Loretta Lynch Will Carry on Holder’s Civil Rights Legacy, Obama Says

Loretta Lynch Will Carry on Holder’s Civil Rights Legacy, Obama Says

Loretta Lynch Another Eric Holder?

Loretta Lynch is said to have the same commitment to civil rights as Eric Holder, a statement that calls into question whether or not we want two more years of those policies.

In 2008, led by their leader King Samir Shabazz, members of the New Black Panthers (NBP) in Philadelphia intimidated voters by standing before a voting place in the city, dressed in their uniform of black beret, black jacket, black pants, and black boots, and carrying clubs in their hands. Shabazz has also been captured on video saying he hates all white people, “every single one of them,” and calling for the killing of all white babies.

As Attorney General, Eric Holder, the chief law enforcement official in the United States, ordered the Department of Justice (DOJ) to drop the case, which was already in progress, against Shabazz and his fellow thugs.

In 2013 a report was issued by Inspector General Michael Horowitz of the Justice Department that highlighted deep ideological and political divisions within the Civil Rights Division.  The Civil Rights Division, one of the most powerful organizations in the federal government, has widespread hostility to protecting the civil rights of whites.

In a speech given at Long Beach earlier this year, President Obama’s new nominee for Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, specifically called out voter ID laws as racist even though we have had several instances of voter registration and voter fraud from the black community.

Poll worker, Melowese Richaardson, who admitted voting at least twice for Obama in 2012, once by absentee and once at the polls, also said she ‘registered’ thousands of people.  Richardson claimed she had submitted an absentee ballot, but was afraid her vote would not count so she also voted in person. She also said she voted in the name of her granddaughter and yet another person.  It is alleged that she voted six times.

Melowese Richardson was convicted of voter fraud and using her position as a poll worker to vote ‘more than once’, and was sentenced to five years in prison. She was released, however, after several months.  She was greeted as a heroine by Al Sharpton at a Welcome Home rally to kick off the campaign for an Ohio Voter’s Bill of Rights Constitutional amendment.

A judge sentenced her to probation instead.

She was greeted and praised at an event at the Word of Deliverance Church in Forest Park when Cincinnati National Action Network President Bobby Hilton called her on stage for a “welcome home.”

We are left with the feeling that Democrats don’t take voter fraud seriously and the Office of the Attorney General isn’t too concerned about it.

At one point Eric Holder, while defending his decision to drop the charges against the NBPP, said, “Think about that, when you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, and to compare what people were subjected to there to what happened in Philadelphia–which was inappropriate, certainly that . . . to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line, who risked all, for my people.”

I think, during the last six years, we have learned who he meant when he said “my people”.  



Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., was one of the key lawmakers to call for an investigation of the handling of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation incident during the 2008 presidential election outside a polling place in Philadelphia.

Four members of the NBPP were brought up on charges, but the DOJ dropped them all.

“The report makes clear that the division has become a rat’s nest of unacceptable and unprofessional actions, and even outright threats against career attorneys and systemic mismanagement,” Wolf said in a statement.

The report detailed two cases where the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division filed suit on behalf of white plaintiffs against minority defendants, both of which were during the George W. Bush presidency.

The first was in 2005, when civil action was filed against the Noxubee County, Miss., Democratic Election Committee and its black chairman Ike Brown, alleging multiple violations of the Voting Rights Act.

The second was the case involving the NBPP incident at the voting station in Philadelphia, filed in early 2009.

Intense ideological polarization within the Voting Section of the DOJ Civil Rights Division was found in Horowitz report, including:

  • “Polarization within the Voting Section has been exacerbated by another factor. In recent years a debate has arisen about whether voting rights laws that were enacted in response to discrimination against blacks and other minorities also should be used to challenge allegedly improper voting practices that harm white voters. Views on this question among many employees within the Voting Section were sharply divergent and strongly held. Disputes were ignited when the Division’s leadership decided to pursue particular cases or investigations on behalf of white victims, and more recently when Division leadership stated that it would focus on “traditional” civil rights cases on behalf of racial or ethnic minorities who have been the historical victims of discrimination.”
  • “In 2007, some career employees made offensive and racially charged comments to and about a student intern who volunteered to assist the trial team in the controversial Noxubee matter, which was the first Section 2 case brought against minority defendants on behalf of white voters. Division leadership reprimanded one career attorney and counseled two others for this conduct. We also found that some Voting Section employees criticized and mocked the trial team in e-mails to each other at work, sometimes using inappropriate and intemperate language.”
  • The continued polarization within the Voting Section also came into focus during “brown bag” meetings between section personnel and Julie Fernandes, who was Deputy Assistant Attorney General. During one meeting about Section 2 enforcement, in September 2009, Fernandes made comments about Division leadership’s intention to prioritize “traditional civil rights enforcement” on behalf of racial or ethnic minorities. Some career staff interpreted her comments to signal that division leadership had a blanket policy of not pursing Section 2 cases against black defendants or on behalf of white voters.

In an earlier interview WND conducted with former Department of Justice attorney J. Christian Adams, it was made clear the DOJ operates under a climate that is anything but ideological polarization when it comes to the application of civil rights law.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/new-report-doj-hostile-to-civil-rights-for-whites/#GSFUL4Ao30lWKpIV.99 



We have some questions for the nominee, which need to be articulated during her confirmation period.  President Obama has been charged more than once with violating the constitution by making or changing existing laws.  Every one of those need to be addressed and Loretta Lynch needs to tell us whether or not she feels like these ideological polarizations were legal under the Constitution.

So the question is do we want an Attorney General who will carry on the policies of Attorney General Holder, whose tenure has been one of the most divisive and partisan eras of the Justice Department?

Ann Hardy

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *