New Black Panthers voter intimidation: the case against the DOJ just got legs

Wow. Wow wow wow. On video, Mr. New Black Panther exclaims:

"I hate white people! All of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate em.

[...]

You want freedom? You gonna have to kill some crackers! You gonna have to kill some of they babies!"

Jennifer Rubin has done the reporting legwork on the DOJ's dismissal of the case they had already won against the New Black Panthers. In a comprehensive article on June 21 in The Weekly Standard, Rubin covered the damning actions of the DOJ, then zeroed in the biggest issue:

While the interference by political appointees in the NBPP case has been egregious, there is a critical issue with implications far beyond this single case: Whether the attorneys who populate the civil rights division of the Justice Department believe that civil rights laws exist only to protect minorities from discrimination and intimidation by whites.

[...]

Former voting rights attorneys confirm that the belief is omnipresent in the Justice Department. DoJ attorneys openly criticized the Panther case, objecting not to any lack of evidence or to the legal arguments but to the notion that any discrimination case should be filed against black defendants. There are instances of attorneys refusing to work on cases against minority defendants. In 2005, for example, Coates pursued, filed, and won a case (upheld on appeal to the Fifth Circuit in 2009) of egregious voter discrimination by black officials in Noxubee County, Mississippi. Colleagues criticized Coates for filing the case and refused to work on it.


Liberal civil rights lawyers argue that because “a history of official discrimination” can be one subsidiary factor in voting cases it “wipes out every other factor” and prohibits cases from being brought against blacks. And further, that since “socio-economic” factors can be considered in determining whether voting discrimination has occurred, these cases cannot be brought against black defendants until there is economic parity between blacks and whites. Such attorneys use phrases like “traditional civil rights cases” and “traditional civil rights victims” to signal that only minority victims and white perpetrators concern them. Justice sources tell me that career attorneys have been “assured” that cases against minority defendants won’t be brought.

Update: three DOJ officials come forward to vouch for the veracity of whistle blower J. Christian Adams.

`