re: #45 Buck

Really? the opening sentence “the Justice Department released the long-awaited results of its inquiry into its own handling of the New Black Panther voter intimidation case” doesn’t sound funny to anyone else?

I mean to completely dismiss the sworn testimony that says that the fix was in seems premature. To say there was no evidence is to completely dismiss that testimony as non-existent. I mean you might say there is not enough evidence, but to say there is none…well I thought sworn testimony was evidence…and they have that.

Was the original case really as weak as the article suggests? Can we really be sure that there might have been people who didn’t approach, and didn’t feel safe in getting involved (even later)? Not that it is necessary for that in the law. It is fine to suggest that the lawyers who filed the original case and got default convictions were right wing racists. But this investigation says otherwise. And you can judge the video if you want, but Bartle Bull was a witness to the behavior of voter intimidation, and in sworn testimony he testified to that. He was actually there.

According to the letter cited, the lawyers who initiated the charges were right, and the people who dismissed the charges AFTER the default convictions were right.

So they investigated themselves and found themselves innocent. Shocka.

Bush era DOJ attorneys also torpedoed the case.

The matter seems to have been long on politics and short on real substance.