Duplicitous Maneuvers

DUPLICITOUS MANEUVERS

It was probably the most damning morning of television ever broadcast...but was anyone paying attention? PJTV broadcast the testimony of Christopher Coates, the former voting chief for the Department Of Justice's Civil Rights Division. Coates was testifying in spite of the fact that his bosses in the Department of Justice had issued instructions for him to ignore the subpoena requesting his appearance. After his testimony it became quite clear why his superiors in the Justice Department wanted to maintain his silence.

Christopher Coates was testifying before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. This commission is tasked with investigating complaints alleging that citizens are being deprived of their right to vote by reason of their race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or by reason of fraudulent practices. Coates was subpoenaed to testify in regards to the ongoing investigation into the alleged New Black Panther voter intimidation that occurred in the 2008 election. His testimony given on September 24 just may have destroyed the presidency of Barack H. Obama. Can testimony this damning be suppressed for long?

"President Barack Obama’s handpicked U.S. Justice Department officials are ignoring civil rights cases in which the alleged victims are whites and they abandoned a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party that resulted in a “travesty of justice.” -Christopher Coates

Coates is alleging that Department Of Justice officials dismissed the intimidation charges against the New Black Panthers for political reasons. The New Black Panthers were videotaped outside a Philadelphia voting precinct dressed in military-style uniforms and one was brandishing a nightstick and hurling racial slurs. He was emphatic that the dismissal of the Case against the New Black Panthers "was ordered because the people calling the shots in May 2009 were angry at the filing of the Noxubee case and angry at our filing of the New Black Panther Party case." But it gets worse...

"In the spring of 2009, Ms. (Loretta) King, who had by then been appointed Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights by the Obama Administration, called me to her office and specifically instructed me that I was not to ask any other applicants whether they would be willing to, in effect, race-neutrally enforce the Voting Rights Act. Ms. King took offense that I was asking such a question of job applicants and directed me not to ask it because she does not support equal enforcement of the provisions of the VRA and had been highly critical of the filing and prosecution of the Ike Brown case." -Christopher Coates

Why did Coates feel compelled to ask whether job applicants could enforce the law in a race-neutral manner? The question became necessary because of a lack of enthusiasm among the career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division for enforcing the law when it resulted in African-American defendants rather than victims. This was an attitude that Coates said he first encountered during the administration of George W. Bush:

"Opposition within the Voting Section was widespread to taking actions under the Voting Rights Act on behalf of white voters in Noxubee County, MS, the jurisdiction in which Ike Brown was and is the Chairman of the local Democratic Executive Committee. In 2003, white voters and candidates complained to the Voting Section that elections had been administered in a racially discriminatory manner and asked that federal observers be sent to the primary run-off elections. Career attorneys in the Voting Section recommended that we not even go to Noxubee County for the primary run-off to do election coverage, but that opposition to going to Noxubee was overridden by the Bush Administration’s Civil Rights Division Front Office. I went on the coverage and while traveling to Mississippi, the Deputy Chief who was leading that election coverage asked me, “can you believe that we are going to Mississippi to protect white voters?” What I observed on that election coverage was some of the most outrageous and blatant racially discriminatory behavior at the polls committed by Ike Brown and his allies that I have seen or had reported to me in my thirty-three plus years as a voting rights litigator." -Christopher Coates

A judge agreed with Coates assessment of the case and the Department Of Justice won an injunction against Ike Brown and the Democrat Executive Committee which subsequently was upheld on appeal. That was the first time in the history of the Department Of Justice that it pursued a prosecution of an African-American defendant under the Voting Rights Act. Apparently it did NOT sit well with many within the Civil Rights Division who did not have any desire to prosecute non-traditional voting rights violations. In other words, they only wanted to prosecute white people. I suppose you could file this among those foolish claims that black people cannot be racists.

When Coates was promoted to head the Civil Rights Division, he began asking the offending question in job interviews as to whether applicants could pursue cases in a race -neutral manner in the future. This is what led Loretta King, an Obama political appointee, to order him to stop asking the question.

