Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
DOJ Lawyers referred to White Colleague as a KLANSMAN in official Emails; Why DOJ wouldn't do anything about NIFONG / DPD
Topic Started: Mar 12 2013, 08:38 PM (234 Views)
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.

White DOJ Lawyer that had the termerity to charge whites and blacks was referred to as a "KLANSMAN" in official DOJ emails.

He was harrassed in the Dept of Justice for not pursuing strictly White Indictments.

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/12/justice-dept-problems-voting-section-not-partisan/



.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
Why didn't they investigate Nifong and the DPD Powers?


A Mocking and harrassing career DOJ Lawyer said White people are not covered for a Reason.

Rights don't extend to Whites.



.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

He wasn't eric's..... people
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
"J. Christian Adams, lead prosecutor in the New Black Panther case, testified before the commission that Justice Department officials instructed Civil Rights Division attorneys to ignore cases that involved black defendants and white victims. He said that “over and over and over again” the department showed “hostility” toward those cases."




.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

...According to the Tuesday’s report, polarization within the Voting Rights section had been exacerbated by the question of whether voting rights laws that were enacted in response to discrimination against blacks and other minorities also should be used to challenge allegedly improper voting practices that harm white voters.

Views on this question among many employees within the section were sharply divergent and strongly held, the report said, noting that disputes were ignited when the division’s leadership decided to pursue particular cases or investigations on behalf of white victims, and more recently when division leadership stated it would focus on “traditional” civil rights cases on behalf of racial or ethnic minorities who have been the historical victims of discrimination.



It seems like a rather ironic problem when law enforcement is based on skin color in this situation. The word "equal" got lost in the process.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
We now know the definition of "Klansman" in the United States Dept. of Justice:

Someone that believes blacks have to abide by the same law as whites.


Scary.


.

Edited by Mason, Mar 12 2013, 09:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo


We know the civil rights laws don't extend to whites because Judge Beaty said so.


And he's a federal judge.


And that's his judicial opinion.


And upheld by the entire Fourth Circuit.


And no one wants to appeal that to SCOTUS.


(Dred Scot reasoning lives again--with just the colors reversed.)
Edited by Quasimodo, Mar 12 2013, 09:15 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

So when party A is in power, and uses / abuses that power against Group B, could it not be said that discrimination is occurring against Group B?

If so, then white people are now the minority party and are being discriminated against... using the reasoning that Holder's DOJ and the POTUS have spoken and acted upon.

If, as we are being told, the blacks and Latinos are going to be the Democratic voting block that will destroy the Republican party, then I think Caucasian Americans can eventually apply for minority status, with all the concommitant advantages, such as in hiring and college admissions. But, who will advocate for us. I suspect they are out for revenge, not equality.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic »
Add Reply