-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
-
DeMint Supports Defense
May 14, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Update on Tom Perez
May 14, 2013 | 0 comments
The Spectacle Blog
More on the ongoing shenanigans at the Holder/Obama Department of (in)Justice — shenanigans that go FAR beyond the Black Panther case — at the Washington Times:
Their reports, and reports from other former department lawyers, reveal that black staffers at Justice have been harassed for working on cases against black defendants, that department officials have vowed not to enforce parts of the Voting Rights Act equally or at all, that military voters are receiving less-than-enthusiastic protection while felons received special assistance to vote, and that department officials dropped the New Black Panther case without bothering to read the briefs.
Note: The “their” in that passage refers to former DoJ lawyer J. Christian Adams and current DoJ lawyer Christopher Coates, the latter as reported via Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation. Also, a note on attribution: Early in the editorial it mentions “several reports in the past week.” Originally, those reports were attributed to the writers who broke them, but space considerations required numerous cuts in the original, way-overlong draft of the editorial. So, for the record, the writers of the two new reports referenced in the editorial are Byron York, who wrote in the Examiner that DoJ is poised to start funneling money to liberal interest groups, and Mr. Adams again, who wrote that DoJ is interfering with a humane prisoner-health program in South Carolina.
Oldefarte| 8.10.10 @ 11:53AM
Typically great stuff, Quin! If you, TAS writers, or bloggers here have any thoughts/ideas pertaining to the future possibility [if say Republicans win either one or both houses of congress in November] of IMPEACHMENT charges being brought, we'd all really be interested in same. In addition to this, I'd think that possibly the DofJ lawsuit against Arizona, the federal moratorium against offshore drilling in the Gulf, and the behind-the-scene wheeling and dealing of welfarecare could all be considered as governmental corruption activities that seek to use political power to force partisan political activites upon citizens!!!!
Nate| 8.10.10 @ 12:32PM
More race-baiting from Mr. Hillyer on this lame issue non-issue.
Look:
Let's say the WORST occured. Let's say that the **two men** who represented the so-called "New Black Panthers" on election day 2008 succeeded in "intimidating" hundreds of John McCain voters in a precinct that went for Obama by 94%.
Let's say it's all true. Does it REALLY deserve the coverage it has received on Fox News and in your column? Really?
We're a country of over 300 million people. There is NO history of routine intimidation of voters by blacks. None. There is a long, established, well-documented history of white intimidation of blacks, including terrorist activity that flourished in the south for decades, threatening blacks with violence when they attempted to assert their civil rights.
Thanks to countless brave Americans from across the political spectrum, those days are -- for the most part -- behind us.
The fantasy on the loony, reactionary right that somehow whites are the true victims of oppression at the hands of blacks is a disgrace.
It is NOT backed up by facts that are PROPORTIONAL to the hysteria with which it is "covered" in the right wing blabosphere.
And yes, the attempt to paint whites as victims of racism in a way comparable to what blacks suffered in this country is RACIST.
Mr. Hillyer should be ashamed of engaging in this sort of thing, and he should stop getting his "news" on Fox. It's distorting his view of present day reality as well as his historical sense.
Bruce Berger| 8.10.10 @ 12:45PM
Nate,
You are addressing a different issue than the one that gets most of us on the right exercised. It is not the act of intimidation (real or imagined) that concerns us, but the atmosphere at the DOJ that is at issue. I would think any good American would want to know how the DOJ is being run, and whether any political agenda permeates it. Didn't you want to know that in the Bush years?
Conservative Bob| 8.10.10 @ 1:31PM
Nate
Is it safe for me to surmise by your post that you are comfortable with reports that the DOJ is choosing to favor one group over another as in convicted felons over active deployed military?
You miss characterize concerns the right is not seeking victim status but unfettered equal protection under the law, particularly as it relates to the honestly and accuracy of our elections.
I favor severe criminal penalties for anyone who interferes with or tampers with our electoral process from registration, to absentee balloting, to maintaining accurate voter rolls, to accurately counting every legal vote every time regardless of race or party affiliation every time.
To further that I also believe requiring every voter being required to show valid picture identification before casting their vote in any election will enhance accuracy and reduce dramatically fraud and abuse.
Bruce Berger| 8.10.10 @ 1:45PM
Nate,
Not to pile on, though your post deserves it, I would hope that your agree that it is important for a free, independent press to keep close tabs on government. You may think Fox is "on the other side" but it provides a valuable service when other news organizations too often look the other way. A lazy press is not good for any of us.