Coates testimony was confirmation of earlier testimony by former Department Of Justice attorney J. Christian Adams who left the department in protest after the dismissal of the New Black Panther case. Coates himself was ordered not to testify before the commission and was transfered to the U.S. attorney's office in South Carolina, a move that was designed to get Coates out of sight and out of mind...it obviously failed. Now the Obama administration, which was once promoted as the first post-racial presidency, now finds itself an enabler in the worst sort of racial discrimination.

However bad the blatant discrimination within the Department Of Justice may be, according to Christopher Coates there is something else afoot which could directly affect the upcoming election with regard to the potential for voter fraud on a massive scale:

"In June 2009, the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) issued its bi-annual report concerning which states appeared not to be complying with Section 8's list maintenance requirements. The report identified eight states that appeared to be the worst in terms of their non-compliance with the list maintenance requirements of Section 8 [of the Voting Rights Act]. These were states that reported that no voters had been removed from any of their voters’ list in the last two years. Obviously this is a good indication that something is not right with the list maintenance practice in that state. As Chief of the Voting Section, I assigned attorneys to work on this matter, and in September 2009, I forwarded a memorandum to the CRD Front Office asking for approval to go forward with Section 8 list maintenance investigations in these states."

"During the time that I was Chief, no approval was given to this project, and my understanding that approval has never been given for that Section 8 list maintenance project to date. That means that we have entered the 2010 election cycle with eight states appearing to be in major noncompliance with the list maintenance requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA, and yet the Voting Section which has the responsibility to enforce that law has yet to take any action." -Christopher Coates

Apparently the weeds that ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) planted in the last election are not going to be pulled, but instead will be fertilized and harvested...and the harvest is coming fast! Voter rolls that are not properly maintained are ripe with the deceased, illegal aliens and duplicate registrations. All have the potential for showing up and illegally influencing the outcome of elections. However this is of no concern to the Department Of Justice. Don't be surprised to find out that our elections are being manipulated...they have been for quite some time!

Christopher Coates specifically mentioned Missouri's Robin Carnahan during his testimony. He told the commission that Mrs. Carnahan, acting in her current position as Missouri's Secretary of State, has refused to remove deceased people from Missouri's voter rolls. Carnahan was entitled to this special mention because she is currently running for the office of U.S. Senate against republican Roy Blunt. Wouldn't everyone running for public office love to be in a position to influence the outcome of their own election by collecting a stash of dead voters and have them "vote" as needed? Democrats rationalize these kind of shenanigans by calling it "leveling the playing field." This is how a dangerous freedom-hating minority seizes power. They can not win elections by telling the truth or pursuing fair voting practices...and they know it.

This is not an issue that will go away. You can expect every closely contested race in this November's election to be challenged by Democrats who will be able to "find" all sorts of "extra" ballots for their candidates on the recounts they subsequently demand. They perfected this method of operation in the close 2008 race for the U. S. Senate in Minnesota. As you will recall, republican Norm Coleman had a slim lead going into the recount but Al Franken ended up with the lead after many new votes were "discovered." Some of these votes were "discovered" in the most ridiculous places...like the trunk of a poll workers car! Don't be fooled. Ill maintained voter lists are the vines that bear the fruit of election fraud. When votes are needed, they will be found...count on it. As the old axiom states: It's not the voters that decide the outcome of elections, it's the counters.

Hopefully a Republican wave is going to be strong enough to overcome these difficulties and allow them to retake control of the House of Representatives. Once that happens, they will be in a position to launch serious official investigations into the corruption within the Department Of Injustice's Uncivil Wrongs Division.

A Time To Kill?

A TIME TO KILL?

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace. - Ecclesiastes 3:1-7

Finally, ten months into his administration, President Obama has a significant foreign policy achievement he can hang his hat on. Perhaps it is something we can assume is a direct result of the "prestige" bestowed upon him with the awarding of the now infamous Nobel Peace Prize. No, I am not talking about an agreement for sanctions against the recalcitrant regime in Iran that is Hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons. The Russians, in spite of Obama's feel-good appeasement/betrayal of the Czech and Polish governments, have already announced they will not participate in any such maneuver. Instead, our president has apparently succeeded in getting the legally removed socialist dictator in training restored to his presidency in Honduras.

Honduras is on the verge of ending a four-month political crisis after rival camps cut a deal that could return ousted President Manuel Zelaya to power and earn international support for a November 29 election. Buckling under pressure from U.S. diplomats, negotiators for Zelaya, toppled in a June 28 coup, and the de facto leader Roberto Micheletti who replaced him, agreed to put an end to Central America's worst political turmoil in two decades.

The deal, a diplomatic victory for U.S. President Barack Obama, leaves it up to the Honduran Congress to decide whether Zelaya can be restored to serve the last few months of his term -- the question that caused earlier talks to stumble. A Congress vote is expected in the next few days, after the Supreme Court gives a non-binding opinion on the matter. (Reuters)

This, of course, is the same Honduran Congress and Supreme Court that initially supported the ouster of the president in the first place thereby assuring its' status as a legal removal from office. Due to the misguided and relentless pressure applied by the Obama administration, which included the refusal to recognize the legally chosen replacement for President Zelaya as well as the refusal to recognize subsequently elected governments in the future, the Honduran government has a greed to a compromise that will allow the exiled president to return to office.

This may not, at first glance, appear to be a big deal. Surely the Obama administration will call this a triumph for democracy and the rule of law. After all, Honduras has elections scheduled to occur shortly and and Zelaya will almost certainly be voted out...or will he?

Zelaya was sent into exile on June 28 after attempting to hold a vote on whether a constituent assembly should be set up to look at rewriting the constitution. The proposed rewrite would lift the current ban on presidential re-election and allow him to remain in office beyond a constitutionally limited second term. The vote was deemed in violation of the constitution by the Supreme Court. This process is not unlike the one used by Zelaya's good friend and political ally, Hugo Chavez, that has allowed that socialist dictator to assume permanent control over Venezuela...all in the name of democracy and the rule of law. Peculiar how these people use such seemingly liberal ideals to enslave their populations under fascist domination isn't it?

Clearly, with the action to restore Zelaya to office, The Constitution of Honduras has been negated. No agreement to restore him can be considered legal if, in fact, his removal was legal. Zelaya's replacement, Robert Micheletti, cowered in the face of pressure from international socialists. The Honduran Congress still has to vote on this agreement and the Supreme Court has to certify it as well. However all of this is occurring AFTER external pressure from other nations has been applied. This is definitely a test of a nation's right to exert its' own sovereignty.

If, in fact, Zelaya is restored to power, this will constitute an intolerable act perpetrated against the people of Honduras. They had a procedure for protecting themselves from a president that was abusing his power. The ability to impeach, recall and remove leaders is a necessary part of a healthy democracy. The people must have protections against those who would use the apparatus of the law to establish a dictatorship. This is what Zelaya was accused of, and for which he was legally removed. If Zelaya returns to power, the military, or a group of civic minded leaders, should assassinate him. When the people have exhausted every other recourse, and in this case they have, then violence is in order...it is the time to kill. A price must be extracted for this intolerable act or there will definitely be more intolerable acts to come. The price must be very high. If this leads to further violence and unrest, so be it.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

That Obama would choose to interfere with the internal machinations of another democratic country is very revealing. Especially when you consider how, up till now, it has been handled relatively peacefully. Obama, like all socialists, is willing to contest the unfairness and social injustice of law and order until, of course, he becomes the law and the order. Then, like all socialists, he acquires a peculiar dislike for such things as dissent that might point out certain injustices of their own. That is why democrats in this country always speak of disenfranchised voters when they lose, yet fail to prosecute cases of voter intimidation when they win. This is evidenced by Obama's Justice department's unwillingness to prosecute the Philadelphia Black Panthers. It is not freedom, fairness or equality that they seek...it is absolute power. That is why the events in Honduras are so important. They are establishing an international right to validate a sovereign country's government without the consent of the governed. Did you ever think you would see an American president make such a stand?

There is one thing you can count on from our socialist friends. The acquisition of power will lead to a love of country and a belief in the patriotic duty to sacrifice for the country that they control. Dissent, once celebrated as a high form of patriotism, will suddenly be reviled as treason against the state and their illusions of the will of the people. One need only watch the transformation of the on air personalities at MSNBC to see such shifting principles and the resulting new-found love for a country that just last year they condemned. Which brings us to a new problem...or should I say. the highly expected return of an old standard of the left: The unfair election...

