Sunday, 17 January 2010

THE CASE ERIC HOLDER WILL NOT PROSECUTE

Ken Berwitz

Here, from www.newsbusters.org, is Brad Wilmouth's blog on the voter intimidation case AG eric holder has moved heaven and earth to ignore.  It includes a verbatim transcript of  Bill O'Reilly interviewing former Justice Department official, Kris Kobash. 

FNC: House Dems Block Action on Black Panthers Voter Intimidation Case

By Brad Wilmouth (Bio | Archive)
January 16, 2010 - 16:10 ET

On Thursdays The OReilly Factor, FNC host Bill OReilly updated viewers on the Black Panthers voter intimidation case from election day 2008 -- involving a Pennsylvania polling place -- which Attorney General Eric Holder declined to prosecute despite strong video evidence. The most recent development, on Wednesday the House Judiciary Committee voted to block any action on the case, as all 15 Democrats voted to reject action while all 14 Republicans voted in favor of more investigation. OReilly: "But yesterday the House Judiciary Committee voted 15-14, along partisan lines, not to compel the Justice Department to hand over investigative data in the case. As you may know, Attorney General Holder has stonewalled the investigation, and now the Dems are apparently letting them get away with it."

Guest Kris Kobach, a former Bush administration official, recounted the severity of the case:

This is a very serious case of voter intimidation under section 11B of the Voting Rights Act. And, remember, the charges were brought in January of 2009, and these guys didn't even answer the charges, which is the legal equivalent of basically admitting that you're guilty. And so the Department of Justice had victory in its hands, and then the new Holder Justice Department came in and said, "No, we're dismissing the charges against two of the three thugs and against the party, as well." Only the guy that had the nightstick had an injunction against him, so very, very troubling because rarely would a prosecutor or the U.S. Justice Department drop charges after they've already effectively won the case.

Below is a complete transcript of the interview from the Thursday, January 14, The OReilly Factor on FNC:

BILL O'REILLY: "Factor Follow-up" segment tonight. On election day 2008 in Philadelphia, some Black Panthers intimidated voters at a polling place.

UNIDENTIFIED BLACK PANTHER: I'm just wondering why everybody's taking pictures, that's all.

 

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Okay, I mean. I think you might be a little bit intimidating that you have a stick in your hand. That's why.

 

BLACK PANTHER: Who are you to decide?

 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, that's a weapon. So that's why I'm a little worried.

 

BLACK PANTHER: Who are you to decide?

 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, I am a concerned citizen. I'm just worried that you might be-

 

BLACK PANTHER: And so are we, and so are we. That's why we're here.

 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Okay, but you have a nightstick in your hand.

 

BLACK PANTHER: So what? Youve got a camera phone.

 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have a camera phone which is not a weapon.

O'REILLY: Now many believe that was a violation of federal law. But yesterday the House Judiciary Committee voted 15-14, along partisan lines, not to compel the Justice Department to hand over investigative data in the case. As you may know, Attorney General Holder has stonewalled the investigation, and now the Dems are apparently letting them get away with it.

Joining us from Kansas City, Missouri, Kris Kobach, former chief advisor at the Justice Department under President Bush. First of all, am I making too big a deal out of this? That just looks like a crime to me. You've got two guys standing out there in regalia, Black Panthers with sticks in their hands. There's no reason for them to be there. The sticks are definitely weapons. And this is, you know, not supposed to happen at any American polling place. You can imagine if the Ku Klux Klan had two guys out there with sticks. So am I making too much of a thing out of this, Chris?

 

KRIS KOBACH, FORMER CHIEF ADVISOR, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT: No, you're not making too big a deal out of it. This is a very serious case of voter intimidation under section 11B of the Voting Rights Act. And, remember, the charges were brought in January of 2009, and these guys didn't even answer the charges, which is the legal equivalent of basically admitting that you're guilty. And so the Department of Justice had victory in its hands, and then the new Holder Justice Department came in and said, "No, we're dismissing the charges against two of the three thugs and against the party, as well. " Only the guy that had the nightstick had an injunction against him, so very, very troubling because rarely would a prosecutor or the U.S. Justice Department drop charges after they've already effectively won the case.

 

O'REILLY: Yeah, and they never explained why they dropped it. They didn't explain it.

 

KOBACH: Exactly.

