Voter intimidation charges against Panthers dropped

[Hew]

I guess my question is why would this be a federal case? Pennsylvania has pretty strong laws prohibiting such activities.

Using your logic then no case of voter intimidation is ever worthy of federal prosecution since every state has laws against voter intimidation. That's fine and dandy and I might even agree with you, but I've got a hunch you wouldn't feel the same way if two klansmen were blocking the polls in Kennesaw, Georgia. Also, other problems with your logic include: 1) an attorney general who says we're a nation of cowards about race and that he would give civil rights cases top priority (apparently only for blacks), 2) a president who has promised to "reinvigorate federal civil rights enforcement" (again, apparently only for blacks), and 3) the Black Pantha brutha was telling McCain volunteers, "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracka!" McCain was running for a federal office.

So we have a President and Attorney General saying that they'll be all about voter/civil rights, and two armed black men intimidating voters at a polling place for a federally elected office. Given those conditions it seems to me like this case would SCREAM for "federal prosecution."

[txbadger]

"..complaint that the polling place was dangerous. The new location was a lodge house two miles away"

My gawd, 2 whole miles away, from a source not in the district?? Is that like buses coming from MN or IL to Milwaukee with people who's only id was someone saying they "know" them on election day?? Like us traders say, for every seller there's a buyer....

[YardleyLabs]

"..complaint that the polling place was dangerous. The new location was a lodge house two miles away"

My gawd, 2 whole miles away, from a source not in the district?? Is that like buses coming from MN or IL to Milwaukee with people who's only id was someone saying they "know" them on election day?? Like us traders say, for every seller there's a buyer....

As I noted, the only complaint of danger was from a Republican committee woman who did not live or vote in the district. There had never been a reported incident or complaint in connection with an election. The population of the project is primarily elderly and low income. Vehicle ownership approaches zero and there is no public transportation. It was pretty evident throughout the hearings that the relocation had as its primary objective the limitation of voter from the project.

[road kill]

As I noted, the only complaint of danger was from a Republican committee woman who did not live or vote in the district. There had never been a reported incident or complaint in connection with an election. The population of the project is primarily elderly and low income. Vehicle ownership approaches zero and there is no public transportation. It was pretty evident throughout the hearings that the relocation had as its primary objective the limitation of voter from the project.

HMMMMM, I wonder why??

Maybe because they wern't trying to intimidate blacks, hispanics or socialists??

DUHHHH!

just sayin'

[YardleyLabs]

Using your logic then no case of voter intimidation is ever worthy of federal prosecution since every state has laws against voter intimidation. That's fine and dandy and I might even agree with you, but I've got a hunch you wouldn't feel the same way if two klansmen were blocking the polls in Kennesaw, Georgia. Also, other problems with your logic include: 1) an attorney general who says we're a nation of cowards about race and that he would give civil rights cases top priority (apparently only for blacks), 2) a president who has promised to "reinvigorate federal civil rights enforcement" (again, apparently only for blacks), and 3) the Black Pantha brutha was telling McCain volunteers, "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracka!" McCain was running for a federal office.

So we have a President and Attorney General saying that they'll be all about voter/civil rights, and two armed black men intimidating voters at a polling place for a federally elected office. Given those conditions it seems to me like this case would SCREAM for "federal prosecution."

There are many cases that warrant Federal investigation -- primarily those that evidence discriminatory actions that appear to originate with or be tolerated by the local authorities in violation of Federal election statutes. Most election cases, however, are addressed in State courts under State law first. It is the exception rather than the rule for the Feds to become involved. In this case, there was an arrest made almost immediately by the local authorities shortly after the problem was first reported and unimpeded access to the polling station -- which was, by the way, in an almost entirely Democratic district -- was reestablished. It is not clear that anyone was prevented from voting and there is, as far as I know from the local news reports, no suggestion of public complicity in any of the alleged intimidation. Given that, as I understand it, Federal involvement would be highly unusual.

[Bob Gutermuth]

You can forget about Gun Grabbing Gov Rendell or the mayor of Philly spurring any investigation. Their guy won and its tough cookies for the rest of us.

[Goose]

Kenyans and democrats are whores for money and wont prosecute anybody who gives.

We live in Cuba now.

[txbadger]

"As I noted, the only complaint of danger was from a Republican committee woman who did not live or vote in the district. "

So complaints of possible danger can only come from the neighborhood?

"There had never been a reported incident or complaint in connection with an election."

Which makes it safe??

"The population of the project is primarily elderly and low income. Vehicle ownership approaches zero and there is no public transportation."

Must not be Philly/Pittsburg are then, shuttling of the ol folks to rural areas where accessing simple needs like food and healthcare are hard to obtain? Or did We build some special places just for them?

The point of this thread is not what may have been done somewhere else, whither it was addressed or not but in this particular case 2 black men dressed in know anti white garb, one armed with weapon were standing at the entrance to a polling location & were judged guilty, by default, without punishment. Just facts not distraction please.

[YardleyLabs]

[quote=txbadger;452256]"As I noted, the only complaint of danger was from a Republican committee woman who did not live or vote in the district. "

So complaints of possible danger can only come from the neighborhood?

"There had never been a reported incident or complaint in connection with an election."

Which makes it safe??

"The population of the project is primarily elderly and low income. Vehicle ownership approaches zero and there is no public transportation."

Must not be Philly/Pittsburg are then, shuttling of the ol folks to rural areas where accessing simple needs like food and healthcare are hard to obtain? Or did We build some special places just for them?

The point of this thread is not what may have been done somewhere else, whither it was addressed or not but in this particular case 2 black men dressed in know anti white garb, one armed with weapon were standing at the entrance to a polling location & were judged guilty, by default, without punishment. Just facts not distraction please.[/quote]

I'm not sure what you are saying. There were two men at a single polling station. One lived in the building where the station is located and was not armed. He was engaged in activities that are legal and mirror those of more traditional party representatives at Pennsylvania polling stations in and out of Philly. The other was carrying a nightstick and was intimidating people entering the polls. He was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. The Philadelphia Chapter of the New Black Panther Party was censured and suspended by the national organization because of this incident. The threat level was minimal. The individual that was arrested had already commented publicly that he would not vote for Obama, characterizing him as the equivalent of a slave overseer.

The fact is that the Bush administration followed a systematic program to drive career attorneys out of the civil rights division and to replace them with conservatives who dramatically shifted the focus of the division from defending minority rights to a policy of attacking reverse discrimination (see for example http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0723-05.htm). On the face of it I see no reason why the original suit was ever considered to be a priority at all.

[road kill]

Could someone explain to me then why Black men in uniform bradishing billy clubs were even at the voting site?

C'mon Yardley, this out to be some damned fine bloviating!!