This year, New Jersey’s registered voters can request a mail-in ballot for any reason. (Before 2005, voters needed to provide a reason for why they needed an absentee ballot.) The state received about 150,000 absentee-ballot applications this year. On about 2,300 of those applications so far, the signature on the request form does not match the signature on the voter’s registration forms with the state.

In a development that is depressingly predictable, the New Jersey Democratic party is asking the state to provide provisional ballots for all these voters. Those ballots could, presumably, be used to overcome any narrow lead by Republican Chris Christie over Democrat Jon Corzine on Election Day.

A mass distribution of provisional ballots, at the request of a political party, would represent a significant change from established law. Currently, when a county clerk rejects an absentee-ballot request, the clerk tries to contact the voter — through mail, by phone, and in some cases, by attempting to contact the voter in person. And a person who has spoken to some of New Jersey’s county clerks says they’re granting wide latitude on signature styles; for them to reject a ballot request because of the signature, it has to be dramatically different from the one on file..

Democrats have never made this request before, not even in 2008, where many more New Jersey residents were voting through absentee ballots. Of course, that year Democrats Barack Obama and Frank Lautenberg were expected to win the statewide races handily.
The fears of absentee-ballot fraud in New Jersey is not theoretical or far-fetched. Earlier this year, Atlantic City councilman Marty Small and 13 people who worked on his unsuccessful mayoral campaign “were indicted on charges they conspired to commit election fraud during the June Democratic primary through a variety of schemes involving messenger absentee ballots, state Attorney General Anne Milgram announced in Trenton.” One of those workers has already pled guilty. Five workers were indicted on similar charges in Essex County in August. - National Review Online

Now, according to New Jersey Policy, third parties can pick up and return absentee ballots. However, a couple of weeks ago, a Democratic operative in Atlantic City plead guilty to a charge of tampering with ballots. One of the practices mentioned in the indictment was the person picking up ballots from people and throwing them out if they weren’t for his candidate. And then there was this:

They allegedly solicited applications for messenger absentee ballots from individuals not qualified to receive them and had the voters not fill in the name of the messenger, so they could fraudulently designate themselves as the authorized messengers or bearers. - New Jersey Office Of The Attorney General

Hmm. It looks like another play at the Al Franken strategy, and why not? They got away with it that time. In a close election you make sure you have plenty of absentee ballots at your disposal to "discover" during the recount process as you contest all of your opponent's votes and replace them with your own. If you will recall, Franken trailed his opponent, Norm Coleman, by just a few hundred votes. However, after a recount fraught with judicial challenges brought before favorable judges that also included the discovery of 300 ballots, all for Franken, found in the trunk of a car, Franken unsurprisingly came out the winner. A perfectly stolen election.

Suspicious minds reasonably see these requests for questionable absentee ballots as an attempt to create a pool of emergency votes to be used if Republican Chris Christie holds a small lead on Election Night. Reasonable people should also see that this is another example of Democrats preparing their tactics for the 2010 elections and beyond. Republicans and conservatives are rightly salivating at the prospects of substantial gains in the coming elections due to the over-reach of progressive democrats. However you must remember who you are dealing with. This is the evolutionist, by any means necessary party. They are not bound by moral convictions or an ideological attachment to free and fair elections. They will do whatever they have to do to steal the election and then afterward demand the rest of us abide by the laws they so flagrantly violated.

In Honduras, the time for peaceful dissent is winding down. The re-installment of a legally removed president is their sign that they can no longer remain passive and non-violent. Their liberty is in need of "refreshing." As anyone who has ever planted a tree can attest, they need lots of "refreshing" when they are young and vulnerable. There is nothing unexpected in this. However, we haven't got there yet, but Obama and his progressive sycophants are pushing us in that direction. Soon, we too could reach a point of no return. Even a 233 year old democracy can find itself in need of "refreshing."

As we look forward to the 2010 and 2012 elections just remember, so are the progressives...and we are seeing their plans.