 

O'REILLY: We asked them. We couldn't get an answer. So then Congress gets involved and says, "Look, we're going to compel, we're going to, the Judiciary Committee in the House, we're going to compel Attorney General Holder to turn over what he found out about this incident so we can decide whether Holder is doing his job or not." And then they vote, and 15 Democrats vote, "No, we don't want to see the data," and 14 Republicans vote, "Yes, we do." So, I'm saying to myself, look, this is a, good possible criminal case, definitely civil because they didn't answer the judgment, okay? And Holder won't explain why he's not pursuing it. Maybe it's small ball, but let him say that. Let him say that. "It's just not important enough for us" or whatever. So where are we now? They get away with it, right?

 

KOBACH: Yeah, this is very disturbing. The excuse that the majority of the committee gave when they decided not to pursue asking the Justice Department to hand over the information was, "Oh, we just think this is an isolated incident." No, it's not an isolated incident when you take it in context. In a typical year, the Justice Department gets maybe two or three complaints of voter intimidation. In 2008, they got 48 complaints of voter intimidation. And then take the broader context of hundreds of complaints of voter fraud across the country. And so it was clear that many people brought credible complaints of efforts to take away the integrity, to affect the integrity of our elections, and voter intimidation and voter fraud go hand in glove. This isn't isolated incident.

 

O'REILLY: Even if Holder and the Justice Department says, "It's not worth our time and effort. We've got more important things to do," okay, say that. Say that so that the people can make a decision one way or the other about how we are being governed. Right now, what we have is we can't find out what the federal government found out in their investigation because Congress has voted, you know, the committee voted against the exposition. We don't know what they found out. And Holder is basically saying, "Hey, I don't care what you think. I'm not even going to explain myself." I just think that is just outrageous.

 

KOBACH: It is. And on top of that, Bill, the United States Commission on Civil Rights, which was created back in 1957 to investigate civil rights violations just like this one, it's a bipartisan commission with authority to investigate and issue subpoenas, they sent a subpoena to the Justice Department, and Holder stiff-armed them.

 

O'REILLY: Yeah.

 

KOBACH: He said no way, not going to answer your questions. And he asserted various bogus privileges that don't even apply.

 

O'REILLY: So right now, there's nowhere else we can take this? It's dead? We're never going to find out?

 

KOBACH: Since theyve said no to the Commission on Civil Rights, Congress was really our last hope here. And this committee is apparently more interested in protecting the department against embarrassment than in protecting our right to vote free of intimidation.

 

O'REILLY: All right. Mr. Kobach, thanks very much. We appreciate it.

The 2010 elections cannot come fast enough.  And that goes double for 2012.


FINALLY, SOMETHING TO LAUGH ABOUT FROM A COAKLEY SUPPORTER

Ken Berwitz

I respect Donna Brazile a lot.  She's smart, savvy and not given to making utterly ridiculous statements.

But we all have our moments, don't we?

Here is her unintentionally funny - very, very funny - quote from this morning's round table on the ABC News show, "This Week":

look, if Obama can  go to Copenhagen to try to bring the Olympics to Chicago, and go to try to get climate change, clearly he can go to Boston to rally a demoralized base, and to insure that Democrats turn out

That, folks, is the howler of the election campaign.

-Obama went to Copenhagen to try to bring the Olympics to Chicago, with the result that Chicago was the first city eliminated after he left;

-Obama went to Copenhagen to try to get climate change, and came away with a non-binding resolution signed by no one that means nothing.

So, yes; clearly he can go to Boston to rally a demoralized base.  But what in the world would make anyone think he will succeed?  The two disastrous failures cited by Ms. Brazile?

Unbelievable. 

In a way I'm sorry this campaign ends with Tuesday's election.  How often do you get material like this?


THE REPUBLICAN EMAIL

Ken Berwitz

Over recent days, I have received several emails from Democrats, including J. B. Poersch (head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee), Senators John Kerry, Chuck Schumer and Chris Dodd..  I have posted all of them on this blog. 

They are angry.  They are insulting.  Most have used a vile, sexually explicit term to attack Scott Brown, the Republican senatorial candidate running against Democrat Martha Coakley in Massachusetts.

