Bush DOJ decided New Black Panthers no major case
UPDATE: Fox News guest Kirsten Powers made the mistake of thinking for herself. A must-see video:
Several of you have clamored for me to say something about the alleged voter intimidation case in Philadelphia, which involves a thuggish group who call themselves the “New Black Panthers.” (While I was no fan of the original Black Panthers, they don’t deserve to have their reputation further befouled by this group. The two groups are in no way related.)
I was loathe to comment since I know that no rational discussion will follow. How could it? It was clear from the beginning that this was not a case of voter intimidation against anyone who might vote for John McCain. As many observers noted on that day, no matter how badly those two New Black Panters were behaving (and the police were called and responded), it’s a HEAVILY DEMOCRATIC PRECINCT. As blogger Ben Smith noted way back then, “You don’t typically intimidate your own voters.”
But solid reporting from Media Matters and Adam Serwer of The American Prospect ought to put this nonsense to rest (it won’t, but it should). The charges against the New Black Panthers were downgraded by the Bush Department of Justice:
The decision not to file a criminal case occurred before Obama was even in office.
This means that the case was downgraded to a civil case 11 days before Obama was inaugurated, 26 days before Eric Holder became attorney general, and about nine months before Thomas Perez was confirmed as head of the Civil Rights Division.
From Media Matters:
# Adams has admitted that he does not have first-hand knowledge of the events, conversations, and decisions that he is citing to advance his accusations;
# The Bush administration’s Justice Department — not the Obama administration — made the decision not to pursue criminal charges against members of the New Black Panther Party for alleged voter intimidation at a polling center in Philadelphia in 2008;
# The Obama administration successfully obtained default judgment against Samir Shabazz, a member of the New Black Panther Party carrying a nightstick outside the Philadelphia polling center on Election Day 2008;
# The Bush administration DOJ chose not to pursue similar charges against members of the Minutemen, one of whom allegedly carried a weapon while harassing Hispanic voters in Arizona in 2006;
# No voters have come forward to claim that they were intimidated from voting on account of the New Black Panthers standing outside the polling center in 2008;
So, no matter how many times J. Christian Adams declares that the Obama administration refuses to protect the rights of white people — and no matter how many times Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh repeat it — it’s not true.
(See my first post of the day about facts before you respond.)
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
335 comments Add your comment
indy989
July 13th, 2010
2:48 pm
1. The DOJ received clearance to move ahead with injunctions against 2 members of the NBPP and 1 against the party itself. The case was over and won on a default judgement since no members of the NBPP decided to show up to court to answer the charge. Therefore any BS about them not having enough evidence to move forward was just that, BS. Why do you need need more less or any evidence after the verdict has been given. 2. Once the DOJ learned of the verdict they then downgraded the punishment by eliminating 2 of the injunctions and reducing the severity of the third snatching defeat from the jaws of victory as many have said. 3. I am sure Ms. Tucker would be fine if the tables were turned with the idiot Klan doing the exact same thing in a majority Conservative district and I hope that she will be on “This Week” this Sunday to say so, so that we may all hear it for ourselves. If she does that I will obviously be dubious but at least she has the courage to be consistent when it is not an easy thing to do. Show some character Ms. Tucker.
Joe
July 13th, 2010
2:52 pm
Unbelievable. Ms Tuckers bigotry is unfathomable. That this should not raise the blinds off the editors @ AJC really puts this in the light. She seems to imply that some racism is acceptable. And gets away with it. Even CNN fired someone for stupidity with the comments about the Hamas cleric. But that was for people thousands of miles away. It can only be left to conclude that the AJC is a racist newspaper
Linda
July 13th, 2010
2:55 pm
So it was decided “criminal” charges would be downgraded to “civil”. That isn’t the issue. In a nutshell:
11/4/08 NBPP Voter Intimidation in PA
1/07/09 DOJ Files Lawsuit Against NBPP
4/20/09 Court enters default judgement against NBPP, (defendants were a no-show in court)
5/15/09 Obama Admininstration Moves to Dismiss Charges Against NBPP
6/8/09-11/10/09 Three Letters Sent to Attorney General Holder on the case…no response
As reported during interview on America Live with Megyn Kelly with Former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams, yes (gasp) on the Fox News Channel.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
2:57 pm
Uga_b she was not being defensive. Kirsten had no idea what she was talking about and had not studied the case and Megyn called her on it. What is wrong with that?
