Black panther intimidating
The department continues to refuse despite the fact that: A.
The DOJ has not invoked any cognizable privilege; B.
Whether high-level political appointees within the Department of Justice have enunciated a policy or tolerate a practice of enforcing certain civil-rights laws in a racially discriminatory manner; B.
Whether high-level political appointees within the Department of Justice have enunciated a policy or tolerate a practice of not enforcing Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act; C.
LEVENTHAL: the person with the nightstick was escorted away, which i just confirmed inside.
but the implication is that you were telling me that the black panthers were there to intimidate white voters from coming to this location?
republicans saying that two black panthers have been blocking the doorway of one polling locations. one of the two black panthers who was allegedly blocking the door is standing right over here, with an accused us of intimidating voters because we were here with a camera and microphone.
In order to avoid continuing disputes with the Department regarding whether the testimony requested by the Commission is privileged, the Commission is requesting that the Department supply witnesses able to testify regarding matters unrelated to case deliberation, i.e., whether high-level political appointees within the Department of Justice have enunciated a policy or tolerate a practice of enforcing certain civil rights laws in a racially discriminatory manner; whether high-level political appointees within the Department of Justice have enunciated a policy or tolerated a practice of not enforcing Section 8 of the NVRA; and whether there is pervasive hostility within the ranks of the Civil Rights Division toward enforcing the nation’s civil rights laws in a color-blind manner. Thus, the Commission expects the Department to fulfill its statutory obligations to cooperate with the Commission’s investigation and produce the requested witnesses able to testify about these matters. Within the next few months the Commission will issue a report on the New Black Panther Party matter to the President and Congress.
Political appointees also sought the opinion of career Appellate Branch attorneys regarding treatment of the New Black Panther Party case, which attorneys recommended that the case be pursued.
There is no evidence of any career attorneys involved in the New Black Panther Party case favoring dismissal. False: Evidence gathered by the Commission has derived from multiple sources and thousands of pages of documents.
The evidence shows, , that a black Department of Justice employee who worked on a case involving black defendants was racially harassed by Voting Rights Section staff; that a Department of Justice attorney who brought a case against black defendants had his authority gradually removed; that repeated statements were made by Department of Justice personnel that the DOJ should not bring cases against minority defendants on behalf of white victims; that attorneys within the Voting Rights Section flatly refused to work on a case involving a black defendant and both white and black victims; that Voting Rights personnel objected to use of department resources to bring cases against minority defendants; that the department refuses to enforce Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act on behalf of white victims; and that case-justification documents were altered in a manner that would reduce or eliminate the probability that a case would be filed against black defendants.
Several former Department of Justice attorneys have given statements corroborating Mr. False: Uncontroverted testimony adduced before the Commission shows that voters turned away after seeing members of the New Black Panther Party stationed outside the polling place.