Now I have gotten an email from the Republican Party, signed by Republican National Chairman Michael Steele.  Here it is:

 


Dear (NAME),

On behalf of the RNC, I send our heartfelt prayers and thoughts of condolence to the entire country of Haiti and the people across the world affected by the devastation of this earthquake. I applaud the men and women of our civilian and military agencies who are bravely responding to this disaster.

The earthquake affected as many as three million people, collapsed government buildings and caused major damages to hospitals throughout the area. The amount of destruction is staggering and the cost of recovery will be immense.

For that reason, I'm asking you to support the humanitarian efforts taking place to assist the people of Haiti during this incredibly trying time. Please visit the American Red Cross or the Salvation Army to learn more about how you can help those who have lost everything.

I appreciate your willingness to help these groups. Your generosity will have a significant impact on the rescue efforts and will help the people of Haiti begin the process of recovering from this disaster. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Michael Steele
Chairman, Republican National Committee


Republican National Committee | 310 First Street, SE | Washington, D.C. 20003
p: 202.863.8500 | f: 202.863.8820 | e: info@gop.com

Paid for by the Republican National Committee.
310 First Street, SE - Washington, D.C. 20003 - (202) 863-8500
www.gop.com

Unsubscribe

Copyright 2010 Republican National Committee

Notice a difference?

Me too.


HOW TO FIX THE ECONOMY

Ken Berwitz

From my pal Bob, who got it from his pal, Angela:

The Fix

There recently was an article in the  St. Petersburg Fl. Times. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on:  "How Would You Fix the Economy?"
I think this guy nailed it!
 _____

Dear Mr. President,

Please find below my suggestion for fixing America 's economy.  Instead of giving billions of dollars to companies that will squander the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan. You can call it the "Patriotic Retirement Plan":


There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force.  Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire.  Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.

2) They MUST buy a new American CAR.  Forty million cars ordered Auto Industry fixed.

3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage Housing Crisis fixed.

It can't get any easier than that!!

P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress pay their taxes...

Mr. President, while you're at it, make Congress retire on Social Security and Medicare. I'll bet both programs would be fixed pronto!

If you think this would work, please forward to everyone you know.

If not, please disregard.

Very, very clever joke.

Of course it would never work....

...on the other hand.....


THE LATEST DEMOCRATIC EMAIL

Ken Berwitz

This one is from J. B. Poersch, who chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

I'll say this:  At least it's a somewhat straight appeal:  i.e. it rails against radical rightwingers and the tea party movement,  but doesn't use the term "teabagger":

ONLY 48 HOURS TO GO!

Dear ARLEEN,

We've got 48 hours. It's a dead heat. But it's not too late to make a difference.
 
The response has been overwhelming. Democrats, from blue-collar workers all the way up to two United States presidents, are doing everything they can to help Senate candidate Martha Coakley. We need your help, too.
 
Click here to donate $5 or more to the DSCC. Martha Coakley needs our help to get each and every Democrat to the polls on Tuesday. Stand strong with Martha!
 
This afternoon, President Obama made his own case for why Massachusetts needs Martha. Progress depends on it. Health care reform depends on it.
 
But radical right activists have turned Massachusetts into ground zero for the tea party movement. The leader of the Rhode Island Tea Party said if Scott Brown wins, "This will be a clear indictment of the Obama presidency and the Democratic Congress overreaching." We can't let the tea partiers win. We must get out the vote for Martha Coakley, and your donation now will help.
 
Click here to donate $5 or more to the DSCC. Martha Coakley needs our help to get each and every Democrat to the polls on Tuesday. Stand strong with Martha!
 
It's crunch time, and you've got a choice to make: Will you sit back and watch? Or will you do everything you can to help Martha win?
 
Sincerely,

 
J.B. Poersch

Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, dscc.org,
and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Is this the end of the Democrats' "teabagger" strategy?  We'll see.....


OBAMA TALKING WITH HIS "NEGRO DIALECT"

Ken Berwitz

I am watching/listening to President Obama speaking at a Black church in Massachusetts - and listening to him use that "Negro Dialect" Harry Reid was so kind to tell us about.

Not one word about Haiti, though.  Only some political material and some whining that he is being mistreated and how badly it hurts.

Chicago politics.  Through and through.

==========================================================

NOTE:  Mr. Obama will be speaking before a more generalized audience at Northeastern University at about 3:00PM.  Let's see if his dialect changes at that time.  I'm betting yes.


