Conspiracy

Panthermania

|

Dave Weigel is right about the New Black Panther Party:

Coming soon: the New Gray Panthers, for anti-Semitic old people.

How often does Fox bring on the Panthers, or talk about them? A Lexis-Nexis search finds 68 mentions of "Malik Zulu Shabazz," a leader of the NBPP. The majority are appearances on Fox News, where Shabazz is repeatedly brought on to act as a foolish, anti-Semitic punching bag….

[Megyn] Kelly's obsession with the current NBPP controversy is something else, though. No one disputes that two members of the Panthers lurked outside of a heavily black, Democratic polling place in Philadelphia on election day 2008, and no one thinks this was a smart or legal thing for them to do. Police were called to the scene to disperse them, and King Samir Shabazz, who was filmed holding (though not using) a nightstick, lost the right to be a poll-watcher for the next election cycle. It was the only recorded incident like this in the nation; nearly two years later, no voter has come forward and said he or she was prevented from voting by the Panthers. And in his publicity tour to attack the DOJ over the Panther case—a second-rate case against a fifth-rate hate group—J. Christian Adams has been unable to name any case in which the DOJ was presented with a crime committed by black people and chose not to prosecute it.

So why obsess over the Panthers? Is it turnabout for the way that liberals elevate the craziest tea party activists, or the way they call them racist? Because it's obviously not a search for justice or a muckraking effort to discover reverse racism in the DOJ. If this is an effort to make sure that King Samir Shabazz is prosecuted for intimidating voters, why not try to find some voters he intimidated? Why, instead, as Kelly and Glenn Beck have opted to do, show video of the Shabazz yelling about "crackers" at a street fair before the election? No one disputes that he hates white people—just watch one of the tapes from the times Fox News invited his colleagues on to discuss how they hate white people.

The New Black Panther Party plays the same role for the right that Hutaree-style militants play for the left: They're a tiny, uninfluential group whose importance is magnified to keep the base excited. Left and right wind up worrying more about each other than they care about the institutions that actually govern the country. It's great if your goal is maintaining movement identity, but not if you're more interested in changing policy than collecting scalps.

NEXT: Lunch in Government Cafeterias Pretty Gross, Lunch in Government Schools Much Grosser

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Not this again.

    1. This is where we’d like to be able to post pictures saying “Aw jeez, not this shit again!” the way it’s done on Free Republic.

    2. Walker and Weigel utterly missed the point.

      Essentially nobody considers the NBPP a threat, nor cares about them. 99.99% of the concern here is about the DOJ — the Department of Justice, if you haven’t heard of it — dropping the case for unpleasant racio-political reasons. Politicizing the DOJ is ugly. If it were two Klansmen in a heavily white district, and nobody had actually claimed to have been prevented from voting, they’d be prosecuted and both Weigel and Walker would solemnly approve. As would we all — fuck the Klan, they’re scum.

      The difference here is that the mainstream left have pet hate groups who they protect, and the mainstream right don’t.

      I repeat: Nobody gives a rat’s ass about the NBPP. The concern here is about the DOJ applying a racial standard in who gets prosecuted for committing crimes. If Walker and Weigel have read anything at all that anybody at all on the right is saying about this issue, they are aware of that.

      This is either deliberate dishonesty, or a degree of full-on, balls-out professional incompetence that’s remarkable even in a cheap, dishonest, small-time partisan shitball anklebiter like Weigel.

      Weigel writing about conservatives is like Richard Nixon telling you about hippies. It would be funny if it weren’t for morons like Walker who think he’s really got it all figured out.

  2. “No one disputes that two members of the Panthers lurked outside”

    Lurked? Faggots got a way with words, don’t he?

    1. He has a gf in Alaska.

      ….

      We should not be talking about her.

      1. He has a gf in Alaska.

        Don’t most guys quit bragging about their made-up “out of town girlfriend” around high school age?

          1. She must have a thing for effeminate jagoffs with acne-scarred faces.

          2. The first rule of Weigel’s GF is we do not talk about Weigel’s GF.

            the second rule of Weigel’s GF is we do not talk about Weigel’s GF.

      2. Hey DW, how is that girlfriend?

        Uhm, she is fine.

        How come I never see you hanging around with her?

        She lives in . . . another state.

        Oh yeah, really? How come I never see you on your Blackberry talking to her?

        She lives in Alaska. Bad reception.

        1. That was my speculation on That Which Should Not Be Talked about. My other favorite blog encourages using titles.

  3. The New Black Panther Party plays the same role for the right that basically everyone that Dave Weigel covered when at the Post played for the left.

          1. =6

            1. +4

              10

    1. You will be happy to know that Instapundit make John’s comment his “Comment of the Day”

      1. That should read made instead of make.

    2. A culture war is fought with the weapons the OTHER SIDE hands you. Pat Robertson has been a weapon for the left for years, because every time he opens his mouth and claims that lesbians cause tidal waves the MSM uses that as an excuse to smear all religious conservatives by association. Hateful wackjobs like Rosie O’Donnell and Ward Churchill work for us, not them, and so does this Black Panthers creep, that’s why he’s on FOX.

  4. Dave Weigel is […]

    I stopped reading after that.

    1. Whoa! That’s a new game!
      “Dave Weigel is…”

      1. become death, destroyer of ratfuckers.

        1. This was really, really funny.

      2. …a hack.

      3. “…able to cause H&R to get about a zillion page hits when he is mentioned or linked to.”

      4. taking his talents to South Beach

      5. “…automatic disproof of any point the idiot article-writer is trying to make. If he weren’t an idiot, he wouldn’t feel the need to cite known liars and left-wing propagandists.”

      6. still shillin’

  5. Police were called to the scene to disperse them, and King Samir Shabazz, who was filmed holding (though not using) a nightstick, lost the right to be a poll-watcher for the next election cycle.

    No hugs exchanged?

    1. “(though not using)”

      Ya gotta love Weigelese.

      Robbery Victim: Officer! That man is pointing a gun at me.

      Cop: True, that. But he’s not really using it is he?

      1. Gobbler, I know people with sticks can be scary, especially to the easily frightened. But it’s important to remember that a stick is not a gun and that only a fucking idiot would equate the two.

        1. Try waving one at a cop.

          1. Pretty sure if I waved a stick at a cop he would just think I’m retarded and move on.

            1. Pretty sure if you waved a nightstick at a cop, you wouldn’t be pretty sure of what you say you’re pretty sure about.

            2. Then go do it, retard. Don’t expect us to come bail you out when they beat your ass and throw it in jail for being stupid, though.

              As Chris Rock says, if you jump a subway turnstile carrying a loaded gun and smoking a joint, maybe you need your ass kicked. Same thing goes for people with as little common sense as to be waving a blunt weapon at police.

              1. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but they will never intimidate me from voting.

                1. As long as you’ve got a gun, anyway…

            3. You mean “would think you were wounded….”

              I suggest, in an example of evolution in action, that you give it a try.

        2. Well, I’ve used the whole “sticks can be threatening too!” excuse for years.

          http://brendan.sdf-eu.org/pics…..sticks.jpg

          Music festivals are huntin’ season for me…

        3. I seem to remember some white cops using a nightstick on one of those black fellas out in LA one time. Those sticks did quite a bit of damage if I recall correctly, and elicited the greatest statement from a King since Martin Luthur King, Jr. exited the planet.

        4. Only a fucking idiot would completely miss the point of the comment and focus on “equating” a stick and a gun.

        5. tough talkers on the web pee their pants when it really happens. Somehow I don’t think Les would be all that brave if he felt threatened.

