New Black Panthers To Intimidate Voters Again in 2012

Malik Zulu Shabazz, national chairman of the New Black Panther Party, stated today in a radio interview that his controversial group may deploy at voting booths in the November presidential elections, claiming such a move is needed to ensure there is no “intimidation against our people.”

The NBPP was the focus of national attention after Eric Holder’s Department of Justice dismissed voter intimidation charges against the groups leaders related to the 2008 presidential election.

“No sir,” Shabazz responded. “And you’re not gonna bait me into that. I know what you are here to do. And that’s not true. We will be there. I mean, if we are there. If. We are not saying we will be there or not. But whatever we will do, it will be legal and lawful under the Constitution of the United States.”

Asked about the dropping of federal charges related to the NBPP’s activities during the previous presidential election, Shabazz stated, “I would like to deny voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panther Party in 2008.”

He continued: “We were not found that we intimidated anyone, and therefore we were not charged, and that’s why we are walking free today, happy as a bird, to the [dismay] of many.”

Read more here.

Will THIS devious group steal your vote?

A powerful group focused on “racial justice” – with leaders who have personally donated tens of thousands of dollars to the Obama campaign and the DNC – is leading the leftist-driven charge to weaken voter ID laws in key states before the November election.

The Advancement Project describes itself as a “multi-racial civil rights organization” that works “‘on the ground’ helping organized communities of color dismantle and reform the unjust and inequitable policies that undermine the promise of democracy.” The organization states, ” Simultaneously, we have aggressively sought and seized opportunities to promote this approach to racial justice.”

It was founded in 1999 and has offices in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.

Massive assault on voter ID laws

Just last week, a federal court struck down a Texas law requiring voters to present a government-issued photo ID before casting a ballot. According to the organization website, “Advancement Project intervened as defendants in this federal litigation in support of the Department of Justice’s position that Texas’ Photo ID law is racially retrogressive and should be denied preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.”

Prior to the ruling, on Sept. 13, 2011, the Advancement Project sent a letter to the Justice Department, calling on the Civil Rights Division to reject the voter ID law. It also delivered a petition of 120,000 signatures demanding the department deny pre-clearance of Texas’ law.

And on Aug. 27, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley struck down Ohio’s “wrong precinct” law.

“In the lawsuit, brought on the behalf of several labor and community organizations, attorneys from Advancement Project and Service Employees International Union argued that Ohio’s law unconstitutionally penalizes thousands of voters for poll worker errors that disproportionately impacted African Americans,” the Advancement Project stated on its website.

Read more here.

Federal Court: ID needed for beer and wine, not for Voting

A federal court has ruled against a Texas law that would require voters to present photo IDs to election officials before being allowed to cast ballots in November.

A three-judge panel in Washington ruled Thursday that the law imposes “strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor” and noted that racial minorities in Texas are more likely to live in poverty.

Read more here.

How Voter Fraud Threatens Your Rights

The integrity of our electoral system and the voices of millions of Americans are at stake when governments, political parties, media and activists won’t crack down on fraud, abuse and outright cheating at the polls—and berate those who dare to stand up. A new movement of concerned voters, epitomized by the grassroots organization True the Vote, is taking the fight to the corrupt by appealing to ordinary citizens’ common sense.

With miserable unemployment numbers, crushing national debt and the battle over health care still raging, it’s difficult to overstate the importance that the results this fall’s election will have. But what happens if this most sacred of civic duties is compromised? What happens if there are people out there working to corrupt the system for their own personal gain?

If we don’t have truly free and fair elections, just where does that leave us as a nation?

At least 44 states have seen charges or convictions for voter fraud in the last 10 years, according to a vote fraud study from the Republican National Lawyers Association. Charges have included voter impersonation, vote buying, absentee ballot fraud and double voting. In 2010, a Nebraska man was arrested after investigators said he submitted nearly 200 phony names during a drive for a minority voter registration group. Last year, a Mississippi NAACP official was convicted of fraudulently casting absentee ballots in the names of 10 people—four of whom were dead—after forensics matched her DNA to the envelope seals.

The need to protect the voting process—above and beyond efforts local, state and federal governments happen to be taking—has led everyday citizens to take matters into their own hands. True the Vote is one such grassroots nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving election integrity. Self-described as “developed by citizens, for citizens,” the Houston-based group recruits and trains volunteers to serve as election monitors and also to validate existing voter rolls before a questionable registrant can cast a potentially fraudulent ballot. Their primary goal heading into the 2012 election is to have 1 million poll watchers in place around the country so that when Americans go to cast their ballots on Nov. 6 they do so freely and fairly.

Read more here.

Eric Holder to NAACP: ‘I Will Not Allow the Texas Voter ID Law to Happen’

Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday he opposes a new photo ID requirement in Texas elections because it would be harmful to minority voters and told the NAACP in Houston that he will do everything he can to make sure the law doesn’t stand.

He added the Justice Department “will not allow political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens of their most precious right.”

Under the law passed in Texas, Holder said that “many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them — and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them.”

“We call those poll taxes,” Holder added spontaneously, drawing applause as he moved away from the original text of his speech with a reference to a fee used in some Southern states after slavery’s abolition to disenfranchise black people.

The 24th amendment to the constitution made that type of tax illegal. Holder insinuated the voter ID laws were racist numerous times throughout his speech.

“I will not allow the Texas Voter ID law to happen,” said Holder.

Read more here.

Non-Citizens on North Carolina Voter Rolls

President Obama might LITERALLY be reelected over our DEAD bodies!”

Union violence of little interest to media

Over 500 people “storm” private property, break windows and vandalize other property, wield baseball bats and crowbars, make death threats, and allegedly hold six guards hostage. Fifty law enforcement officers respond. U.S. Marshalls are placed on standby to enforce a related injunction issued by a federal judge.

It happened yesterday at a grain terminal at Port of Longview in southwest Washington State. The perpetrators? Members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU). The local police chief was quoted as saying, “A lot of the protesters were telling us this is only the start.”

Not surprisingly, the incident didn’t garner much national attention. Imagine how the coverage by the so-called mainstream media would have differed had anything even remotely similar occurred at a gathering of people of a different political persuasion, say those Tea Party SOBs.

Union violence is not rare. The National Institute for Labor Relations (NILR) has collected over 9,000 reports of union violence since 1975 and the actual number is much higher–by as much as a factor of ten. Only a fraction of such offenses result in arrest and conviction.

On Monday, Teamsters Union president James Hoffa proudly declared, “The one thing about working people is we like a good fight.” (Fight, not good, being the operative word.). Echoing Hoffa, ILWU President Bob McEllrath said “It shouldn’t be a crime to fight for good jobs in America.”

The fight crowd has certain federal legal precedent on its side of the ring. According to NILR, the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Enmons decision, among other factors, makes prosecution of union violence difficult. According to the Cato Institute, violence “deemed to be in furtherance of “legitimate” union objectives” is exempt from prosecution under federal anti-extortion laws. Offenders can be charged and prosecuted under state and other federal laws, but the scales of “justice” in such instances, just like our federal government’s overall pro-union rather than union-neutral stance, are tipped in favor of organized labor. Until that changes, we’ll get more of the rot such laws and regulations have wrought.

Why won’t the Justice Department let Christopher Coates testify on New Black Panther Party case?

J. Christian Adams, a former Department of Justice official, has gained a lot of media attention as a whistle-blower in the dismissal of the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) voter intimidation case. His testimony before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has raised a great deal of concern and questions about the current racial mandates at the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.

While Adams’ statements about the racial directives within the division have caused public distress, they have not given rise to action as his testimony, though partially corroborated, is in some regards hearsay. Christopher Coates is perhaps the one man who could provide substantive answers to back up Adams’ claims.

Coates was the chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department who led the team of attorneys that brought the initial case of voter intimidation against the NBPP. In May 2009, Coates was allegedly ordered to dismiss the charges against the NBPP.

On January 5, 2010, the Department reassigned Coates to the U.S. attorney’s office in Charleston, South Carolina. Some have speculated that the reassignment was in retaliation for his prosecution of voting rights violations against black defendants, specifically the NBPP and a case in Noxubee County, Mississippi (U.S. v. Ike Brown, a case in which a black political boss in Mississippi, Ike Brown, was accused of voter suppression).

A DOJ spokesman, Xochitl Hinojosa, told The Daily Caller in a brief e-mail that “Christopher Coates requested the transfer to South Carolina.” But despite DOJ’s position, some still question whether Coates’ reassignment was voluntary and why the DOJ won’t allow him to speak about the NBPP case.

Read more here.