indy989
July 13th, 2010
2:58 pm
Oh now you did it Linda. Confusing the whole thing by bringing more facts into it.;)
uga_b
July 13th, 2010
3:02 pm
Indy989
I don’t disagree with her assertions; she just usually handles herself better. There was no need to shout. Most of the Democrats they have on have to twist the facts some (like here in this blog) or just shout Bush did it. I feel bad because they are usually put in indefensible positions. And let me be clear, I am not against catfights.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
3:10 pm
uga_b,
If they feel that they are put in indefensible positions then why do they go on? Kirsten has been a long time member of the Fox News Team and understands the nuances associated with debate. Step 1, have the facts straight. She did not so she got rocked. We are reaching an asymptotic point where so much indefensible behavior is going on by many, not all or probably even most, on the left that they have no way to defend all of it. You can only keep knocking a pile of stuff down for so long until it becomes too high.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
3:12 pm
The shallowness of Ms Tucker’s reasoning just shows you how hard it has become to defend these sort of actions.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
3:19 pm
I will however give her kudos for at least having the courage to discuss this issue unlike so many in the “Main Stream Media”.
augrad1996
July 13th, 2010
3:19 pm
This article is misleading. The Bush administration filed civil charges against the Panthers and the Obama admin dropped the charges. End of story. Could a criminal trial have been successful without any injuries? I am not sure. Point is though that Obama’s DOJ dropped this case.
What is crazy to me though is that the Tea Party is considered a racist group yet I have seen no video evidence of this. There IS video evidence of racism among the New Black Panthers but the MSM chooses to ignore that. Now you must ask WHY is that so?
Jimmy62
July 13th, 2010
3:28 pm
The Justice Department is saying the facts don’t support the allegations. But they won’t explain what facts don’t support the allegations. We have Black Panthers strutting around a polling place with nightsticks allegedly expressing racial slurs towards white people. Is that true or not? If it’s true, then the civil judgement should not have been dropped. If it’s not true, then where’s the evidence? I’ve yet to see anyone say that there were not Black Panthers strutting around a polling place with nightsticks allegedly expressing racial slurs towards white people. I’ve heard plenty of excuses made for them, for various reasons like “But they’re black!” or “They’re Democrats” but no refutation of the basic facts.
Next election I’m going to dress up in paramilitary clothes and carry a nightstick and yell threatening racial slurs at black people at my local precinct. Somehow I have the feeling I’ll end up in jail, while these jokes got less than a slap on the wrist, and people like Cynthia are lining up to defend them.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
3:30 pm
augrad1996
More to your point, it is my understanding that Andrew Breitbart has offered $100,000 to anyone who can show him conclusive proof of Tea Party member’s acting in a racist manner, or something approaching that end. With the number of people at these rallies and the number of Camera Phones that there are in this country, if there is so much racist hate percolating from the Tea Party movement then why haven’t we seen any credible evidence? The NAACP is moving to vote on a resolution as we speak that calls out the Tea Party as a group with Racist Ties and values with no evidence to that fact. But no mention of the NBPP case? That is why the NAACP has fallen so far from it’s once great place in this nation as a voice of liberty and freedom. It is now nothing more but a hypocritical wing of the far left only good for being manipulated as a blunt tool used to attempt to strike down those with which the left feels threatened by.
Ivan Cohen
July 13th, 2010
4:12 pm
One of the posters would have the KKK and the Black Panther Party fight it out to the death. Who would step in to fill up the void. Yep, none other than the Aryan Brotherhood. Think the National Guard or any of these Christian(child,just put it in the hands of Jesus)preachers, liberals and conservatives(some of my best friends are black)is going to be a buffer to these fanatics, guess again. It has been stated that the NAACP and other organizations were defunct. Then I believe the theory also applies to: Moral Majority, Promisekeepers and the Christian Coalition. Mark A. Traina, there already is a Miss America and from its inception up to the time Vanessa Williams was crowned the pageant was lily white. One can go to an Ayran website and find remarks about killing blacks, hispanics, jews along with their babies. No other group would be around except for the blond blue eyes. America is divided by markets on television, home shopping channel, lifetime channel catering mostly to women, country music channel, etc. The era of bland, predominately white television program being foisted upon other ethnic groups in this country is over. No matter how hard one tries, ain’t no going back. Nothing nostalgic about those days at all, everybody will not be sanitizing their history books like Texas.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
4:18 pm
Ivan Cohen – So what is your point again?
Ranger
July 13th, 2010
4:53 pm
So, Media Matters is a credible source? That puts this version in doubt automatically.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
5:08 pm
uga-b, Just saw the video. Kelly was most unprofessional, threatening to cut off the guest’s mike.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
5:10 pm
The credibility factor, Who was intimidated? No one has claimed he or she was intimidated.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
5:11 pm
Josh, Here is the truth: The Bush administration downgraded it to a civil case. The Obama administration sought and got an injunction against the guy with the club.
Ranger
July 13th, 2010
5:13 pm
Enter your comments here
ODDOWL
July 13th, 2010
5:28 pm
The crazy BPP member who was talking trash at the polling site was just trying to sell wolf tickets. simply phony bravado. If that thugg Panther member had been serious, he would have gone to an all white Republican polling site in the suburbs and intimidated the white boys. I think the Panther member chose to sell his wolf tickets at the heavily Democrat polling site rather than a Republican polling site was because of concern for his safety more than anything else. This whole controversy was fabricated by Sean Hannity WABC radio and the Fox Fantasy News network.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
5:29 pm
yes, it’s another faux controversy
Sean Noonan
July 13th, 2010
5:35 pm
Megyn handed Kristen her ass, plain and simple.
Rick
July 13th, 2010
5:42 pm
Para-military garb, nightclubs, kkk hoods..what’s the differance? I found the film intimitating. They would have had to use force to stop me, personally. But how many people walked by, or may hesitate to vote next time? Anybody who thinks this is not morally wrong has a sad heart. I live in an integrated area and happily see the mixture. I don’t care if my children marry white, black, red, yellow, etc.etc. People are people. And I love everybody, by the Golden Rule, even if sometimes it can be a sheer determination of the will. This type of threat, white or black, is sickening to me. I easily love Martin Luther King Jr. Does that make me white or black. Where is God? Where is Love in all this? A stone heart is not a good thing. There is no room in it for empathy or compassion. It’s hard, empty of life, it is dead. This behavior is disgusting. Anyone who believes it to be fine is not aware of the loving strength of individuality, and that all people are created equal. I’m just a man who tries to look up to everyone. Nobody special.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
5:45 pm
Rick, I haven’t heard anybody suggest the New Black Panthers’ behavior was morally right. Here’s the question: How big a deal was it? Criminal charges? Prison sentence? It’s sickening to hear the racism coming out of their mouths. But there is NO EVIDENCE they kept anyone from voting. Remember, in a criminal justice system, you need evidence to prosecute.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
6:05 pm
Ctucker @ 5:08 – She threatened to cut the mike off because Kirsten was not allowing her, Megyn, to interact with her, Kirsten, and move the discussion forward.
Ctucker @ 5:10 – Tell that to Bartel Bull. If you do not know of which I speak let me know and I will hook you up with the facts. If you do know then you are being intellectually dishonest in my opinion.
Ctucker @ 5:11 – Here is the truth the Bush Admin downgraded it to a Civil. The Obama/Holder DOJ manged to get 3 injunctions. The Obama/Holder DOJ then decided to drop 2 of the injunctions and downgrade the third for no discernible reason. The reason they offered was complete and utter BS. The Obama DOJ then put out a directive, according to Adams, that no cases where the def is black and the plaintiff is white will be moved on. They will remain unadressed or dropped altogether.
Ctucker @ 5:45 Once again there were complaints filed by several including a black poll watcher and Bartel Bull who is not in any way close to a conservative. Only as close as RFK was anyway. Also, you don’t need evidence to carry out a sentence once the verdict has been handed down.
I hope that you will let me know when if you will be on “This Week” this Sunday or not. If so I hope that you have the courage to bring this up although I doubt George Will has the intestinal fortitude to truly debate this subject as it should.
Once again, I do think that you show a lot of character in responding to this issue. I think that it would show a lot more if you were to bring it up in a forum where your direct interaction is more likely.
hnf
July 13th, 2010
6:23 pm
There’s nothing more unprofessional than sloppy journalism; specifically, blatant factual misstatements. Tucker can’t help but make multiple in this post alone, but then proceeds to call another journalist unprofessional:
“Jimma, A Bush Justice Dept appointee testified that he downgraded the charges. That’s where the reporting came from [sic]”
The testimony Tucker cites is that of Thomas Perez, a 2009 appointee of Pres. Obama. Perez was in no way affiliated with the D.O.J. during the Bush administration; he was a professor of law at the Univ. of Md.
“The Obama administration sought and got an injunction against the guy with the club.”
As even the source Tucker cites to recognizes, the complaint for injunctive relief was filed in January, 2009—prior to Obama’s inauguration. The Obama administration did nothing other than cut the original complaint down to limit the parties affected. “Sought” implies some sort of affirmative action on the part of the actor. Refraining from voluntarily dismissing that complaint doesn’t qualify “seeking”.
hnf
July 13th, 2010
6:51 pm
Tucker even block quoted a statement making it clear Perez, the testifying witness she refers to as a Bush appointee, preceded even Obama by a substantial amount of time: “ . . . and about nine months before Thomas Perez was confirmed as head of the Civil Rights Division.”
Not only is that embarrassingly sloppy, it’s a pretty good demonstration of how ideological predisposition complicates even the most straightforward of facts for some people (e.g., the author of this editorial). Start with a conclusion, then secure the factual support, right? I tend to agree with this lady as much as not on matters of pure opinion—but factual distortions and inaccuracies that lend support to positions make journalists like this (and Rush, Hannity, Maddow, etc.) utterly abhorrent.
Brian white
July 13th, 2010
7:07 pm
Ms.Tucker I’m a life long AJC reader.Do you think the new black panther party is a racist organization ?
truthmattersfa
July 13th, 2010
7:11 pm
“The Obama administration sought and got an injunction against the guy with the club.”
Then they dropped the case Ctucker. You’re the last person to comment on anyone “getting their facts straight”. Speaking of which you still have not corrected the record when you said “She (Aunt Zeituni) never ignored the deportation order.”
truthmattersfa
July 13th, 2010
7:13 pm
“Remember, in a criminal justice system, you need evidence to prosecute.”
No one is talking about criminal proceedings except you & Media Matters. Why do you keep bringing up a completely irrelevant issue??
eyesopen
July 13th, 2010
7:26 pm
“This means that the case was downgraded to a civil case 11 days before Obama was inaugurated, 26 days before Eric Holder became attorney general, and about nine months before Thomas Perez was confirmed as head of the Civil Rights Division”
Merely because a civil action as opposed to a criminal action was filed against the defendants on Jan 7 2009 under the Bush DOJ did not preclude the filing of criminal charges later. Indeed, the Bush DOJ got the ball rolling on this case. So, it was in fact the Obama DOJ that both “downgraded” the injuctions and spiked the effort against the New Black Panthers, for those who find facts a useful foundation on which to form one’s judgment.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
7:54 pm
eyesopen, That’s a case of fact-twisting to come to the conclusions you want.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
7:58 pm
truthmattersfa, I’m talking about it because several conservatives have talked about it.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
7:59 pm
Brian white, Sounds like they’re racist.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
8:19 pm
Ctucker @ 7:59 – Then why have they not been denounced by the NAACP? Doesn’t the NAACP have a history of condemning those with outwardly racist views? Does the NBPP Advance the efforts of Colored People?
indy989
July 13th, 2010
8:22 pm
ctucker @ 7:58 I think that truthmattersfa’s point was that the fact that it was reduced from a criminal to a civil complaint is a straw man argument and a red herring.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
8:23 pm
ctucker @ 7:54 I think that is a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.
