The US Department of Justice Took Part in Organizing Protests Against Zimmerman

LowDown said:

No, sorry. The President and Attorney General both set the tone of the whole thing when they came down on one side and expressed sympathy for Martin and the protestors. If the DoJ was involved in it at all then we all know what they were up to.

Click to expand...

We could make that assumption, if we were given to wildly making assumptions absent any evidence.

Or we could look at the evidence.

I do agree on one point, though. The protests were going to happen whether the DoJ got involved or not. I question, though, whether the DoJ's real role was to ameliorate the anger or gin it up.

Click to expand...

Read the FOIA stuff that's been provided courtsey of Juducial Watch.

Other than baseless accusations it's all we've got to go on (at this point).

As I said, I've actually read it and to all appearances the intent was to ameliorate the anger not gin it up.

Case in point: The DoJ CRS arranged for the safe transport of protestors to a city meeting. The protestors then barracaded the meeting and forced the resignation of the police chief.

Click to expand...

In other words the government facilitated the peoples' ability to peacefully exercise their Constitutional rights (freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, right to petition government for redress of grievances).

Those tyrants!!!

If we had a decent government they would have been rounding up those angry people, stripping them of their rights, and sending them to reeducation camps in the high desert!

Also: According to the Orlando Sentinel, The CRS ended up offering advice and assistance to the protestors. … The CRS was viewed by the protestors as a quietly protective, on-the-ground force, the Sentinel story makes clear.

Click to expand...

So by channeling the protesters' anger into peaceful and constructive activity the CRS was somehow overstepping the bounds?

I fail to see how.

Look, if Sanford had errupted in riots, lynchings, people were hurt, property were damaged, buildings were burned down and etc... and it came to light now that the CRS was the party responsible for whipping up the crowd into a frenzy and setting them off on a rampage then, sure, I'm right there with you, "Bad CRS. BAD!!!"

But what really happened was a group of people (both the people of Sanford and other citizens of Florida and the United States more generally) got really, really angy over what they perceived to be an injustice, then the race hustlers moved in and did everything they could to capitalize on that discontent.

So the Miami-Dade CRB got in touch with the DoJ CRS and said, "Hey, give us a hand in keeping the lid on this racially motivated protest scene because we fear that if we (the government) don't step in and "ameliorate the anger" other parties (the race hustlers) are going to gin it up and we're going to lose control of the situation.

So basically the CRS served the exact purpose for which it was created.

I say again, YAWN, over.

soot said:

We could make that assumption, if we were given to wildly making assumptions absent any evidence.

Or we could look at the evidence.



Read the FOIA stuff that's been provided courtsey of Juducial Watch.

Other than baseless accusations it's all we've got to go on (at this point).

As I said, I've actually read it and to all appearances the intent was to ameliorate the anger not gin it up.



In other words the government facilitated the peoples' ability to peacefully exercise their Constitutional rights (freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, right to petition government for redress of grievances).

Those tyrants!!!

If we had a decent government they would have been rounding up those angry people, stripping them of their rights, and sending them to reeducation camps in the high desert!



So by channeling the protesters' anger into peaceful and constructive activity the CRS was somehow overstepping the bounds?

I fail to see how.

Look, if Sanford had errupted in riots, lynchings, people were hurt, property were damaged, buildings were burned down and etc... and it came to light now that the CRS was the party responsible for whipping up the crowd into a frenzy and setting them off on a rampage then, sure, I'm right there with you, "Bad CRS. BAD!!!"

But what really happened was a group of people (both the people of Sanford and other citizens of Florida and the United States more generally) got really, really angy over what they perceived to be an injustice, then the race hustlers moved in and did everything they could to capitalize on that discontent.

So the Miami-Dade CRB got in touch with the DoJ CRS and said, "Hey, give us a hand in keeping the lid on this racially motivated protest scene because we fear that if we (the government) don't step in and "ameliorate the anger" other parties (the race hustlers) are going to gin it up and we're going to lose control of the situation.

So basically the CRS served the exact purpose for which it was created.

I say again, YAWN, over.

Click to expand...

What was that you were saying about wildly making assumptions without any evidence?

Come on, guys. We're talking about the Obama DoJ here.

LowDown said:

If you don't hate what is happening to our country then there is something wrong with you.

Do you have specific evidence that PJ Media is unreliable? Let's see it if you do.

Click to expand...

I haven't liked what is happening to our country since the Vietnam War ... I just get tired of people pretending everything got much worse in November of 2008 (especially after witnessing 2000-2008).

If you want to count PJ Media among your reliable sources, go ahead ... but if you want me to provide you with data you can find yourself, then you're out of your mind ... after all, it is a self-described conservative source, founded by Roger L. Simon, liberal turned conservative ... Let me add, though, I wouldn't dismiss PJ outright ... I just wouldn't rely on it solely, which is how all this started ...

BTW, what troubles me more about our country now are GOP members that decided to put party over country as soon as the big-eared guy won. Has that been troubling you? If not, there's something wrong with you.

Respecthelect said:

Five discussion pages about whether Judicial Watch is credible or not? The source documents are proof from the government's own word. Plus, the story is being widely reported. Five pages of trying to change the subject hasn't worked, it's time to call conservatives "racist." A much more reliable and typical way to win the argument.

Click to expand...

glad someone is looking at more than one source ... and I trust from different ideological perspectives ... as far as calling cons racist, give me a reason and I will ...

windowdressing said:

I haven't liked what is happening to our country since the Vietnam War ... I just get tired of people pretending everything got much worse in November of 2008 (especially after witnessing 2000-2008).

If you want to count PJ Media among your reliable sources, go ahead ... but if you want me to provide you with data you can find yourself, then you're out of your mind ... after all, it is a self-described conservative source, founded by Roger L. Simon, liberal turned conservative ... Let me add, though, I wouldn't dismiss PJ outright ... I just wouldn't rely on it solely, which is how all this started ...

BTW, what troubles me more about our country now are GOP members that decided to put party over country as soon as the big-eared guy won. Has that been troubling you? If not, there's something wrong with you.

Click to expand...

I see there is amnesia about how Bush was treated by the 'rats. Party over country? They should talk. It didn't particularly bother them back then; why should it bother them now? Not even leaking critical military secrets bothered them if they thought it would hurt Bush.

By the way, it turns out that this story isn't new. It was reported in the Orlando paper a year ago, including the stuff about the CRS going to Florida to gin up pro-Martin protests.

So why didn't we here about it back then? I suspect that what with all that's happened in the meantime people find the idea that Obama would corrupt government agencies to punish political opponents and gain a political advantage a lot more credible now.

Use the EPA, OSHA, IRS, ATF to punish political opponents? Of course they would and did.
Voter fraud? Of course.
Bribes, kickbacks, favors for cronies? Of course.
Ginning up racial animosities to get the black vote out? Of course.

This particular incident is just part of the bigger picture. It rings true.

Nevertheless, some of the more thoughtful conservatives share your concern about the ambivalence of the email exchanges. I see their point, but think they are perhaps forgetting who we are dealing with here.

LowDown said:

I see there is amnesia about how Bush was treated by the 'rats. Party over country? They should talk. It didn't particularly bother them back then; why should it bother them now? Not even leaking critical military secrets bothered them if they thought it would hurt Bush.

By the way, it turns out that this story isn't new. It was reported in the Orlando paper a year ago, including the stuff about the CRS going to Florida to gin up pro-Martin protests.

So why didn't we here about it back then? I suspect that what with all that's happened in the meantime people find the idea that Obama would corrupt government agencies to punish political opponents and gain a political advantage a lot more credible now.

Use the EPA, OSHA, IRS, ATF to punish political opponents? Of course they would and did.
Voter fraud? Of course.
Bribes, kickbacks, favors for cronies? Of course.
Ginning up racial animosities to get the black vote out? Of course.

This particular incident is just part of the bigger picture. It rings true.

Nevertheless, some of the more thoughtful conservatives share your concern about the ambivalence of the email exchanges. I see their point, but think they are perhaps forgetting who we are dealing with here.

Click to expand...

I've responded to this post too many times to do it again ... knock yourself out with this crap ... hopefully it helps you get up in the morning ...

» Judge In Zimmerman Case Pressured by Obama Administration? Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Lousy source, but I wouldn't surprised by this administration, especially with Holder in the DoJ.

windowdressing said:

thanks ... What do you know you know about Judicial Watch? I'd be careful with it as well, which is why I suggest getting more evidence/info, from more sources, before jumping to conclusions on this ...

Click to expand...

If there is anything I am doing lately is trying not to jump to conclusions, however the audio that Luther provided doesn't sound good that's for sure....BTW, can you tell me was there any of these so called DOJ "peacekeepers" available with resources for TEA Party gatherings?

j-mac said:

If there is anything I am doing lately is trying not to jump to conclusions, however the audio that Luther provided doesn't sound good that's for sure....BTW, can you tell me was there any of these so called DOJ "peacekeepers" available with resources for TEA Party gatherings?

Click to expand...

I have no idea what our government is doing all the time, whether it's a GOP administration or Dem ... I think we're learning more and more every day that they do more than we thought ... it's why the PATRIOT Act scared the crap out of me and was disappointed that so many of our fellow citizens thought it was O.K. (perhaps because they were scared to death at the time) ... let's face it, we deserve most of what we get ...

windowdressing said:

I have no idea what our government is doing all the time, whether it's a GOP administration or Dem ... I think we're learning more and more every day that they do more than we thought ... it's why the PATRIOT Act scared the crap out of me and was disappointed that so many of our fellow citizens thought it was O.K. (perhaps because they were scared to death at the time) ... let's face it, we deserve most of what we get ...

Click to expand...

Well, I have no beef with what you say here, but just because we make poor decisions in electing our government, doesn't mean that we can't at some point wake up and start the turn around does it? I mean, when the Patriot act first went into place I argued for it from a standpoint of naive trust in the administration that was doing it. Today I am more skeptical, and concede the point made from many at the time about not minding one administration, but wouldn't like the next with the same power. So true.

Anywho, you do have a point.