  6. I’ve been standing out here screaming my head off for twenty fucking years and I’s still ignored!
    These mutherfuckers stand outside a polling place and make news?

    1. My favorite is the group of 5%ers or whatever they call themselves now that hang out at 164th and Jamaica Ave. Classy fellows, those.

      1. Too bad all the 5% nation doesn’t have cool grooves.

        1. bold statement: five percenters created more great music than any other fringe religious group on the planet.

          1. Mike: I dont think members of the Wu count. Or Erik B and Rakim. Or Gang Starr, or Jeru…

            In fact, almost all rappers that quote 5% nation stuff are just appropriating the lingo.

            FWIW – the only real 5% nation rappers I can think of off the top of my head – Sunz of Man & XClan – pretty much sucked. Am I missing some better stuff?

            Just dropping some scientifical mathematics up in the cipher. Word is born, god.

            1. Perhaps the better word is “inspired” great music.

              1. good point. we’ll go with “inspired”.

            2. Gilmore,

              Rakim joined the Nation of Gods and Earths when he was 16.

              1. Meh. I wouldn’t be surprised if you were a hippy at 16. My point was that despite the prevalence of 5% nation lingo in rap, almost none of them are dedicated adherents. including the R. I may be wrong, but it doesnt seem to me like he ever made a point of putting his ‘religion’ before putting paper inside his hand…

          2. dhex – even Rastafarians?

            1. I think its a good run for the money.

              the 5% nation inspired a lot of the best rap music. Rastafarians were not necessarily the drivers of reggae, but groups like the wailers, tosh, marley, black uhuru and others were certainly not unlike modern rappers in citing the doctrine of their associated creed. Either way, its not about the ‘religion’ so much as the usefulness of the culture in creating a language and pattern that becomes musically unique. I think in this respect the Rastas hold the trophy for idiosyncrasy and quality, and and least some ideological consistency. The 5%’rs win on the infectious nature of their lingo in spreading though all of rap music to the point where most dont even remember the origin of hundreds of common expressions. Rastas at least had a vision that was consistent. The 5%’s were mostly converts from prison who spread the language without the theology so much.

    2. Them Jooooos kilt ma baybies! Me an’ Sis, we cain’t have no more kids on’acounnta them damn nig’ras pollutin’ the gene pool!

      1. Them Jooooos, they’s kilt m’ baybies! Me an’ my bitch, we kin’t have no mo’ kids cuzza them damn kikes pollutin’ the gene pool!

  7. For most people the story is about whether the DOJ has a race based policy not about the NBP.

    Weigel is trying to make the story about Fox instead of the DOJ.

    1. Exactly. Who gives a shit about the piss ant BPP? The issue is Holder’s DOJ and the handling of this case.

    2. Funny how he manages to fail at everything he tries to do.

      1. I don’t agree he’s failing. You just have to evaluate him according to his function.

    3. Perhaps this will put to rest the silly arguments that Weigel is not and was never just another left wing hack.

    4. Indeed. Nobody thinks these NBPP people are anything more than nuts. They’re nobodies. But the question remains, if you had the case won why drop it? That’s asinine regardless, and is it part of a larger policy?

  8. …the New Black.

  9. This is essentially correct – a non-issue. Had the Panthers showed up at a mostly white polling place, one could probably find a hundred voters who claimed intimidation. But I’ll bet if a robed but unhooded klan kook showed up a even a 100% white polling place in, say, Georgia there would be Congressional investigations out the wazoo if DOJ did nothing.

  10. Left and right wind up worrying more about each other than they care about the institutions that actually govern the country.

    Mr. Walker, do you see this as a new development?

      1. I thought you made good points Jesse. The ADL, FBI and other questionable groups have “informants” in these types of groups that essentially keep the groups going, then the MSM uses these groups to divide and conquer.

        Poor whites and blacks both pay highly regressive payroll taxes and are victimized by lobotomizing educational systems used to create cannonfodder/or income streams for the prison industrial complex. The elite needs to keep poor whites and black divided.

        Glenn Beck is focused on Black Panthers. What message does that send to the Obamatards? “oh wouldn’t you expect tea partiers to be focused on black panthers? therefore tea partiers are racists!”

        see how this works?

        1. Oh bullshit. Who are these ADL informants in the Black Panthers?

          More like questionable neo-nazi and Black seperatist groups love to complain about the ADL – and blame the jews for the existence of whatever they hate.

  11. Yea I went to big government today (which has pretty much gone from being an ok website to being totally worthless) and they had all their blacks denouncing the NAACP or something. And almost all of them brought up the black panther incident as if it was a big deal. I couldn’t figure out what point they were trying to make by repeatedly pointing out that the NCAAP did nothing about the NBPP. the NCAAP did nothing about the NBPP crap because the NBPP crap was nothing, and not worth anyones time worrying about.

    1. The NAACP is to the Black Panthers as the KKK is the Aryan Nation. Big Government is to the NAACP as the Freedom Riders were to the KKK.

      And you’re a fool, a bigot, and a racist for pretending you’re blind and you can’t see the point in condemning both of these hate groups for their racism.

      1. Last I heard the NAACP never burned crosses in people’s backyards, or ochestrated lynchings,beatings, tie-u-to-the-back-of-my-truck events. And the Black Panthers are a natural product of the violence and oppression. And even they have never been known to round up and kill white people. U cant begin to compare the two groups.

        1. True, but their respective behaviors have been on a converging path the last couple decades.

          1. Well let me know when the NAACP starts hanging people from trees, k?

            1. In other words, “Wait until they actually whack somebody with those night sticks to call it intimidation!”

              See this gun here? I’m not actually shooting you yet. How dare you call this a robbery! I’m not intimidating anybody! Hurting you is the last thing I’d ever want to do. Did I mention I’d like to kill your cracker babies? You’re an Uncle Tom if you don’t agree the Tea Parties are racist. No, don’t you dare say I’m intimidating you, you half-cracker! Now let me inspect that wallet of yours, Uncle Tom. Come on, does this really have to be so hard?

              1. They don’t have to hang anyone to be racist asshats. Unless you think the Klan circa 2010 is acceptable.

        2. And I’m sure (because I’ve read it) that the KKK claimed they were just a natural byproduct of the violence and oppression of Reconstruction. And I’m sure that the members of the Black Panthers, old and new, have several white victims to their credit. What motivated the attacks? Only the perps and God know that, but I somehow figure that the race of the victims was a factor in target selection.

  12. I would take this article seriously if it was not written by Weigel….the same guy who amplified the importance of the birthers in the Republican party to epic proportions.

    The David “Birther hunter” Weigel is now angry that Fox news is doing what he did with the birthers to the Black Panthers.

    FWI: this post is me hugging Weigel.

    1. Oh yeah and the differance is that the brithers have not broken the law….

      But the black panthers probably did and the DoJ has stopped investigation despite video evidence.

    2. Weigel knows how it works, because that is his job as well. I actually trust Weigel on this.

      1. Weigel knows how it works, because that is his job as well.

        Oh yeah, he’s got experience at lying! Nice to know we’re not dealing with rank amateurs here.

        “We’re number one, Ben, that’s all that counts, believe me. I’ve been in the business for thirty years.”

        I actually trust Weigel on this.

        Retard.

