Obama-Biden, Clinton-Gore, Corrupt DOJ ...same difference!

The following article brings to mind the Clinton-Gore Administration's corruption of the Department of Justice...and lets not forget Janet Reno's role. Just in case you may have forgotten, here's a little reminder:

"The Clinton-Gore Administration's rampant corruption and trampling of the rule of law permeated the entire executive branch. Whether conscious conspirator or unwitting puppet, Janet Reno dedicated the awesome enforcement power of the Justice Department to protect and defend President Clinton's multiple crimes and abuses of power. She prostituted Justice into a base political arm of the administration.

In 1993, shortly after she was installed as attorney general, Janet Reno sent an unmistakable signal that her Justice Department would primarily serve the political ends of Bill Clinton rather than the ends of justice. At once, she fired all 93 of the country's United States attorneys. According to no less an authority than Ted Olson, President George Bush's chief post election attorney, Reno's move was extreme and unprecedented. "In order to maintain continuity in thousands of pending prosecutions, and as a statement to the public that elections do not influence routine law enforcement, the nation's top prosecutors are traditionally replaced only after their successors have been located, appointed, and confirmed by the Senate. On instructions from the White House (she claimed it was a 'joint' decision; no one believes that), Reno ordered all 93 to leave in ten days. There could not have been a clearer signal that the Clinton campaign war room had taken over law enforcement in America."

The firings were only the beginning. Throughout Clinton's two terms, the Clinton-Reno Justice Department, instead of dispassionately enforcing the law, waged war against the administration's political and legal enemies." Source: Human Events via Reference Publications

You should also note that Clinton had a role in the hiring of career personnel at the lower end of the Justice Department with ideologues that would contribute to his future needs...and the future is now. ~ Norman E. Hooben

The following from Maggie's Notebook

Black Panther DOJ Coverup: Civil Rights Commission Request Ignored: In Your Face DOJ Racism

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has, for months, sought an explanation from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) of how the dismissal of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case was handled. Finally, subpoenas were issued to DOJ attorneys and those subpoenaed have been instructed to not appear in court, and not to give over any subpoenaed documents. That's your Obama Justice Department at work folks.

New Black Panthers outside Philadelphia Polling Place November 4, 2008

The background on the story is that three New Black Panther thugs, garbed in para-military-looking garb, planted themselves outside a Philadelphia polling place during the November 2008 presidential election day - one wielding a nightstick. It was caught on tape. A voter intimidation lawsuit was filed. For five months the men refused to show up in court. A default judgement was leveled. Then DOJ civil rights attorneys got involved and completely dismissed the case. Now we know why.

From Jennifer Rubin writing for Commentary Magazine:

The Justice Department has ordered its career trial lawyers who have been subpoenaed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights not to appear to provide testimony or give documents in the investigation of DOJ’s dismissal of the New Black Panther Party voter-intimidation case. The Washington Times explains:

Joseph H. Hunt, director of the Justice Department’s Federal Programs Branch, ordered the lawyers’ silence in a letter to the attorney for J. Christian Adams, the lead attorney for the department in the New Black Panther case. The letter said “well-established” and “lawful” Justice Department guidelines prohibited Mr. Adams’ cooperation in the commission probe.

Todd Gaziano, a member of the Civil Rights Commission says the guidelines cited do not apply...

Our job places a premium on our role as a watchdog of federal and state enforcement agencies, and to that end, Congress has instructed all agencies to comply fully with our requests,” he said. … [Gaziano] said the Justice Department “had it exactly backwards” when it suggested that there could be negative consequences for those who comply with the commission’s subpoenas. He said a lawyer cannot refuse to comply with a subpoena he knows to be lawful.

I say good luck to Mr. Gaziano. He should watch his back. The Walpinization of Gaziano is being planned as I type. You may remember Inspector General Gerald Walpin who was fired by the White House for doing his job and revealing millions of stolen funds by AmeriCorp. The White House illegally fired Walpin - but hey so what (thumbing of haughty noses). Gaziano will be next.

Rubin says a source told her that that J. Christian Adams was "not quite" threatened with the loss of his job, but plainly...

...he and his colleague, Christopher Coates, the voting rights section chief, are being strong-armed to disregard a lawful subpoena. This is abject lawlessness, the sort of executive imperiousness that, if practiced by a Republican administration, would bring howls of protest from Congress, the media, and liberal lawyers’ groups.

The Obama Justice Department doesn’t want to respond to a subpoena because they have a personnel rule? Next thing you know they’ll be claiming executive privilege for a social secretary. Oh yes, that’s right … [already done that!]

While the DOJ spokesperson continues to claim there never a case supporting voter intimidation, Rubin says DOJ lawyers object

But of course the lawyers disagree, claiming that their best legal judgment was overridden by political appointees without justification. They have a story to tell, with documents, firsthand accounts of meetings and conversations and e-mails with the political appointees’ own remarks, which they say will substantiate their position. But the Justice Department won’t let any of that out, nor will it say what specifically about the case lacked factual or legal support.

The options according to Rubin are for attorneys to appear before the Commission in defiance of Obama and Holder et al, and risk their jobs, or some kind of deal may be negotiated to help the DOJ cover their tracks or "Congress might wake up, fulfill its obligation to conduct some real oversight of the Obama administration, and actually hold a hearing on the matter."

The administration acted upon their own racial prejudice and said that voter intimidation is fine and dandy when the Black Panthers want to take control, complete with nightstick to protect their vote, but not yours or mine. Can you imagine, had any Republican ignored and then thwarted subpoenas from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission? The DOJ's actions are blatant, in-your-face racism. I encourage you to read Black Panthers Win: Voter Fraud Wins: Voter Rights Lose and hear Bartle Bull's account of that day in Philadelphia. Mr. Bull's civil rights activity goes back to Senator Robert F. Kennedy's 1968 presidential campaign. As an American voter, you need to know what Bull had to say about Philadelphia. Thanks to the incredible news-sleuthing abilities of Larwyn.

Related background: and the rest of the story:

DOJ Dismisses Black Panthers: Black Panther Voter Intimidation Dropped

DOJ - Black Panther Voter Fraud Absolved