility that such voter intimidation was a planned nation-wide project, with well-known funders. And this case could just be the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Hence, the perjury, the abuse of a whistleblower, the unvolvemennt of a former (and Obama subordinate) Harvard Law Review big-wig,

I have relatives living in America (legal immigrants from India, heh heh heh) who wrote to me of the (often) frightening intimidation at the 2008 Dem caucuses. Blacks in the Hillary side of the aisle were mercilessly vilified. "Uncle Tom", "white-man's whore", "I'll see your momma tonight, boy" were some of the abuses hurled. And these were Black on Black. But many non-blacks took fright and left, as did one of my cousin sisters, who had brought her kids to show them American democracy at work. Poor sis.

PattyMor| 10.5.10 @ 10:53AM

I say vote out every Republican who voted to
confirm Eric Holder. Holder is so partisan and he had the gall to call Americans "cowards" . This comment was a look into his heart from the beginning of this vile administration.

Aaron| 10.5.10 @ 2:12PM

Dear PattyMor,
Amen to that! And while we're at it, make sure that Sen. Lindsey Graham from So. Carolina gets voted out the next time he's up for re-election. That moderate Republican voted "Yes" and Elena Kagan was put on the Supreme Court. How much will our poor country suffer because of her and Sotomayor? Lindsey Graham - you are an idiot!!!

Oldefarte| 10.6.10 @ 12:49PM

Even before that, Holder legally advised Bill Clinton regarding the pardoning of Mark Rich [along with many other crooks] during the last days of his presidency [and was a big clue as to his corrupt personae]!!!!!!!!!!

CalMark| 10.5.10 @ 2:43PM

This surprises anyone?

Obama is from Chicago. During the 2004 election that got him elected Senator, an eyewitness (yours truly) saw the following in Chicago:
1. ACORN thugs running in and out of the polling station before it had opened, then forcing people to take the official ACORN "how to vote" checklist.
2. A "voting assistant" screaming at an old lady that "YOU VOTE FOR JOHN KERRY" every time--I counted three--she apparently tried to mark her ballot for someone else. The precinct workers just sat there, yawning. (It is Chicago, after all.)

BTW, National Review and various conservative pundits weren't interested. Now we reap the whirlwind.

Dein| 10.5.10 @ 7:16PM

Did anyone mention the visit to the White House living quarters by"another person"named"Malik Shabazz"?Soon after,the case was dropped. Please correct me if this timeline is not accurate.....

Jeff Perren| 10.6.10 @ 3:11PM

Absolutely first-rate reporting. Thank you for the excellent summary and information that even someone following the case hadn't heard before.

Interesting isn't it, how a trivial issue like Watergate got front page coverage for months and eventually led to the resignation of a President a step ahead of impeachment. Yet, somehow, I doubt this will make more than a ripple among the MSM, if that, and Obama's position is surely secure.

Also, I doubt the cretins controlling the major mainstream news publications will be hailing Quin Hillyer as the new Bob Woodward, though -- on the basis of this story -- they really should.

Well done!

Christian Louboutin| 6.23.11 @ 5:50AM

Panthers Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, in black paramilitary garb, stood outside the polling place in close formation, Shabazz brandishing a night-stick, while they used racial epithets and threatening language and gestures.