      2. That says more about you than it does about Weigel.

  13. So why obsess over the Panthers?

    I wouldn’t say Megan Kelly is “obsessed” with the BPP, first of all. Fox and Kelly have been asking a legitimate question: Why did our US Justice Department completely drop a clear cut case of voter intimidation, and why isn’t this getting more coverage in the media? Why does it seem like Fox is the only major news outlet who is even covering it? And does anyone doubt for a second that if this was a white militant group with nightsticks at a voting station that there would be people in jail right now? Can you imagine the level of hyperventilating this would cause if it was a -GASP!- TEA PARTY MEMBER?

    Jesus, I don’t even want to think about it.

    There is no doubt that the BPP provides an easy punching bag, but the fact is that the DOJ has clearly let these idiots off the hook because they were black, and that is what Kelly and Fox are concerned about. The fact that other media folks aren’t realizing that this is just wrong on a fundamental level is troubling in of itself.

    1. Why does it seem like Fox is the only major news outlet who is even covering it?

      This is a good point. Fox’s obsession looks more like they are covering a juicy story that know one else is covering. If i was Fox I would play it to death as well. No wonder their ratings are crushing the competition.

      1. I know, right?

        And lefties in and out of the MSM don’t seem to understand this is why Fox crushes them.

        It’s as if McDonald’s decided one day it would only sell soy burgers and was baffled when Burger King was suddenly killing them.

        1. Maybe they let them off the hook for the same reason the Bush DOJ let those armed Minutemen outside the 2006 polling place off the hook?

          On the other hand, a handgun isn’t as intimidating as a nightstick.

          1. They weren’t brandishing weapons and tlaking about killing babies, they were quietly monitoring for election fraud and getting signatures for a petition.

    2. If you want an example of how the left would react, you only have to go back to the 2000 election. Black voters were complaining about a police car at a polling station in Florida, and the left pretty much hyperventilated over the incident, even after it was discovered it was there because the cop who owned the car was there TO FUCKING VOTE.

      The 2000 election in Florida gives a perfect example of how the left reacts even when there is no fucking evidence, at all, that voter intimidation actually occurred.

      1. Good example. 1) Police car at polling place = OMG racist intimidation of voters!!!!

        2) Paramilitary thugs + nightstick + racial threats at polling place = Meh, just a Fox/GOP plot to make something out of nothing.

        1. Excellent. Crystal clear example. Thanks!

          We are all Americans. We must all know that we can go to the polling place and not have thugs threatening us – no matter what color we are.

      2. “Black voters were complaining about a police car at a polling station in Florida”

        The facts are actually worse than you present. The police car was not at the polling place, but had set up a speed trap a few miles away from a polling place, and was there for about an hour.

        1. OMG a speed trap miles from a polling place!!! It’s racism!!!

          1. I meant the facts make those hyperventilating look even more foolish.

    3. Why did our US Justice Department completely drop a clear cut case of voter intimidation, and why isn’t this getting more coverage in the media?

      Clear cut? Perhaps they could find at least one intimidated voter if it was all so clear cut.

      It isn’t getting more media coverages because it’s a bunch of horseshit. It’s on Fox because it’s perfect for the old white people who make up their viewing audience.

      Now if the real Black Panthers were still around, the ones from Oakland, who did believe in “second amendment solutions” and acted accordingly, you would have a story. Those guys really were bad asses, not pathetic wannabes like the NBPP. A guy standing around at a polling place, even with a stick, isn’t too impressive to anybody who remember the real deal.

      1. If the case wasn’t clear cut then how did the DOJ obtain an injunction? And do you honestly believe that if this was a guy in a white robe standing in the freaking doorway of a polling station with a nightclub that we’d even be having this coversation?

        1. Depends, is he using the nightstick?

          1. This was a case of voter intimidation, not voter assault. The presence of the nightstick was the crime. It’s use is irrelevant to the charges.

  14. And in his publicity tour to attack the DOJ over the Panther case — a second-rate case against a fifth-rate hate group — J. Christian Adams has been unable to name any case in which the DOJ was presented with a crime committed by black people and chose not to prosecute it.

    The complaint was that the policy was being set at DOJ. The violations come after the policy. And unless the DOJ tells us, how would we know what they’ve decided not to pursue? Are we supposed to hunt down all possible black defendants and ask them whether they might have committed a crime the DOJ was ignoring?

    That’s typical Weigeling — he said the same thing about not finding any disenfranchised whites. It’s purely asinine. If the Klan were standing outside polling centers brandishing guns and uttering racial epithets, the media’s focus would not be on whether they actually prevented any nonwhites from voting.

    1. Well, Weigel is in the tank. What’s Jesse Walker doing there?

      1. It should have been a reply to RC Dean. Damn!

      2. Everyone stumbles.

        Plus I think there is a feel sorry for Weigel thing going around. Apparently everyone and their dog who has ever worked with the guy loves him. Jesse could simply be helping a friend.

        1. Jesse could simply be helping a friend fellow Journolister.

          1. There do seem to be a few more Weigel threads lately.

            1. B/c they drive hits and comments, that’s why. I’ve met Weigel before, many years ago, and he’s a good dude. But his takes have been getting sloppy.

  15. One important factoid that nobody mentions: The DOJ dropped the case after they had won it, but before sanctions were imposed.

    So, there was no question about it being a weak case that they might not win.

    The scandal over this isn’t about the Black Panthers. Its about the DOJ dropping a case against a hate group (hence the footage of the defendants vomiting hate) that it had already won, because the defendants happened to be black.

    If you don’t think that’s worth a bit of a kerfuffle, then you are truly in the tank.

    1. It was worth a marches throughout the South and on Washington 50 years ago.

  16. You’ve got to love reading about Megyn Kelly’s obsession on the web site of the guy who is insanely obsessed with Sarah Palin and her daughter.

    Fuck both of those fake libertarian dickheads Weigel and Sullivan.

    1. And Jesse Walker. Anybody who cites the blatant hackwork of known shitheads like Sullivan, Greenwald, or Weigel about anything can not be considered a legitimate source.

    2. Andrew Sullivan is the vuvuzuela of political commentary.

      1. It puzzles me that people read Sullivan’s blog. 95% is know-nothing vitriol, delivered in the most unappealing way possible. He appears to have no shred of charm or self-awareness. There are plenty of lefty loons out there in blogville that are fun to read because they actually possess qualities like insightfulness and humor. Why read this hack instead?

  17. Scandal Boy is, by definition, not right. If he were right, he wouldn’t be Scandal Boy.

  18. I bet money that many of the most outrageous and widely known Black Panthers are on the government payroll. That would explain why they aren’t prosecuted….like that talk radio white supremicist guy who was paid by the FBI to promote violence.

  19. As far as the DOJ goes, I’ve been reading Adam Serwer’s coverage of the case (e.g.) and find it pretty persuasive. If there are strong critiques of his take out there, please point me to them.

      1. That’s just a response to Serwer’s post about the decision to pursue a civil rather than criminal case, though, isn’t it? I’m not referring to that.

        It looks like there’s much more at Just One Minute, though, so I’ll give that a detailed reading later tonight.

        1. Maguire’s dismantling is much more thorough:

          http://justoneminute.typepad.c…..esday.html

          1. Maguire’s dismantling is much more thorough

            OK, I’ve read it now. It didn’t really address Serwer’s central point: “Generally, the Voting Section is focused on larger systemic issues that have the potential to disenfranchise large numbers of voters — not single instances that are unlikely to occur again in the future.” The NBPP and Minutemen cases may not be “nearly identical,” to use the phrase (from Media Matters, not Serwer) that Maguire leaped on, but they both fall into the same category, and that category is not “larger systemic issues that have the potential to disenfranchise large numbers of voters.”

