Holder's Perez: Perjury on Panthers?

[Geee]

American Spectator:

Late last month, the Obama/Holder Justice Department suffered another embarrassment, and showed that its leaders probably merit criminal prosecution, in a too-little-noticed spin-off from the infamous New Black Panther Party case. As I have written repeatedly, the politicized leadership of the Holderites is thoroughly corrupt, and a menace to the very cause of justice.

The embarrassment came in the final court action of a long-running suit brought by the indefatigable Judicial Watch. The watchdog group had pressed requests based on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to force the Department of Justice (DoJ) to divulge more information about its seemingly inexplicable, and certainly unexplained, decision to drop voter-intimidation cases against the Panthers for their actions outside of a Philadelphia polling place in 2008. As it has done in numerous other instances, the Obama administration stonewalled, claimed spurious "privileges" against disclosure, and prevaricated wildly through its embarrassingly unprofessional press office and via sworn testimony by Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez. Yet Judicial Watch prevailed in part, even against a none-too-friendly judge, thus forcing the release of some of the withheld records.

The latest ruling from federal district judge Reggie Walton involved Judicial Watch's request for the government to pay its attorneys' fees as a result of Judicial Watch's partial win. The judge agreed that the government ought to be liable for at least some of those fees. In doing so, he wrote the following passages, which would be deeply embarrassing for any administration with the grace to feel embarrassment, especially if an establishment media weren't pathetically in the pocket of said administration:

The documents reveal that political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJ's dismissal of claims in that case, which would appear to contradict Assistant Attorney General Perez's testimony that political leadership was not involved in that decision. Surely the public has an interest in documents that cast doubt on the accuracy of government officials' representations regarding the possible politicization of agency decisionmaking.

And:

The Court therefore concludes that the DOJ has failed to show that its withholding of some documents from Judicial Watch prior to the filing of this lawsuit was legally correct or had a reasonable basis in law.

This is about as gentle a way as possible to say that Perez probably perjured himself -- a point some of us have been making for years now as in the Washington Times editorial noting this:

On May 14, Mr. Perez swore under oath before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that there was no "political leadership involved in the decision not to pursue this particular case any further than it was" and that it was only "a case of career people disagreeing with career people."…. [Yet] By our count, Deputy Associate Attorney General Sam Hirsch, not only a political appointee but previously a top, cutthroat election attorney for the national Democratic Party, sent or received 58 e-mails about the case. The "description of withheld information" provided by the Justice Department indicates that Mr. Hirsch weighed in on the decision to drop the cases.

[Draggingtree]

Ad accuses Obama of defending ‘racism against white folks’

 

Published: 11:18 AM 08/17/2012

By Jim Antle

 

Has Barack Obama, the first black president of the United States, failed to live up to the dream of civil rights icon Martin Luther King? That’s one of several startling claims made in a

accusing Obama of “tacitly defending black racism before and since being elected.”

“The Obama administration has injected race into the presidential campaign,” the narrator intones at the beginning. “Obama Attorney General Eric Holder recently said, with no argument from the president, that their white critics are motivated by race.”

The voice in the commercial then turns Holder’s charge on its head: “Implying whites are too stupid to have honest disagreements with the president without being racist is, in and of itself, racist against whites.”

Both the ad and the registered super PAC behind it, FightBigotry.com, are the brainchild of

 

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/17/ad-accuses-obama-of-defending-racism-against-white-folks/#ixzz23ukmELQ7

[SrWoodchuck]

Great posts, @Geee & @Draggingtree!

[Draggingtree]

Great posts, @Geee & @Draggingtree!

Thank Geee it's her post and it's a good one, I'm just following her story.