New light on the New Black Panther Party voting rights case dismissal? — UPDATED

October 3, 2011

Andrew Breitbart at Big Government has posted some very interesting photos of then-candidate Obama’s 2007 visit to Selma, Alabama, for a civil rights march. Here’s one:

The speaker is Malik Zulu Shabazz, leader of the NBP and one of the defendants in a federal voting rights lawsuit brought by the Bush administration Department of Justice, which accused the NBP of intimidating White voters in the 2008 elections. Early in the Obama administration, this case was withdrawn by the DoJ, even though the government had won.

What’s the connection to Barack Obama, you ask? Take a look at the rest of the photos; they show the then-junior senator from Illinois and future President of the United States speaking at the same podium and marching with Shabazz and other NBP members.

It’s almost too easy to do this, but I have to ask: What if, in 2007 or 2008, John McCain had joined in a march with David Duke? What if his running-mate, Sarah Palin, had attended a rally with Klan speakers? What if any Republican at any time shared a stage with White supremacists? The howling from the media would have been deafening and would not have ended until that person had been hounded (rightfully so) from public life.

But Barack Obama could share a podium and march side by side with the functional equivalent of Black fascists and there’s nary a peep.

On the other hand, Rick Perry’s father leased a hunting ranch at which someone years before had scrawled a racial slur —a rock which the Perrys painted over and overturned— and the Washington Post treats it as a national scandal.

Anyone who denies a liberal bias in the MSM must being doing the good drugs.

But I digress.

To get back to the Philadelphia voting rights case (background), what does it say when a candidate  for president shares a stage with the head of that organization and marches with its members –implying a certain sympathy or common ground or understanding, at least– and then the Justice Department  overseen by the Attorney General appointed by that same candidate-now-president dismisses a won case against that same organization and its head?

Yeah nothing to see here. Move along.

In one sense, this should neither be surprising nor outrageous; we know Obama himself comes from a hard-left background and is most probably a Socialist at heart and, just as important, spent 20 years in the pews of a church run by a racist preacher who taught Black Liberation Theology.

That he could get along with the NBP’s leadership should be predictable.

And yet, it should be profoundly disturbing that a future leader of the greatest constitutional republic in history should feel comfortable in the company of fascists and racialists. And that, once in charge, his Justice Department (irony alert) should refuse to enforce the law in a colorblind manner.  And, as Breitbart asks, just who is the “Malik Shabazz” who records show visited the White House soon after the NBP case was dismissed? The White House refuses to say. Hmmm…

Maybe they were just reminiscing about the good time they had on that march in Selma.

Read the whole thing.

LINKS: See also Hot Air. At Big Journalism, Lee Stranahan asks “Who is the New Black Panther Party.”

UPDATE: Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy wrote about this today, and mentioned a stunning fact that escaped me the first time around:

This is a shocking story, and a breathtaking indictment of the mainstream media which went out of its way to avoid vetting Obama as a candidate — and to make sure anyone who tried to do due diligence got no sunshine. A candidate who chose to appeared in the company of, say, the KKK, would have provoked relentlessly hostile media coverage and, in short order, have been marginalized as disqualified to hold responsible elective office. As Andrew [Breitbart]points out, one of those present with Obama was Najee Muhammed, the Panthers’ “minister of war” who had called for Georgia police officers to be murdered.

Nice friends ya got there, Barack!

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

California congressman plays dumb, fails

July 13, 2010

Alternative headline: “California congressman thinks his constituents are dumb, gets surprise.” At a town-hall meeting in Reseda, Representative Brad Sherman (D-Oligarchy) tried to deny knowing anything about the voter-intimidation suit against the New Black Panther Party or the Holder Justice Department’s dropping of a case it had won. As you’ll see, his constituents weren’t buying it:

This is another example that shows how the progressives and their “moderate” enablers in the Democratic Party can’t rely anymore on being shielded by the mainstream media’s slanted coverage or non-coverage. Thanks to the Internet, the MSM’s role as gatekeeper is over. Whether it’s via a cable network such as Fox, Center-Right news and opinion aggregators such as Pajamas Media or Real Clear Politics, the moderate to conservative blogosphere, or just individuals armed with video cameras and a YouTube account, there are too many holes in the Great Wall of the Liberal Media to keep alternative opinions at bay. As our elected representatives discovered during the health-care town halls last summer, their voters are informed and willing to ask questions – and they expect answers, not feigned ignorance or stonewalls or temper tantrums.

