Black panthers blocking intimidating voters
But what about the Panthers’ intimidating uniforms and jackboots? After all, “the boots were no different from a pair my husband owns.” Oh, I see: How could anyone think these friendly Panthers — who were heard telling spectators, “You’re about to be ruled by the black man, cracker” — were any more intimidating than . But even more stunning is the frivolousness of her new legal arguments. This is not a situation in which, as disingenuously implies, a mere investigation straddled two different administrations and the second decided to drop it. Team Obama did not merely abandon an investigation; they abandoned a formal complaint that had been brought in court by career prosecutors in the name of the American people. judge was poised to enter judgment in favor of the United States.
Therefore, Judicial Watch is both eligible and entitled to fees and costs, and the Court must now consider the reasonableness of Judicial Watch’s requested award.He describes the Panthers’ conduct as “The new Thernstrom gives Adams the back of her hand: He is, she says, “disgruntled,” as though her attempts to divine his motives were dispositive.Such mind-reading doesn’t have to meet the same “very high” standards as civil-rights law.The New Black Panthers case stems from a Election Day 2008 incident where two members of the New Black Panther Party were filmed outside a polling place intimidating voters and poll watchers by brandishing a billy club.Justice Department lawyers investigated the case, filed charges, and when the Panthers failed to respond, a federal court in Philadelphia entered a “default” against all the Panthers defendants.