Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

6 Bumps

Dismissal of Black Panther case a travesty of Justice?

The Justice Dept. is ignoring civil rights cases that involve white victms & wrongly abandoned a voter intimdation case agaist the New Black Panther Party last year, a top dept. official testified friday. He called the justice departments conduct a travesty of justice. Christopher Coates, former voting chief for the depts civil rights devsion backed up former justice official J. Christian Adams claim in a lengthy & detailed testimony, he said the JD cultivates a hostile atmosphere against race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. He said the Black Panther Case was dismissed following pressure by the NAACP. Coates still works for the Justice Department and was ordered by Holder not to testify.


Asked by Natesmom507 at 9:21 AM on Sep. 25, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 35 (74,836 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (23)
  • They had the evidence to convict them. People testified that they were intimidated. Holder DENIED them their day in court.

    Answer by Carpy at 12:44 PM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • was and it is. And I just wondering how much longer the sheeple are just going to keep making excuses and where the heck the ACLU is. Oh THATS right...NOT a left wing cause.....


    Answer by momof030404 at 9:29 AM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • Would it be dismissed if it were Klan members in their robes? I think not and these individuals are the same thing in my mind.

    Answer by sopranomommy at 11:05 AM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • There is no case.
    This is prejudice,pure and simple. Because they have black skin, you assume they are guilty. Now you are associating them with the KKK. BIGOTS!

    yep, because they are BP biggots. But you go ahead with that hypocritical free pass.

    And brandi, intimidation at a voting place is illegal whether attempted or done. You tell me why they were there otherwise.

    Answer by Carpy at 11:13 AM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • Brandy, their is evidence, people saying that they felt very intimidated by these two mens, and looking at the one mans history (someone already posted the link) where he is screaming about killing cracker babies shows what kind of individual he is and his intent. He was purposely standing there to scare away voters. There is no question about it, and the fact that our government tried to let them get away with it is just horribly wrong. It is the same thing as someone standing out there wearing a white hood, the black panthers are known for being a racist group.

    Answer by -LovingMamma- at 5:01 PM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • One of these "gentlemen" has been shown on video saying he wants to "kill all cracker babies". If that isn't bigotry I don't know what is. It is precisely the same thing as the Klan saying they are going to kill all the _____ babies. (I refuse to use that word.)

    If that were my polling station I would be intimidated with them standing there looking like they are.

    Answer by sopranomommy at 12:08 PM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • the only thing the case requires to prove voter intimidation is for the voter to say
    I felt intimidated and I did NOT vote.
    The case has this evidence already.
    We have a racist administration, and again I will say " We told you so"

    Answer by jewjewbee at 1:51 PM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • It's simple. If you break a law you should be held accountable. It's too bad that our justice dept. is as single minded as our current administration. I don't care if anyone thinks that there was intimidation or not, I believe there was a law that was broken and to fail to hold people accountable for their actions only encourages them to keep breaking those laws. It should have nothing to do with race. Last time I checked, Lady Justice wears a blindfold.


    Answer by QuinnMae at 9:56 AM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • It was a travesty of justice. By your reasoning brandi, if someone attempts to shoot you, but misses, then they have done nothing wrong.

    Answer by Carpy at 10:49 AM on Sep. 25, 2010

  • I think that this needs to go to court and let it be judged there. I think they will lose which is why Eric Holder did what he did. It is hard to support a group before PBO and then have to prosecute them as USAG. Go to court, present your case, and let the law be weighed. Then, shut up about it.

    Answer by jesse123456 at 11:16 AM on Sep. 25, 2010