Oldefarte| 8.11.10 @ 12:22PM
Nate, you such a stupid twit that it's almost asinine for anyone to have to stoop to your imbicilic level in order to respond to your excrement comments. You simply don't get it, do you, moron? This legal case against the NBP party for voter intimidation was developed over time within the US D of J by career lawyers according to LAWS pertaining to the universal voter harrassment/intimidation guidelines. the D of J was within inches of receiving a federal judge's summary judgement in their favor when political appointed managers/supervisors within the D of J [no doubt under the direction of their BOSS AND HIS BOSS] told these career lawyers to DROP/SWEEP UNDER THE LEGAL RUG THEIR CASE! The D of J does not exist to play political correctness games, you dimwit-----they exist to apply legal justice according to federal laws. You are simply an ABORTION and I don't know why anyone [including myself] has to waste their time in responding to your ignorant diatribes!!!!
Nate| 8.10.10 @ 4:24PM
Bruce and Bob,
You both make very good points, and I'm compelled to agree that there may very well be an issue at the Department of Justice. In any case, I'm all in favor of close scrutiny of what gets done there.
My concern is with proportion. Today I'm moving out of one apartment into another. It's savagely hot here, and I'd rather just be drinking beer. Now, if the NEWS published this information, you'd be right in thinking journalism had lost all touch with reality, NOT because they were printing something that wasn't true, but rather because they weren't making a good decision about what was important.
To be sure, if a journalist can dig up something OTHER THAN a single x-employee's word that there's a deliberate policy not to investigate these kinds of crimes if they are committed by black people, then I'll get interested again.
But that journalist will actually have to be doing journalism, that is to say, he'll need to have some evidence of his assertions and he'll need to have CONFIRMED his information by consulting more than one source. Sean Hannity cannot have done his work for him by pulling allegations out of his comfy rear-end.
THEN, I'll have to see a variety of journalists chasing down the story and competing over it. That's generally a good way to judge if a story is being developed worth following.
You both seem like reasonable, decent fellows, and I respect your desire to know that the law is being followed at the DOJ. I'll keep a more open mind in the future, but again, I'd like to see more than the skimpy stuff that's surrounded this story from the beginning -- and yes, I'm very, very suspicious when Fox News is playing a video clip over and over and not one single other news outlet is interested.
Quin| 8.10.10 @ 10:06PM
Nate,
It would help if you would even bother to read what I write before spouting off. THE ENTIRE POINT of my blog entry was that this is about WAY more than the Panther case. And if you paid any attention at all, you creep, you would know that there are multiple reports, not just a single employee's word, that Justice is discriminating in this way; that the only reason that there aren't more reports under oath is that Justice won't let its people testify, and that there has been a ton of independent journalism examining all of this in great detail.
But if your criteria for deciding that a story is important is to have a bunch of establishment journalists chasing it down, then you are as much in the tank as the establishment media. The whole point is that these guys operate with horrendous double standards, so that the exact same thing that qualifies as news if the right does it is treated as utterly unimportant if the left does it. I have demonstrated examples of that time and time and time again, and will do so again in the future.
Nate| 8.10.10 @ 11:29PM
If NO one except the Washington Times and Sean Hannity is reporting on a fairly unbelievable conspiracy at DOJ, I will remain skeptical, especially given the tendency of the right wing press -- Fox News included -- to engage in repeated Willy Horton style race baiting. Showing endlessly a clip of two scary looking black men as though such persons were to be found at half the precincts in America is RACE BAITING, Mr. Hillyer, and there's just no excuse for it AND it does take away the credibility of those who perpetrate it.
Oldefarte| 8.11.10 @ 12:31PM
Moron, stick to the SUBJECT and stop injecting your typically liberal references to racial matters of the 1960's [and the Horton situation] which have nothing to do with this NBP/D of J case [study/research THIS SITUATION ONLY and quit redirecting/camouflaging your arguing points to other, unrelated circumstances]!!!!
Quin| 8.11.10 @ 3:00PM
Nate, do you have ANY intellectual integrity? Do you ever bother to know what you are talking about before you speak?
Fact: The ombudsman of the Washington Post devoted whole column to how this subject merits more scrutiny. The national editor of the Post agreed (but then hasn't followed up and done anything). Howard Kurtz devoted a ton of space to saying the same thing. Five former DoJ officials, two of them under oath, have backed up Mr. Adams' statements. A TON of reporting has shown example after example of oddly political or race-based actions by the Civil Rights Division at DoJ. And, finally, if you, sir, were to accuse me, with my history of fighting for civil rights and political interests of black people, of race-baiting, to my face, I would ask you to don boxing gloves. Your comments are an insult, and slanderous, and utterly false -- and I'll put my background on this front up against ANYthing you can throw up there, anytime, anywhere.
I welcome honest debate, and have posted numerous, generous comments on this site to those who disagreed with me vociferously but civilly and with obvious thoughtfulness. But I won't put up with cheap-shot artists or ranters who literally have no idea, none at all, about the facts, but merely spout off based on "impressions." I can't speak for the editors, but from my standpoint, you are not welcome here.