eyesopen
July 13th, 2010
8:26 pm
Nothing was downgraded by the Bush DOJ is my point.The allegation made by Adams is not that the Obama DOJ failed to pursue criminal charges, it is that its softening of the injunction against one of the defendants and its dismissal of charges against the other two defendants is a manifestation of a policy under the Obama DOJ to uphold the law only when the victims are minorities. True or not, this is a serious complaint unless we have no problem with becoming a country in which it only matters when my ox is getting gored.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
8:26 pm
indy989, Since I’m not a member of the NAACP, I won’t attempt to speak for the organization.
hnf
July 13th, 2010
8:27 pm
seems you only respond to the extreme and/or baseless comments. it appears you simply unable and unqualified to handle the rest.
ctucker
July 13th, 2010
8:28 pm
So, indy989, once the matter is a civil complaint, what penalties should apply?
indy989
July 13th, 2010
8:36 pm
Ctucker @ 8:26 I am not asking you to speak for the organization. I am only interested in your opinion. Maybe I should have stated my question as such. I apologize for not being more clear. I like many have stated my personal opinion on the subject and would like to hear yours.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
8:40 pm
Ctucker @ 8:28 I am not the one to decide what penalty should apply. My point is that there was no reason for the penalties to be downgraded. If you believe that they were downgraded for good reason I would like to hear those reasons. It was not as the DOJ said “lack of evidence to move forward with the case”. That is a pure canard. The case was already determined by a court of law. So then why were the charges downgraded?
Dan Priem
July 13th, 2010
8:42 pm
Actually, they converted the case from Criminal to Civil. The proof standards are less with Civil. Remember OJ getting off on criminal but being convicted on Civil charges.
The DISMISSAL, was Obama’s. And to hint at anything else is dishonest.
indy989
July 13th, 2010
8:52 pm
Dan Priem – I misspoke, I meant to say the penalties were downgraded.
Buckagon
July 13th, 2010
9:01 pm
The comments on this story show what can only be deliberate encouragement of liberal and Democrat mischief by the malpracticing AJC and its abject neglect of journalistic standards or the truth. Everyone knows for certain that if two robed Klansmen were standing outside the polling place in say, a white area in John Linder’s District, with nightsticks shouting invective, we would have a hyper-national story and CRIMINAL prosecutions, to say nothing of civil prosecutions which would be national stories for months.
Buckagon
July 13th, 2010
9:15 pm
Rereading C Tucker’s talking points, the word flabbergasted doesn’t do my mind justice to her contention that essentially it couldn’t have been intimidation because it was a liberal district anyway. CT, your sense of justice is all wrong. You have to stop making excuses for unlawful behavior, bad characters, dangerous situations and illegal actions simply because the violator is liberal, black, socialist or fascist. Honestly, I’ve seen more coverage and TV chatter of Mel Gibson than of these New Black Panther guys.
Bob
July 13th, 2010
9:24 pm
Not true??? Are you insane !!! Kill the cracker babies ???? On tape/// Alleged??
How corrupt can you be !
Michael Harris
July 13th, 2010
9:35 pm
Megyn Kelly was over the top in the video. But I started my career as an SEC Enforcement attorney in the late 1960s. At the time the SEC obtained injunctions to restrin a defendant from selling the same company’s stock without registration or fraud. /during my tenure at the SEC, injunctions became broader applying to “any other seciruty.” Here the DOJ got an “any other poliing place remedy forever. The DOJ won by default. So the Holder DOJ takes a meaningful injunction vs people as abhoren as any Nazi or Klansman and (i) for the lead defendant narrows it to make it almost meaningless and (ii) as to the other defendants dismissed the case. The real question is why? The case was over. The smell of politics is palpable.
Mario
July 13th, 2010
10:20 pm
Can you even have a voter intimidation civil case? Isn’t voter intimidation a criminal charge? I don’t get why conservatives are trying to hold on to a civil case of voter intimidation with no victim, makes no sense to me, but I’m no lawyer.