Much to their chagrin and the public’s benefit.

LINKS: More at Power Line and Big Government.

RELATED: An earlier post about the NBPP and Holder’s Department of Injustice.

Department of Injustice: compare and contrast

July 9, 2010

On election day in 2008, members of the New Black Panther Party engaged in a clear case of voter intimidation aimed at White voters:

While the Department of Justice brought suit against the Panthers in the waning days of the Bush Administration and obtained a judgment against the NBPP and its members, the Obama Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder dropped the case with little explanation and to widespread shock and consternation.

Fast forward to the present: Johannes Mehserle, a White BART transit cop on trial for shooting African-American Oscar Grant, is found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Given the facts of the case, the verdict was correct and justice was served.

So, of course, today comes the news that the Department of Justice, that same DoJ that dropped a clear case of voter intimidation, is going to investigate the shooting of Grant for possible federal prosecution:

The U.S. Department of Justice will conduct an independent review of the Johannes Mehserle case in order to determine whether or not the shooting merits federal prosecution, according the department.

“The Justice Department has been closely monitoring the state’s investigation and prosecution,” the department said in a statement.

“The Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and the FBI have an open investigation into the fatal shooting and, at the conclusion of the state’s prosecution, will conduct an independent review of the facts and circumstances to determine whether the evidence warrants federal prosecution.”

This is beyond ridiculous; it is the unequal application of the law, based on the ethnicity of the parties involved. Because career attorneys at the Civil Rights Division of the DoJ do not believe in prosecuting civil rights cases where the accused is Black and the victim is White, and because they now have political bosses who agree with them, the voting rights of White Philadelphia residents are no longer protected. But, make the accused White and the victim Black, and the CRD is all too happy to appease an angry mob and the leftist congresswoman stirring it up.

To be clear: I do not object to the verdict against Mehserle. I think the jury got it right and he should go to prison for his crime. I object very strongly, however, to the Federal government interfering in a state court proceeding in which the state properly exercised its police powers, simply because the administration wants to pander to one or another ethnic group. The opening of a federal investigation implies there’s a legitimate question whether the state court operated fairly, which anyone paying attention can see is not the case here. This is an insult to the court system of California and to the state as a whole, and a clear violation of the spirit of the 10th Amendment.

But, far worse, this is yet another example that Justice under Obama and Holder is not blind and is not applied equally to all, but that it varies according to the color of one’s skin. This goes against nearly a thousand years of Anglo-American jurisprudence and flies in the face of the words from our Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal.”

Eric Holder and the entire Civil Rights Division should be hauled before a congressional committee to explain why one case is important and the other isn’t, and whether they believe that the rights of all citizens are deserving of protection regardless of ethnicity or skin color. And if not, why not.

It likely won’t happen until after November, but it will be enlightening when it does.

UPDATE: An Illinois congressman congressional candidate calls for Holder’s resignation over the NBPP case.

UPDATE II: In Florida, congressional candidate Allen West condemns Eric Holder for pursuing racially biased justice.

UPDATE III: Via Instapundit, the DoJ’s voting section has been told not to enforce the purging of dead or ineligible voters from voter rolls. Chicago-way politics goes nationwide!

LINKS: More at Hot Air, where Ed takes a more calm view of this than I.

Voter intimidation is AOK when it’s our guys doing it

December 27, 2009

Holder Justice Department fires the man who initiated the complaints against the Black Panthers who intimidated voters in Philadelphia in November, 2008.

Because some votes are more equal than others.

Video of the apparently unintimidating intimidation: