• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EXCLUSIVE: No. 3 at Justice OK'd Panther reversal

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
34,478
Reaction score
17,282
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
EXCLUSIVE: No. 3 at Justice OK'd Panther reversal
Case involved polling place in Philadelphia
By Jerry Seper (Contact) | Thursday, July 30, 2009

Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, the No. 3 official in the Obama Justice Department, was consulted and ultimately approved a decision in May to reverse course and drop a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party of intimidating voters in Philadelphia during November's election, according to interviews.

The department's career lawyers in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division who pursued the complaint for five months had recommended that Justice seek sanctions against the party and three of its members after the government had already won a default judgment in federal court against the men.

Front-line lawyers were in the final stages of completing that work when they were unexpectedly told by their superiors in late April to seek a delay after a meeting between political appointees and career supervisors, according to federal records and interviews.

The delay was ordered by then-acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King after she discussed with Mr. Perrelli concerns about the case during one of their regular review meetings, according to the interviews.

Ms. King, a career senior executive service official, had been named by President Obama in January to temporarily fill the vacant political position of assistant attorney general for civil rights while a permanent choice could be made.

She and other career supervisors ultimately recommended dropping the case against two of the men and the party and seeking a restraining order against the one man who wielded a nightstick at the Philadelphia polling place. Mr. Perrelli approved that plan, officials said.

Full Story


Are you kidding me?

I saw the video of those guys standing in front of the polling place with billy clubs. It was the most blatant case of voter intimidation I've ever seen.

I guess this is just more "Hope & Change"... Chicago style.
 
What is the difference between career lawyers and front line lawyers? And is there any evidence that Obama had any influence in this case? Further do any of you know all the facts of the case that led to this decision?

Just curious. I know how some people like to jump on the speculation train around here.
 
What is the difference between career lawyers and front line lawyers? And is there any evidence that Obama had any influence in this case? Further do any of you know all the facts of the case that led to this decision?

Just curious. I know how some people like to jump on the speculation train around here.

The members of the justice department are appointed by, and serve at the pleasure of, the president of the United States. They do the presidents legal bidding, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that this was done at either Obama's direction, or at the very least, his approval.

As I also mentioned before, I saw the original video of the incident, as well as read all the news accounts. It was a pretty cut and dry case of voter intimidation.


.
 
What is the difference between career lawyers and front line lawyers? And is there any evidence that Obama had any influence in this case? Further do any of you know all the facts of the case that led to this decision?

Just curious. I know how some people like to jump on the speculation train around here.

It's PBO's DoJ. It happened under his watch, while his appointee was running the department. What have we been hearing about personal responsibility and taking responsibility for the people under your charge and all that for the last 8 years?
 
The members of the justice department are appointed by, and serve at the pleasure of, the president of the United States. They do the presidents legal bidding, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that this was done at either Obama's direction, or at the very least, his approval.
So in other words you have no evidence that Obama ordered this, you're just going to assume he did. And you're right, it doesn't take a rocket scientist, just a person with some access to the facts of the case. I'll keep my eye out for that person.

As I also mentioned before, I saw the original video of the incident, as well as read all the news accounts. It was a pretty cut and dry case of voter intimidation.
Yeah I saw it to. Who was intimidated in terms of their vote? Look I agree these guys were absolute thugs and shouldn't have been there, but were talking elements of a crime. So where are the victims these men intimidated? Names? What act did they specifically engage in when intimidating these people?

These are little things that must be present to make a solid case. A video can be very misleading and isn't always the nail in the coffin. There is a lot that video does not show.

I don't want those guys out there either. What I do want to know is WHY the case was dropped?

Your speculation that it came from the top just won't cut it. Sorry.
 
It's PBO's DoJ. It happened under his watch, while his appointee was running the department. What have we been hearing about personal responsibility and taking responsibility for the people under your charge and all that for the last 8 years?

And I'll take that as another "I've no idea why they dropped the case, but I'll blame it on Obama."

Very intelligent.
 
It's funny watching the left make all these excuses for their Messiah so they can continue to live in denial of his racism.

Or worse.

How was ACORN involved in this case of blatant racially-biased voter intimidation?
 
Fire an I.G. for investigating a crooked Obama supporter & donor, drop the charges against 3 Black Panthers before they are sentenced, then listen to Obama himself make a classic racist statement in calling police officers doing their jobs stupid and there is still some question as to where the orders to let the guilty black Panthers go scott free came from. You're kidding me right. Am I on Candid Camera?
Liberals forget it was their party that vigorously opposed all of the early civil rights legislation and it was leaders in their party that started the KKK. Now they want to take the high road and claim their RACIST leader is not behind blatantly racist acts in his administration? OH COME NOW! You can fool some of the people some of the time and all of the Granola Liberals all of the time because they are so busy worshiping their Messiah in Chief they don't have time get off the prayer rug facing Washington and face the truth.
 
It's funny watching the left make all these excuses for their Messiah so they can continue to live in denial of his racism.

Or worse.

How was ACORN involved in this case of blatant racially-biased voter intimidation?

Actually, it's funny watching the extreme right make all these ridiculous accusations with no evidence or no connection. Just shows where that hate really lies, regardless of the extreme right's ridiculous assertions.
 
And I'll take that as another "I've no idea why they dropped the case, but I'll blame it on Obama."

Very intelligent.

It's his show. "The buck stops here"? Sound familiar? It's PBO's show. He's responsible for the conduct of every one of his political appointees. Sorry if the truth stings a little.
 
Whether Obama "ordered" this or not, is immaterial. His number 3 at Justice made this happen, thus if he doesn't come against this decision and/or fire the guy, he supports it.

I haven't seen O stepping up to the mic to denounce this decision... have you?
 
Whether Obama "ordered" this or not, is immaterial. His number 3 at Justice made this happen, thus if he doesn't come against this decision and/or fire the guy, he supports it.

I haven't seen O stepping up to the mic to denounce this decision... have you?

In addition to that, this case was dropped in May. Someone in the White House should have already condemned this.
 
This is an appalling conflict of interest, among many other recent examples.

The mesmerizing thing is that he just doesn't care about what we think. At All.

Any normal politician, scumbag or not, would try to deflect even the appearance of such impropriety, particularly in a case such as this. They would make the deal out of sight of us, and try to ensure deniability down the line.

This guy doesn't even care to try to hide it.

.
 
Back
Top Bottom