J. Christian Adams was proud to be a Department of Justice attorney. He believed he was serving his country by prosecuting those who wished harm on others. He strongly believed in what he did. To this DoJ official, his profession wasn’t a job but a calling.
Until earlier this month when he suddenly resigned. The reason? His superiors told him to drop a case against the New Black Panther Party, even though the “case was the simplest and most obvious violation of federal law I saw in my Justice Department career.”
Reading Adams’ account of what happened, I can only conclude that little has changed since the days in which our own Editor-in-Chief David Horowitz became disgusted with the Left because it actively covered up the many (horrendous) crimes committed by the racist gangsters of the Black Panther Party.
Back to Adams’ case against the Panthers. Here’s what happened back in 2008:
On the day President Obama was elected, armed men wearing the black berets and jackboots of the New Black Panther Party were stationed at the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia. They brandished a weapon and intimidated voters and poll watchers.
It goes without saying that such behavior is illegal. That’s why the Department of Justice brought a case against the Black Panthers and those armed thugs after the election. Adams explains that he “and other Justice attorneys diligently pursued the case and obtained an entry of default after the defendants ignored the charges.” As said, all seemed to be going well, until their superiors suddenly ordered them to dismiss the case.
Based on my firsthand experiences, I believe the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law. Others still within the department share my assessment. The department abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens victimized by the New Black Panthers. The dismissal raises serious questions about the department’s enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.
Continue reading page: 1 2