Justice Department Drops New Black Panther Party Case, Accused of Racial Preference

Remove all ads!

Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of lying, just the author of the article. I guess I didn't make that clear.

 

Well, it looks like there's more to this story now. Some emails have come out showing that higher-level political appointees were involved in this, and that it wasn't just “a case of career people disagreeing with career people.” I don't see any smoking gun evidence on wrong-doing in the original case, but this is at least evidence that AAG Thomas Perez 'mis-spoke'*.

*I also don't know that he was aware of this exchange, but I imagine anyone with actual knowledge of the decision making process would be, so either he lied or was lied to.

 

I'm not sufficiently aware of the US legal system to judge how serious an infraction this is, but I found the below quote from the JW president a little strange: "These documents show that not only was the Black Panther decision shamelessly politicized by the Obama administration".

Wait, the Obama administration politicized this case and the decision? Apparently I must be a little unfamiliar with the meaning of the word "politicize", because somehow I doubt their side was the only one who highlighted this case and tried to make politicay hay out of it. Sure, it could help them with some of the more radical black voters, but that's not exactly a swing voter group for a black (well, biracial) president on the Democratic ticket.

 

In this context, 'politicized' means 'made it a political issue', which happened when (and if) the decisions on how to handle the case were made political decisions, instead of legal ones. That would be the Obama administration (or at least their political appointees).

 

Well, to me that would be "politically motivated," "politicized" would imply that it was made the object of political activity. That is why I think the issue was "politicized" by all the outlets who brought it out and tried to link it to Obama.

Now, does the handling of the case bear the possibility of politically motivated tampring? Sure, I think it pretty likely that it had something to do with someone's political aspirations. On the other hand, trying to pin it on Obama or anyone in his intimate circle is imo absurd - none of these guys have anything to gain from bailing a trio of fringe racists, especially after they've already won and they can only lose from the political fallout. A case of someone trying to suck up to the superiors strikes me as much more likely.

 

Or, as has been claimed, a climate of 'only minorities deserve protection' running rampant in this section of the justice department. I also doubt it goes all the way to the White House, but the White House could step in and help sort this out.