            In fact, the law in question has hardly ever been enforced at all. As Abigail Thernstrom — no Democratic apologist — notes, there have been exactly three successful prosecutions under it in 45 years. So there’s not much of a record to point to if you want to argue that there’s a double standard at work.

            1. That’s a great argument for not bringing the case, but a terrible argument for dropping the case after it was already won on default.

              1. If its not enough to bring the case in the first place, maybe it should be dropped…?

                But by all means, continue with the “Obama is persecuting white people!!” narrative.

                1. After they won?

                  But by all means, continue with the “I’m stupid and I’ll show it” meme.

            2. “Pay no attention to the fact that this was one of those successful prosecutions and that they dropped the case after they won it! Ignore the scam behind that curtain! I am the mighty wizard of investigative journalism!”

              1. Pay no attention to the fact that this was one of those successful prosecutions

                No, it wasn’t; those three prosecutions were separate from this one. And double-checking Thernstrom, I think she might have gotten the “successful” part wrong — if you read her exchange with Perez here, he says that to his knowledge the department only brought three cases under that section of the act, one of which resulted in a settlement and the other two of which “were not sustained at trial.”

                That’s the problem with the “let’s pretend” games that various commenters have suggested, where we’re supposed to imagine what would happen if some skinheads did the same thing. Whatever else might happen, they probably wouldn’t face this charge.

                TallDave’s point is much more sensible, and I can’t say I’d be upset if the case hadn’t been dropped. But I can’t get worked up about the fact that the DOJ decided it wasn’t worth pursuing either. For all the invective about racial double standards, I haven’t seen any evidence that this is anything more than two sets of attorneys holding different interpretations of the law.

                1. I haven’t seen any evidence that this is anything more than two sets of attorneys holding different interpretations of the law.

                  I’d be curious to see how many examples one can find of cases being dropped after being won because of “different interpretations of the law.” I’m skeptical that it’s a commonplace occurrence. Some folks at DOJ seemed pretty upset by it.

                  Whatever else might happen, they probably wouldn’t face this charge.

                  Really??? You don’t think viral video of white guys in hoods brandishing nightsticks and talking about killing babies would have resulted in charges? It would dominate the news cycles, every racial identity group would demand action… I don’t see how they could avoid charging someone with something.

                  1. I don’t see how they could avoid charging someone with something.

                    Right. But not with this.

                    1. Why not with this? It might not be the first option, but if they couldn’t make anything else stick, it’s a pretty sure bet they’d give this a whirl, to an approving chorus of left-liberal commentariat across the MSM.

                      I think it’s a bit of a logically fallacy to argue that since the DOJ voting rights division generally pursued more systemic cases, they wouldn’t pursue a high-profile individual case likee this when one came up.

        2. Well, the “civil vs criminal thing” was cited again at the conclusion of the piece you linked, so Serwer, at least, still seems to think that dog will hunt.

          The 2007 case involved people taking pictures, in a public place, to identify possible voter fraud. There was no shouting of racial epithets and no actual attempt to intimdate anyone who was legitimately voting.

          It’s a bit much to be told over and over that we don’t need voter ID because there is no such fraud, while also being told private citizens taking pictures in public on that basis are “intimidating” legal voters. Preventing fraudulent/multiple voting is standard election monitoring stuff. Even Iraq almost certainly has cleaner elections than we do in that regard, because you at least have to dye your finger. (I live in Chicago, and I can say with considerable certainty there would many thousands fewer votes cast if they did that here. Or, a lot of purple-fingered corpses.)

  20. If there are strong critiques of his take out there, please point me to them.

    I suggest you take a gander at Tom Maguire’s blog, Just One Minute. I’m blocked at work, but you can find it at:

    http://www.justoneminute.typepad.com

    and he has a pretty good critical analysis of the Serwer defense of the Obama administration.

      1. Serwer also tries to justify the DOJ’s action by comparing them to two white voter intimidation cases that weren’t prosecuted when Bush was in office. But both of those cases aren’t even remotely similar to the BPP case, and the comparison is disingenuous at best. Add that to the stupid fraudulent gotcha game Serwer tried to play by saying it was the Bush administration who dropped the case (completely wrong) and I’m not sure why you think this guy is “pretty persuasive” other than you would prefer that he were right.

        Of course that can’t be the reason. Right Jesse?

        1. Nah, of course not! I’m a veritable pillar of JournoListic journalistic integrity!

  21. Here we go:
    Careful Reading Tuesday

    And it has some bonus Weigel-bashing!

  22. Let’s focus on Walker’s sophomoric comparison: “The New Black Panther Party plays the same role for the right that Hutaree-style militants play for the left”. Here’s a news flash Jesse: The Hutaree are in jail the NBPP clowns are not. If Shabazz was a skinhead, there would be an uproar wouldn’t there? Clear and simple: there is a racial double standard.

    1. Yep, and dirtpipes like Jesse Walker are perpetuating that double standard. Walker, I hope you get Weigeled real good in your dirtpipe.

  23. I am not a Weigel-hater, but I’m getting there. This take is absolute bullshit.

    I realize many Reason contributors don’t care to vote for either of the two morons running for any given office, but for those of us that do enjoy exercising the right/duty/privilege/whatever of pulling the lever whilst holding ones nose, we expect the process to have some fucking integrity. Voter intimidation, successful or just attempted, is a crime for a very good reason.

  24. The crime itself isn’t the story. It’s the fact that the Obama DOJ, AFTER winning a verdict against the 3 black defendants, let them off the hook for an obvious crime which was caught on videotape.

    Because they were black.

    So much for the post-racial president.

    That’s a big story. If you don’t get that, what are you doing in journalism?

    1. “…what are you doing in journalism?”

      The Democratic Party’s bidding. Hasn’t that been made clear of late?

  25. Reason – against civil rights.

    Cool!

  26. I think Weigel’s totally sane and deeply libertarian compulsion to minimize violent and/or violence-threatening acts?e.g., the famous “hug,” and this story’s “brief showing” of nightsticks?is…deeply libertarian and totally sane.

    1. +1

    2. Who are you!?

  27. Random story, only tangentially related:

    I live in one of the few really Democratic counties in Texas, and machine politics and voting problems are the norm. This April, we had primary run-offs. I had voted in the Republican Primary, and I wanted to vote in a Supreme Court primary run-off. Both major parties had their primary run-offs in the same location. When I asked for a Republican ballot, the elderly black lady who was working the polls asked me where by baseball bat was. I was genuinely confused, and she then said, “You know, to scare the Democrats with”. She was joking, but you could tell that she thought that about big, white Republicans. I thought about asking her about this case, but chose to keep my mouth shut.

  28. Has anyone noticed the New Black Panther logo? “Freedom or Death”. Are these guys secretly libertarians?

    1. the FBI and ADl collaborated on the design for the new logo. They want to scare middle america away from freedom promoting slogans….boobus americana “if the black panthers and the tea parties have similar extremist slogans then we need to shut down all dangerous extremists!”

      Kinda like how everytime Ron Paul talks about pulling outof the Mid-East…the ADL/FBI/CIA/Mossad guys put out another phony Bin Laden video parroting Ron Paul’s argument.

      Whats really wierd is how Bin Laden wants to fight climate change…maybe Ron Bailey could do a interiew with Bin Laden about that…propaganda is confusing.

      1. Really? Where did you read this? Why would the New Black Panthers permit the FBI and the ADL to assist them in designing a logo? I don’t imagine that the New Black Panthers are particularly fond of either of these groups.

      2. I bet money that most of the people who believe this are neo-nazis.

    2. Inspiration if probably “our freedom of speech is freedom or death, we gotta fight the powers that be.”

  29. True that focus should not be on the NBPP. However, when the story is the questionable exercise of prosecutorial discretion and the perpetrators are members of the NBPP, one can see where the story comes from.

  30. J. Christian Adams isn’t attacking the New Black Panthers. J. Christian Adams is attacking the one of the institutions that govern the country, for deciding to let people convicted of voter intimidation walk, unpunished.

    Weigel deliberately conflates the two in order to deflect wrath from the DOJ. Then you, Mr. Walker, aided and abetted his effort to protect one of the institutions that are running the country from criticism.

    But, hey, more important to do a good turn for a former co-worker than actually keep up the pressure on the government to administer justice impartially and protect the mechanism of free elections.

  31. Comparing Hutaree and the NBPP is a little disingenuous and absurd if you support Weigel’s article and argument. The Hutaree were hunted and jailed by federal agents and brought up on federal crimes for hypothesizing about hostilities. NBPP is screaming kill people in the streets and using intimidation at polling places and are not charged.

    There is a double standard with respect to prosecution.

    1. Or are you saying the NBPP is too stupid to actually effectively conspire to kill people? Since that was the main charge against the Hutaree people.

      1. The Old Black Panther wasn’t too stupid to conspire to kill people.

    2. All in all a weak argument, Faux News style bashing, looking to make a mark as the enemy of the enemy.

      As proven with your Hutaree analogy, and taking a lil’ wind out of Dave’s argument. You don’t have to have an act to have done wrong. So if the DoJ hasn’t refused to prosecute, but has laid out a plan to not prosecute, that looks like conspiracy to me.

      1. uh guys, read the sentence again.

        slowly.

        The New Black Panther Party plays the same role for the right that Hutaree-style militants play for the left: They’re a tiny, uninfluential group whose importance is magnified to keep the base excited.

        1. It’s a comparison. A sloppy one.

          1. Because the NBPP are better dancers?

            Or because while they talk a big game, they can’t seem to organize anything worthy of actual prosecution?

            You think there’s a conspiracy to *protect* crazy black radical groups? That’s new. Glen Beck worthy. Email him that one.

            1. Because that comparison is full of shit, and you know it.

            2. I think one group was pursued by the government for discussion (conspiracy) with the ability to act upon that discussion. While the other was not pursued after acting, even if the action was not physical but symbolic. It seems like someone went out of the way to drop the case that was already won. If you can show me another prosecutor that has dropped a case after winning it I guess I will concede your retarded point. But as you can probably glean I think your point is stupid.

              1. The comparison, as dhex was pointing out, doesn’t have anything to do with prosecutorial double standards. It has to do with partisans devoting excessive attention to tiny groups of nuts.

                1. Man, it sucks when you have to explain yourself to readers who want to what you say mean what they want it to mean…

                  Is there something ironic about people missing the point, and immediately obsessing over a possible *conspiracy to protect the NBPP by Holder!?!*? (doing exactly what you said people too often do with these small groups of nutcases)

                  Maybe I misunderstand Irony sometimes… like Alanis Morissette. But it’s still sorta funny.

                2. Except the Hutaree guys went to jail, whereas the suit against the Black Panthers was dropped even after DOJ had won it. Other than that, good point.

                  1. So you’re saying there *was* a conspiracy?

                    I dont really have a dog in the fight because I dont care that much about a few lone jerkoffs who say mean things. I’m just curious why these guys are such bugbears for some people. Is the “DOJ dropped the case!” issue like, fodder for conspiracy theories these days?

                3. In other words, “Don’t let my attempts to distract you from the DOJ’s prosecutorial double standards distract you from my attempts to draw fake moral equivalence between cases that are absolutely nothing like each other.”

                  Jesse Walker, you’re a wretched excuse for a journalist and should be fired, along with everyone else in the media carrying water for the DOJ’s racist double standards.

  32. Men hanging around polling stations waving billyclubs in uniform was simply “not smart or legal”? It should get you arrested in any country that considers itselt civilized. If this is the price of living in a multiculti society, then I would rather live as an immigrant in a monoculti society where the law is respected.

    1. Blubi:
      I would rather live as an immigrant in a monoculti society where the law is respected

      Well, if you’re an ‘immigrant’ in that ‘monoculti society’ (and BTW, is there some reason the word ‘cultural’ – as in monocultural’ – is so hard to spell?)… then it really isn’t so *mono* anymore, is it? Unless you think culture means, “white” or something. I don’t know what you mean, or why you can’t spell it properly.

      The idea you sort-of express doesnt make any sense even on its own terms. The point made in the article was that despite optics, these guys (NBPP) didn’t actually stop anyone from voting, and they (DOJ) can’t find any reason to charge them. If laws were broken, they’d have been charged.

      People acting silly in public is part of the cost of free speech. It should be noted that some landmark supreme court cases protecting free speech (e.g. http://www.enotes.com/supreme-…..urg-v-ohio) were cases where the speech being protected was specifically *hate speech* – in this case, the Klu Klux Klan…

      You want to go somewhere you’re free to say what you want, you will have to accept the crazies along with it. You want ‘regulated’, monocultures? Try and find somewhere in Europe. Perhaps Finland. I’m sure you’ll be welcomed with open arms… or maybe not so much? Their similar public desire to maintain their ‘monoculture’ in the face of increased immigration has also been a path to repression of speech

      e.g.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZH0rPStPIk

      It should be noted that the ‘massive immigration’ this writer alludes to is largely SWEDISH SPEAKERS – the demographics of finland are still 93% finnish, 5.5% swedish… and ALL OTHER still under 1-2%.

      Virtual monoculture!

      Good luck finding happy-monoculti-land

      1. ” … they (DOJ) can’t find any reason to charge them. If laws were broken, they’d have been charged.”

        They were, in fact, charged AND convicted. Other than that, good point.

      2. I admit my comment is obscure if you believe free speech= right to voter intimidation. I do not.
        The guys got off free because they are black, and any nation that allows voter intimidation I consider a banana republic.
        I do live as an immigrant in a monocultural society (Bavaria), by which I mean although there are about 10% immigrants, their origin is sufficiently diverse that the state still applies the law equally irrespective of ethnicity.
        I have no desire to live in a country that discriminates people according to ethnicity, which is unlikely to happen when it is monocultural.
        By multicultural I mean, when ethnic groups are of sufficient number that society, and by extent the state, acts tribally.

      3. “they (DOJ) can’t find any reason to charge them. If laws were broken, they’d have been charged.”

        WTF? DOJ sued them and won before Holder’s folks dropped the case.

      4. Dear Mr. Gilmore:

        They were indeed charged for breaking the law. And indeed, then convicted.

        But Holder, an embarrassment as a lawyer and an affront to any bar, agreed to quash any further prosecution, clearly on racial lines.

        Pay closer attention, son.

        Cordially, Bill

        1. To all:

          I looked the shit up, and you’re all wrong. They got a “default judgment” for not showing up at a *hearing*. Meaning, no evidence was ever presented, no testimony was ever made, and no charges were ever formalized. They got a ding for ignoring the initial inquest in the first place. You act as though this is indemnifying; it’s not. Does it mean they are all nice guys? No. Does it mean the state had a solid case against them? No. Thats why it was dropped, not because the AG also happens to be a Negro. So all of you shut the fuck up already.