THE IMPORTANCE OF *77

Ken Berwitz

My friend Ilene (yes, the same one mentioned in our book) just emailed this to me.

I vaguely remember posting it once in the past, but a) I'm not 100% sure I did and b) in any event it's worth reposting periodically.

Please read every word.  This information literally could save your life:

Some know about the red light on cars, but not the *77.


It was about 1:00p.m.in the afternoon and Lauren was driving to visit a friend. An UNMARKED police car pulled up behind her and put his lights on. Lauren's parents have always told her never to pull over for an unmarked car on the side of the road, but rather to wait until they get to a gas station, etc.

Ok women. Pay attention to this

Lauren had actually listened to her parents advice, and promptly called *77 on her cell phone to tell the police dispatcher that she would not pull over right away.. She proceeded to tell the dispatcher that there was an unmarked police car with a flashing red light on his rooftop behind her. The dispatcher checked to see if there were police cars where she was and there weren't, and he told her to keep driving, remain calm and that he had back up already on the way.

Ten minutes later 4 cop cars surrounded her and the unmarked car behind her. One policeman went to her side and the others surrounded the car behind. They pulled the guy from the car and tackled him to the ground. The man was a convicted rapist and wanted for other crimes.

I never knew about the *77 Cell Phone Feature, but especially for a woman alone in a car, you should not pull over for an unmarked car. Apparently police have to respect your right to keep going to a safe place.

*Speaking to a service representative at ** Bell ** Mobility confirmed that *77 was a direct link to State trooper


info So now it's your turn to let your friends know about *77.

You cannot be too careful.  Remember *77 and stay safe.

=========================================================================

IMPORTANT UPDATE:  Based on information from a commenter, and then my sister, I now understand that *77 works only in some places.

The best advice is to call 911. And, above all, do not stop your car until you are at a place where people can see and hear what is happening.

Ken Berwitz Thanks for the heads-up. 911, of course, is a logical alternative (01/17/10)

Snopes Snopes says that the number doesn't work everywhere. They say to just diall 911. (01/17/10)


THE OBAMA SPEECH

Ken Berwitz

President Obama's speech is over.  It was a borderline disaster.

For a portion of the speech, Mr. Obama either tried to speak extemporaneously or had trouble with his teleprompter.  And, as we have seen in the past, when that happens he produces gaffe after gaffe.  Among them:

-He forgot for a moment what state he was in....what an awkward silence;

-He stammered out that "this election is about one thing......two things" (maybe it grew in those couple of seconds);

-He was diverted, and clearly thrown off stride, by an amazingly leather-lunged heckler (who, we were told after the fact, was an "abortion protester") --- and a child heckler too (maybe the son of leather-lungs, I don't know);

-Then, incredibly, President Obama had a few more or less kind words to say about Martha Coakley's opponent, Scott Brown.  Specifically, he said something along the lines of..."I don't know, he could be a good guy, maybe he's worked in your interest until now" (I'll get the exact words when there is a transcript). 

This was clearly extemporaneous on his part (never let this man extemporize!).  I know it wasn't scripted because a) why would the President give even a mild endorsement of Scott Brown at a Coakley rally and b) every subsequent reference to Brown was 100% critical.  I speculate that he was out of kilter because of the heckling, and his nice words for Brown just popped out at that time.

-(ADDED LATER):  Inexplicably, Mr. Obama continually derided the fact that Scott Brown drives a truck.  He made at least three or four snide references to it during the speech (which were seconded by the crowd's disdainful laughter).  Mr. Obama left me with the impression that he thought truck ownership was somehow beneath his and Ms. Coakley's dignity.  That should be a big hit with the truck-owning voters of Massachusetts.

The end of the speech was a rousing "get out the vote" appeal.  It was the best part of what he said.

One other thing:  As I anticipated in a blog earlier today, Mr. Obama's dialect was not (as Harry Reid would say) "Negro". 

Not in front of this crowd.


THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM (CONT.)

Ken Berwitz

Excerpted from an article in The Times of London:

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

 

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report.

 

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

 

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

 

Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: "If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments."

The more you know about the climate change industry (which apparently is what it is), the more skeptical you have to be.

So is the Obama administration still committed to taking hundreds of billions, maybe trillions, of our dollars and pouring them down this phoney money pit?

Yep.


COAKLEY: THE DEPTHS OF DESPERATION

Ken Berwitz

Just how desperate is the Coakley campaign?  Just how low-down are they willing to go?

Rick Moran, at American Thinker, shows us:

January 16, 2010

'Scott Brown Bites the Heads off of Little Children and Drinks Their Blood'

Rick Moran

The charge against Scott Brown made above is a follow up to the one the Democrats in Massachusetts are making today in a mailer:

(click to enlarge)

rapemailer

 rapemailer1

The justification for this outrageously exaggerated, and deliberately falsified charge is that Brown voted for a provision that would allow hospital workers not to inform rape victims of the availability of the "Morning After" pill if their religious convictions prevented them from doing so.

Not exactly - or even remotely similar to - "turning away" rape victims from hospitals but hey! Who's keeping track, right?

A side note of reality; there has never been a recorded instance of any hospital worker refusing to give the morning after pill to a rape victim if it was requested. In fact, those workers who are uncomfortable informing rape victims of this option invariably bring someone else into the consultation who will. That's the way the system works and the Democrat's ad is as much an indictment of hospital workers with religious convictions as it is Brown.

Now, if you're a Republican, it does absolutely no good to condemn this ad. That's because some mouth breathing, thumb sucking liberal will come back and throw up the equivalency thing in your face. Never mind that it takes someone with the mind of a 5 year old to essentially say, "Yeah, well yous guys does it too - and worse!" No matter. What counts is that nothing Democrats ever do is worse than any one thing a Republican has done. I will faint dead away if a Democrat were ever to categorically and without reservation or qualification condemn an ad like this.

This is the way of the world as it is perceived in the "reality based community."

It wasn't enough to call Scott Brown a "tea-bagger" (a term which has nothing whatsoever to do with the "tea party" movement, but refers to someone who either dips his scrotum in another person's mouth, or is on the receiving end of that act).  Now they're accusing him of being in favor of hospitals turning away rape victims.

Pathetic.  Disgusting.  And, I fervently hope, counterproductive.


ED SCHULTZ: HOW LOW CAN HE GO

Ken Berwitz

Not content with calling Scott Brown a "teabagger" and claiming he would turn rape victims away from hospitals, the latest strategy by the Desperate Left - in the form of hardliner Ed Schultz - is simply to cheat Brown out of the election.

Think I'm exaggerating?  Read this verbatim quote from his Friday radio show and see for yourself:

SCHULTZ (23:02): I tell you what, if I lived in Massachusetts I'd try to vote 10 times. I don't know if they'd let me or not, but I'd try to. Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are.

Can you believe it?  This is what the Ed Schultz's of the world are reduced to.

But, as usual, with few exceptions there is not a peep about it from our wonderful "neutral" media. 

And keep in mind that this was not said on Schultz's anemically-rated MSNBC TV show.  It was said on his syndicated radio talk show, with well over 100 stations and millions of listeners.  Yet, so far at least, most media are giving him a free pass.

By contrast, what do you think media would have done if Rush Limbaugh said he'd cheat to keep Marcia Coakley out of the senate and called her a bastard?

Apart from the issues, it's worth rooting for Scott Brown just to piss these people off.


THE POLL THAT BROKE THE COAKLEY'S BACK

Ken Berwitz

This one could ice the election.

From www.insidemedford.com:

A poll conducted by the Merriman River Group (MRG) and InsideMedford.com indicates that Scott Brown leads Martha Coakley 50.8% 41.2% in the contest to fill the seat of the late Senator Ted Kennedy. Liberty Party candidate Joe Kennedy pulls in just 1.8% support, while 6.2% of voters are still not sure. Brown and Coakley both have most of their supporters locked in. 98% of both candidates supporters say they are definitely or probably going to vote for their candidate.

FYI, The Merriman River Group is a polling/research organization that is stacked with professionals who have a background working for unions, very much including SEIU.  Click here and see for yourself.

If this poll were conducted by a Republican-oriented company I would be more than a little skeptical of its veracity - as I was with the CrossTarget poll, released a couple of days ago, which had Brown winning big. 

But based on the backgrounds of Merriman River Group's employees, if they would side anywhere it seems to me they wouild side with Democrats - which makes these results nothing short of devastating.

There's still about 15 minutes for Mr. Obama to back out of his 3PM speech at Northeastern......


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!