Posted by Richard on July 1, 2010
Remember when Toni Morrison declared that Bill Clinton was our first black president? Well, Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker does. And she's now upped the ante and declared Barack Obama our first female president. Really.
If I were Hillary Clinton and saw that column, I'd throw up.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: moonbats, obama | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Richard on July 1, 2010
There's lots of interest in the Colorado Senate race these days. All the pundits' eyebrows were raised by Bill Clinton's endorsement of Democratic challenger Andrew Romanoff over the establishment candidate, appointed Sen. Michael Bennet. I guess now we know that when the Obama administration tried to bribe Romanoff into dropping his challenge, they didn't use Clinton as an emissary like they did when they tried to bribe Sestak in Pennsylvania.
But I'm more interested in the Republican race. Establishment candidate Jane Norton once had about a 25-point lead over challenger Ken Buck, but the latest RealClearPolitics average has Buck up by 7. So recently, a desperate Norton began airing a scurrilous attack ad, long on weasel words and short on accuracy, challenging Buck's ethics record.
The ad is about the late-1990s prosecution (I'd call it persecution) of Gregory and Leonid Golyansky, two hard-working Russian immigrants who own a pawn shop, for alleged firearms law violations. It followed closely on the heels of a convenient and one-sided 6/24 Denver Post story about the case.
This was during the Clinton years when the BATF was engaged in a concerted nationwide campaign to put gun dealers out of business (and in fact cut the number in half). My good friend David is a friend of Greg Golyansky, and I remember he kept our little Saturday breakfast club informed about the sordid tale, which dragged on for years. As I recall, there was much chicanery by BATF and Justice, including false testimony and arranging for approval of background checks that should never have been approved in order to try to set up the Golyanskys. Maybe David, who checks in here from time to time, will fill in some details.
I know that after several years of repeated BATF sting operations, a 37-count felony indictment, and the eventual ill-advised prosecution, Greg Golyansky cut his losses (over half a million dollars in legal expenses) and pled guilty to a single trivial misdemeanor paperwork violation, and was sentenced to one day of probation. The cases against the other defendants were dismissed.
Ari Armstrong has a good post about this, in which he says:
Senate hopeful Jane Norton’s vicious attacks on GOP rival Ken Buck regarding Buck’s service in the U.S. Attorney’s office may deeply hurt Norton’s campaign, as I have already indicated. The problem is that Norton is attacking Buck for standing up against a political railroading in a gun case.
He also has a transcript of the David Kopel's comments about the case on Colorado Inside Out (video here). Here's a portion that summarizes the whole situation well (emphasis added):
Greg was a pawn dealer. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms brought a case against him. The U.S. Attorney office declined to prosecute. Henry Solano, the Clinton-appointed United States Attorney, agreed with that, said there’s nothing here. Indeed, the only witness against him (Golyansky) was a mentally ill homeless drug addict with severe credibility problems.
And then Tom Strickland comes in on the theory that “I’m going to be the big tough U.S. Attorney and prosecute gun cases.” And he takes a case that not one single career attorney in the United States Attorney’s office in Colorado was willing to prosecute, so he brings in two of his little hand-picked minions who came in with him to bring felony charges against three people.
It was an outrageous abuse of power.
Now Ken Buck violated the protocol by talking about it outside the office. And I agree that was a violation of the U.S. Attorney’s protocol.
But when you say, when is a guy going to make a mistake, I like a guy who makes a mistake on behalf of someone who was being unfairly, unjustly, and politically persecuted.
And then for Jane Norton to turn around and say this is some terrible issue against Ken Buck — well, it just reminds me that Jane Norton’s husband was the guy who before Strickland came into office, probably had the worst record in Colorado history of being an abusive, out-of-control, way over the line, United States Attorney, Mike Norton.
I'm 100% with Dave and Ari. The airing of this issue and Norton's sleazy attempt to smear Buck make me likely to send a contribution to Ken Buck for Senate. I've been a registered Libertarian since the mid-80s, but I'm tempted to switch to Republican (temporarily) just to vote for Buck and against Norton.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: colorado, politics, republicans | 4 Comments »
Posted by Richard on July 1, 2010
The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is investigating the Justice Department's dismissal of Voting Rights Act violation charges against the New Black Panthers — a dismissal that was ordered after the career attorneys at the DOJ Civil Rights Division's Voting Rights Section had already won. One of those career attorneys, J. Christian Adams, recently resigned and went public (emphasis added):
On the day President Obama was elected, armed men wearing the black berets and jackboots of the New Black Panther Party were stationed at the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia. They brandished a weapon and intimidated voters and poll watchers. After the election, the Justice Department brought a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and those armed thugs. I and other Justice attorneys diligently pursued the case and obtained an entry of default after the defendants ignored the charges. Before a final judgment could be entered in May 2009, our superiors ordered us to dismiss the case.
The New Black Panther case was the simplest and most obvious violation of federal law I saw in my Justice Department career. Because of the corrupt nature of the dismissal, statements falsely characterizing the case and, most of all, indefensible orders for the career attorneys not to comply with lawful subpoenas investigating the dismissal, this month I resigned my position as a Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney.
…
The assistant attorney general for civil rights, Tom Perez, has testified repeatedly that the "facts and law" did not support this case. That claim is false. If the actions in Philadelphia do not constitute voter intimidation, it is hard to imagine what would, short of an actual outbreak of violence at the polls. Let's all hope this administration has not invited that outcome through the corrupt dismissal.
…
Others have falsely claimed that no voters were affected. Not only did the evidence rebut this claim, but the law does not require a successful effort to intimidate; it punishes even the attempt.
Read the whole thing. And if you wonder about Adams' claims about the evidence and testimony, you might want to look into it. Start by reading the affidavit of Bartle Bull (PDF), an attorney poll observer at the precinct in question. It's only three pages, and well worth your time. Mr. Bull helped secure the voting rights of blacks in Mississippi in the 1960s and worked on the Bobby Kennedy and Jimmy Carter campaigns — not exactly a right-wing bigot.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: civil liberties, corruption, crime, intimidation, justice | Leave a Comment »