  33. a tiny, uninfluential group whose importance is magnified to keep the base excited. Left and right wind up worrying more about each other than they care about the institutions that actually govern the country.

    Well put, Jesse.

    1. Jesse, you should be fired for this bullshit. Gilmore, you must be brain-dead to be complimenting this asshole for such a retarded piece of shit article.

      1. Wow. You present your case in such as reasonable and fact-filled way, I must submit to your superior judgement.

        I really dont get why people are getting so excited about this. He says, “people get too excited about fringe groups as political punching bags”…. and immediately people start freaking out, demanding that their punching bags are COMPLETELY REAL and it is ESSENTIAL to KEEP PUNCHING THE ENEMY FRINGE!

        I mean, its just *proving his point*. I guess you don’t see that.

        1. I really dont get why people are getting so excited about this.

          That’s because you’re stupid. Or you’re playing stupid. With leftards apologists such as yourself, it’s impossible to tell the difference. People openly using their brains, on the other hand, know bloody well why one should be excited about a partisan DOJ that drops cases it has already won against a bunch of racist thugs just because their skin is a certain color.

          If a bunch of white thugs from a known racist hate group stood outside polls yelling that their candidate was going to “end your nigger reign” and waving their nightsticks at voters, you and all the lamestream media would be screaming bloody murder about these hate groups and their voter intimidation. When two black guys do the very same thing, though, you want us to pretend, based on the equivocations of your disgraced colleague Weigel, a known liar and member of the far-left JournoList, that it’s no big deal.

          He says, “people get too excited about fringe groups as political punching bags”

          That would probably be because the “fringe groups” in question are the White House and its Department of Justice! Funny thing how we’re not supposed to notice Weigel’s participation in the far-left fringe group JournoList might be affecting his opinion, but we’re supposed to be focusing on how the “partisan” nature of the people reporting this incident might be biasing them. You’re lying, and we’re not buying what you’re selling.

          You’re proving *our* point pretty nicely that “Reason” and its Hit & Run section are awfully selective–dare I say, partisan–in what they’re choosing to hand-wave. This kind of thing sure as hell wouldn’t have gone unnoticed in the media under the Bush Administration, and you sure as hell wouldn’t be hand-waving it as just the hysterical reaction of a bunch of partisans if it were being splashed all over the left-wing ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN. Your hypocrisy is showing, leftard!

          1. Yeah! What SmallDave said.

  34. David Weigel is fucking pathetic. No person has come forward two years laters to indicate they were intimidated, therefore no crime was committed? You gotta be fucking joking me. The evidence of the intimidation is on the fucking video tape. And maybe, just fucking maybe, Shabazz being videotaped saying he wants to kill white people may have a wee bit to do with that Dave, you pathetic douchebag.

    I remember during the 2000 election when various lefties had their heads explode because a few black voters spotted a police car at a polling place. Even when they found it was because the cop drove there to vote, it didn’t matter. Now when we have a bona fide case of intimidation, on tape, cocksuckers like Weigel are crawling out of the woodwork to tell us “nothing to see here, move along”, despite the fact the video is there for everyone to see. Hey Dave, multiple individuals actually reported the cocksuckers who were doing the intimidating, you know, the guys on the fucking videotape, to the authorities on the day of the election.

    Can we fucking please quit giving Weigel props for going on some sort of pathetic “woe is me” rehabilitation tour. Weigel should be relegated to the same fucking ashheap on which retarded (excuse the term)hacks like Matthew Yglesias belong.

    1. Shabazz being videotaped saying he wants to kill white people may have a wee bit to do with that Dave, you pathetic douchebag.

      Isn’t the point being made that, “No Actual White People Were Killed in the Making of This Video”?

      I mean, if saying dumb shit in public is evidence of a crime in your view, isn’t your verbal abuse of poor Weegs evidence that you yourself are a Menace 2 Society? I’m no big fan of DW , but I fail to see any reason to get so worked up over an article, which on the face of it (or at least what was quoted), actually makes perfect sense. His point was that the NBPP is basically a harmless bunch of losers being overblown by Fox, out of desperation to scare up some alternative to the Left’s “Crazy Tea Party” meme… And he’s basically right. So what’s the beef? You think the New Black Panther Party is an existential threat to Democracy itself? Get some Pampers already. Or go watch some videos of the Black Israelites in Times Square. That should get you fired up.

      1. Isn’t the point being made that, “No Actual White People Were Killed in the Making of This Video”?

        No black people were killed in the making of a lot of KKK rally videos either. Would that justify dismissing court cases against them? No. Neither does it justify your bullshit. Gillmore, you, Walker, Weigel, and anyone else trying to defend this fucking racist hate group can all go fuck yourselves. Your hypocritical spin is bullshit and nobody’s fooled by it.

        Same goes for anyone trying to defend the racist hate group known as the NAACP, which thinks it’s all right to call people like Kenneth Gladney “Uncle Tom” and condemn Tea Partiers for supposed racist incidents that never happened.

        Now fuck off and die, Gilmore!*

        *NB: no Gilmores were killed in the making of this comment.

        1. No black people were killed in the making of a lot of KKK rally videos either. Would that justify dismissing court cases against them?

          I guess you missed the link above where I pointed out that a Klan rally was in fact the basis for an important supreme court precedent protecting free speech, even when it’s crazy and hateful nonsense… so that point of yours had all the impact of a dry sponge.

          Who’s DEFENDING these idiots?? I dont’ see anything approaching ‘defense’. Simply saying that they are *ineffectual and meaningless* is “defense”?

          You want to wet your pants all day about a few crazy black-power anachronisms, go for it. But don’t demand that the rest of us join in the 10-minute hate over just one of many stupid and irrational groups of hate-mongers.

          The funny part is that – in a few people saying, ‘ignore the crazy people’ – you come out screaming invective and accusing us all of racist-apologism and all sorts of nonsense… i mean, it’s clear what camp you’re in: anyone who isn’t all crazy fired up in angst and anger over the NBPP IS THE ENEMY!!!

          Jesus on a pogo stick. Take a valium and go back to your regular programming if this upsets you so much. I can understand people hating on this because it is sourced to the Wiegster (who everyone pretty much reviles, or at least finds boring), but on the actual content itself… I find it hard to believe you can’t see that people getting over-excited about political fringe nuts is nothing except a distraction from actual policy to play identity-affirming games with people and tar the Enemy Whole with the stain of their worst constituency.

          There’s plenty crazy libertoids, FWIW, and I’ve said a million times they should be outed and mocked and disowned. It’s not like I play favorites. I don’t like radicals of any stripe, especially the ones closest to my own views. 🙂 I can’t think of a reason to tell anyone to “fuck off and die” either, frankly (*unless they are LoneWacko, whom I miss) over stupid political news anyway. But there we differ.

          1. Who’s DEFENDING these idiots?? I dont’ see anything approaching ‘defense’. Simply saying that they are *ineffectual and meaningless* is “defense”?

            So you think that’s why DOJ dropped the suit, even after they had won it?

            1. inform me a little bit to improve your case. I never hear about these guys before this thread, and am glad about that. there isnt like some national NBPP movement going on that im worried about. If there’s some special info about how awfully dangerous they are, please let us know.

              1. Sorry, “heard”

                1. And + = DOJ drops cases mostly because they wont win them. If these guys were doing things (however abominable on video) in a public space, and not infringing on anyone else, then I suggest you refer to the above supreme court case protecting such nonsense as free speech.

                  Again – i’m not defending these people (I dont even know who they are or what their accused infraction is) – just that my knowledge of the first amendment leaves a lot open to latitude for the crazies, as it were.

                  1. Sorry, but this is nonsense.

                    The DOJ had ALREADY WON THE CASE. All that was left was handing out the punishment.

                    This isn’t about the NBPP, which although a radical hate group, is fairly insignificant. This is about the DOJ and their bias enforcement.

                  2. There’s none so blind as those who will not see, Gilmore. If you won’t actually WATCH THE VIDEO, we can’t “inform” you on anything.

                  3. “just that my knowledge of the first amendment leaves a lot open to latitude for the crazies, as it were.”

                    The First Amendment does not allow people to show up at a polling place, swing weapons and threaten people. I am no lawyer, but I am pretty sure I am right on this one.

              2. I never hear about these guys before this thread, and am glad about that.

                So, 20 posts about how it couldn’t be intimidating and you haven’t even seen the video?!

                1. Yeah, Gilmore doesn’t like to let little things like facts or the actual footage from the case get in the way of defending leftard thuggery.

              3. You seem pretty emotionally invested in it for somebody who insists he doesn’t care.

              4. That you have never heard of these people before tells me one thing: You are one seriously uninformed, ignorant motherfucker.

                1. Right.

                  Yeah, I watched the video, and looked up the court case, and as I pointed out above, you are all wrong about how the “DOJ already ‘won’ the case”!

                  They got a default because they never showed up at a *hearing*. there was no case. There was no trial. There was no presentation of evidence or any defense of such. Pretending that DOJ has committed some horrible miscarriage over something like this is nonsense. I dont like them any more than you do. However, I do pay attention to details, and the details show that you are all a bunch of hyperventilating idiots.

                  1. Now you’re just plain lying. Go fuck yourself, Gilmore. Pretending that your repeating this shit makes it a fact just proves you’re full of shit. The racist DOJ won the case and then dropped it, these are the facts, and your cocksuck-and-bullshit story isn’t fooling anyone.

          2. “I guess you missed the link above where I pointed out that a Klan rally was in fact the basis for an important supreme court precedent protecting free speech, even when it’s crazy and hateful nonsense… so that point of yours had all the impact of a dry sponge.”

            Hey fuckwad, are you actually putting forth the notion that voter intimidation that occurs at a polling place is protected by the First Amendment?

            As for me mentioning the videotape of Shabazz threatening to kill white people, I mentioned that not as an instance of criminal behavior, but as a reason why people may not have come forward to report the intimidation that obviously occurred at the fucking polling place, jackass.

      2. Yeah, because me calling Weigel a douchebag in blog comments is the exact fucking same as dudes swinging billy clubs at a polling place telling people they better vote for Obama. Christ, you are a fucking idiot.

  35. Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark too read.

    1. Max is funny and Fluffy is trolling. What the fuck was in that weed? If John pops up and starts telling everyone to vote democrat, I’m going back to get another quarter.

      1. Max simply is channelling Groucho Marx.

        1. It’s still loads better than his usual crap.

    2. You could at least give Groucho the credit for the line.

  36. I’ve seen the tape, and anyone who calls it voter intimidation is a pussy and a racist.

    Basically, the argument that it’s intimidation consists of the claim: “Well, they’re black. And they’re men. And they’re wearing funny outfits that I fear because I’m a suburban pussy white fuckwad. Therefore they’re engaged in voter intimidation! By dint of being black males near a polling place! Because black males are scary when you’re a fucking pussy like me!”

    Nice going, dicklords.

      1. Definitely. I haven’t seen the video, and am not even familiar with this Megyn Kelly*, but if I watch it and come to an opposite conclusion than Fluffy it would pain me greatly to be a gaylord, gaypeon I can live with, but the is pressure of being a gaylord would be too much, so why take that chance by watching the video.

        *is she, what is that total babe’s name, Laura Dew? Is she that hot? With that hideous spelling of Meghan, likely not, right?

        1. but the is pressure of being a gaylord

          See, can barely properly mangle a sentence just thinking about it.

      2. Yes. Brilliant!

    1. Nice sarcasm. Or . . . surely not.

      Two skinhead white dudes dressed in paramilitary uniforms, one armed with billy club, standing for most of the day outside polling station in “mostly” white neighborhood. “Mostly” meaning there are a number of blacks and people of other ethnicities who live and vote there. And they don’t just stand there. When asked what they are doing there they say shit like “We are going to protect our white brothers and sisters.” So, if those blacks feel intimidated upon entering, or even shy away from entering the station then it’s their fault? They’re pussies and racists for feeling threatened?

      We all know that white skinheads and Black Panther militants have never committed acts of violence after all. It’s just the prejudices of the would be voters that made them feel intimidated. Riiiight.

    2. This is not sarcasm. That’s what he really thinks. He is the house “multiculturalist,” defending militant blacks for the voter intimidation and Muslims for their Anti-Semitic atrocities.

    3. When did you start trolling, Fluffy? I don’t think I’ve seen you play I.T.G. before (at least not to this extent).

    4. Conveniently, you left out the part about their billy clubs and the reports, by multiple people, detailing how the individuals in question were threatening people. But hey, you go ahead and play the race card. Parties engaged in a losing argument almost always do at some point. Why should you be any different?

  37. Why does someone always have to crawl out from a crack in the ground and make a big ole “Black Thang” out of it?

    JR
    http://www.privacy-tools.es.tc

    1. I envy the purity and innocence of your neural network, anon bot, that such human frailties allude your understanding.

  38. That “tiny, uninfluential group” has been allowed to set an ugly precedent for what kind of behavior will be tolerated at the polls, at least for protected interest groups, and it was entirely unnecessary because they had already lost the case.

  39. “It didn’t really address Serwer’s central point: “Generally, the Voting Section is focused on larger systemic issues that have the potential to disenfranchise large numbers of voters — not single instances that are unlikely to occur again in the future.””

    Well, that became Serwer’s central allegation after his original central allegation – BushCo made the key charging decision in Jan 2009 – was overturned by Reader Revolt.

    I don’t have enough experience with Serwer to consider him credible after that sort of introduction. Although the question of how often this section of law is used is a matter of fact, not opinion, Serwer didn’t show us much fluency even with facts.

  40. At this point the timeline looks like this:

    (1) DOJ brings criminal case.

    (2) DOJ drops criminal charges, brings civil case.

    (3) Obama elected.

    (4) DOJ wins civil case.

    (5) Obama appointees begin arriving at DOJ.

    (6) DOJ drops case it has already won, before the punishment phase of the trial.

    As to Serwer’s general point:

    It didn’t really address Serwer’s central point: “Generally, the Voting Section is focused on larger systemic issues that have the potential to disenfranchise large numbers of voters — not single instances that are unlikely to occur again in the future.”

    Well, its sort of beside the point. It might be a good defense as to why a case was never brought, but it doesn’t really explain to me why DOJ would carry a case through conviction and suddenly drop it right before sentencing.

  41. Weigel is just sore because Megyn Kelly wouldn’t give his pussy-ass the time of day, much less blow him like he blows Obama.

  42. “Generally, the Voting Section is focused on larger systemic issues that have the potential to disenfranchise large numbers of voters — not single instances that are unlikely to occur again in the future.”

    Sure, because the knowledge that you can bring a nightstick to a polling place as long as you don’t “use it” will certainly have no effect on the number of people who will bring billy clubs to polling places.

    1. Yeah, I guess it’s ok if I shave my head and don camos and billy club when I hang out outside the polls in November.

      1. Be sure to express your desire to kill black babies. If you don’t the DOJ might decide your circumstances are enough different that you don’t qualify for the NBPP exception.

        1. “exception” should be “safe harbor”.

  43. I can’t read anything like this from Weigel without hearing in my head Ezra Klein assigning him the job of helping suppress this Black Panthers story.

    Nice to hear that a Nader voter has found something the government should not bother to investigate to death, though.

    1. +1

      although, if I recall Kos’ effort, the preferred phrase is actually “starve for oxygen”

  44. I have yet to see anyone discuss the specific statute that these thugs are accused of violating. Everyone is arguing over whether what these guys did should be considered to constitute voter intimidation. That question is answered by the wording of the applicable statute – unless the statute is so ambiguously worded that it requires a court to interpret it and apply it to the facts.

    I don’t have time to research it myself right now, though.

    1. “[…]unless the statute is so ambiguously worded that it requires a court to interpret it and apply it to the facts.”

      Since they were found guilty, I guess the court did whatever analysis it thought necessary. What’s your point?

  45. Here, let me explain it for you, in little words so that even you can understand:

    It’s Election Day, 2012. Imagine some Neo-Nazi skinheads go to a voting site in a majority white district, and announce that they’re there to show racial solidarity, and see to it that the White candidate defeats Barak Obama. Imagine they’re saying this while brandishing clubs.

    Imagine the outgoing Obama Justice Department files a civil case against those thugs. Imagine the incoming Administration throws out the ALREADY WON case.

    Imagine what you’d think about teh retard who said “they only intimidated a few black voters, it’s no big deal.”

    Because that is what we think about Dave Weigel, and that’s what we think about you.

  46. “J. Christian Adams has been unable to name any case in which the DOJ was presented with a crime committed by black people and chose not to prosecute it.”

    This is a lie as the Ike Brown case will be the test. Try to get your story straight.

  47. So their cute little patch say Freedom or Death. How are these boneheads not ‘free’??? What’s their explanation? If he want’s to run the show, run for office. It’s not hard to do, except very few would vote for him. If they don’t like living here, move to another country. They’re free to do that. Does these guys get any gov’t money? If so, that’s free.

  48. The New Black Panther Party plays the same role for the right that Hutaree-style militants play for the left: They’re a tiny, uninfluential group whose importance is magnified to keep the base excited.

    If they’re so uninfluential, how come charges against them were dropped? Seems like there are people in the Obama administration who think the NPB deserves protection.

  49. Not very surprisingly, Weigel screws up the reporting. In fact voters _have_ come forward to say they were intimidated. Bartle Bull:

    “For example, I heard the shorter man [King Samir Shavazz] make a statement directed toward white poll observers that,…

    ‘you are about to be ruled by a black man, cracker.’

    To me, the presence and behavior of the two uniformed men was an outrageous affront to American democracy and the rights of voters to participate in elections without fear. It would qualify as the most blatant form of voter intimidation I have encountered in my life in political campaigns in many states, even going back to the work I did in Mississippi in the 1960s.”

    Several voters also said they felt intimidated.

  50. Wow, what a smokescreen! The principal issue is NOT the pathetic whackjobs of the NBPP- it is Lamb’s blockbuster allegations of DOJ policy not to bring Voting Rights Act cases on behalf of white victims.

    And, to those who say, “oh the Panther case is de minimis” and cite at length an “extensive, structural and systematic” standard- I invite you to review the hideous, outrageous case of Ike Brown, and the Holder DOJ’s Sgt Schultz “I see nossink” routine towards it.

    We have high officials of the Department of Justice engaged brazenly in the selective enforcement of the law in a racially discriminatory manner. And that IS a big deal.

  51. I’m not shocked that Weigel is sill pushing leftie talking points, but I am surprised that Reason is echoing them.

    Remeber, Reason editors, you only serve a useful purpose as long as you can pass as “libertarians” – neither on the left not the right. if you keep dropping your mask like this, Mr Koch will have to find better stooges.

    1. So we will put you down as approving unequal treatment before the law?

  52. Retardo nailed it. Amen.

  53. “…J. Christian Adams has been unable to name any case in which the DOJ was presented with a crime committed by black people and chose not to prosecute it…..”

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/t…..ased-test/

  54. Thank you, Ernst. I was looking for the Bartle Bull quotes.

    For Voter Intimidation to be proved, do the targeted voters have to scurry home without voting or does the “reasonable”
    standard found in employee harrassment cases suffice?

  55. I thought we were all libertarians here. I thought most of us would agree “you need a victim for there to be a crime”. I thought most of us would say a person engaging in a willing transaction with a prostitute, or a person who actively and knowingly breathes in marijuana smoke isn’t commiting a crime… because there isn’t a victim!

    Well, where are all the people who were intimidated to vote because this thug was standing outside of the polling place with a stick? This was a majority black, democratic leaning polling place. It looks like it was in front of some kind of housing project. So far, not one person has come forward to say they were intimidated.

    So, where are the victims of this “intimidation”? If there aren’t any complainants nor any victims, what exactly should the DOJ pursue? What kind of case can they make?

    1. Uh, no. “Victimless crimes” are consensual transactions prohibited by government, not acts of aggression at polling places for which we don’t have readily identifiable victims.

      This is like arguing that firing a gun into a crowd shouldn’t be a crime as long as you don’t hit anyone.

    2. Did it occur to you that they might be intimidated?

      Doesn’t the complaint of a poll watcher count? Or are you suggesting that intimidating poll watchers is acceptable?

      This whole argument is ludicrous- if this happened at a 98% white district and the black poll watcher was intimidated, there would be no question of a crime. Or do you disagree?

  56. NBP?!?!?!? Never heard of ’em.

    OsamaHusseinIslamObama 2012?
    (the terrorist-Uighur-ACORN-media choice)
    -It’s never too early to campaign-

  57. We are a leading wholesale trader for wholesale jewelry including imitation jewelry and fashion jewelry.
    In http://www.jewelora.com, we are now supplying over 5000 styles of wholesale imitation jewelry including Cubic Zirconia jewelry, pearl jewelry, gold plated jewelry, stainless steel jewelry and other imitation jewelry.
    About fashion jewelry

  58. thank you for yoru sharing

  59. I’ll recommend penis enlargement http://www.specialitybrand.com/product/maxman.html because they are easy to do. You only need your bare hands to gain size. However, you must remember that they should be done on a regular basis to see its effectiveness.

  60. I like your post, very great! I will bookmark it.

  61. I like your post very much! Can I share it with my friends? I will bookmark it and come back to see you latest posts! http://www.specialitybrand.com

  62. This is a good blog, I think .When I see this article ,I think I have the information of you .Let us be friends by blog .

  63. When does a ring axe due to a man’s ring? sharp seems to factor a cross-fertilisation of symmetry when honest comes to jewellery. Unisex styles in clothing seem to understand inclined sanction for ornaments to attempt unisex prohibitively. over you albatross buy from gemstone, Thomas Sabo Earring pass in gold and titanium rings for men. Before you would unitary ruminate men’s rings lilliputian to classic wedding bands.

  64. We are handbags wholesaler, Wholesale Handbags, wholesale fashion handbags, welcome to visit our website http://www.bagsion.com.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.