Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    It may seem inexplicable why the U.S. Department of Justice would fund the security of a racially divisive protest while a criminal case was proceeding in the State of Florida.

    Judicial Watch obtained documents showing just that. The discovery was reported by Patrick Howley of the Daily Caller:

    A division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was deployed to Sanford, Florida in 2012 to provide assistance for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton, according to newly released documents.

    The Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of DOJ, reported expenses related to its deployment in Sanford to help manage protests between March and April 2012, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

    According to the Daily Caller, the funding of security at the protest featuring race-baiter and rabble-rouser Al Sharpton, who Holder stated he had a partnership with, is as follows:

    • CRS employee spent $1,142.84 to travel to Sanford, Florida from March 25-28, 2012 “to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies”;
    • CRS employee spent $751.60 to travel to Sanford, Florida from March 30-April 1, 2012 “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31”;
    • CRS employee spent $1,307.40 to travel to Sanford, Florida from April 3-12, 2012 “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford”;
    • CRS employee spent $672.24 to travel to Tampa, Florida from April 18-20, 2012 “to meet with RNC official related to possible protests and demonstrations during the RNC.”

    The Community Relations Service may have been founded to act as a “peacemaker” for community conflicts and tensions, but the Department of Justice picked a racially charged protest in Florida to intervene in, rather than assist with numerous other protests around the country (the “tea party” and “Occupy Wall Street” should ring a bell).

    Let us briefly survey the behavior of Attorney General Eric Holder, this hand-selected political appointee of President Obama; it should be noted that the president refuses to fire him (and thus endorses his behavior). Holder has a history of lying to Congress, advocated that schools “brainwash” people to not support gun rights, has undertaken dubious crusades (like opposing voter IDs), ignored racially inconvenient crimes — like New Black Panther voter intimidation, and even went so far as to say that case demeans “my people.”

    But the quickest, dirtiest overview of Holder’s record comes from the stellar Andrew McCarthy piece, published on April 14, 2012, “Holder Meets Sharpton”:

    Eric Holder rode in on the stench of Marc Rich and will ride out on the stench of Al Sharpton. He’s spent the three-plus years in between branding Americans as “cowards” on race matters; investigating the CIA; coddling CAIR and the New Black Panthers; green-lighting voter fraud; swaddling Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the Bill of Rights; and converting the Justice Department into a full-employment program for the Lawyer Left and its Gitmo boutique. But now he’s hit the big time. [...]

    Holder is currently in “partnership” with his fast friend on the highly charged Trayvon Martin case. In the days before the nation’s chief federal law-enforcement official lionized the CEO of the nation’s racial-grievance industry, Sharpton had been in Florida, threatening that his “action network” — as in “direct action,” the community-organizer’s stock-in-trade — would “move to the next level” if authorities in Sanford, Fla., failed to arrest George Zimmerman, the man (or, if you prefer the New York Times Agitator’s Glossary, the “white Hispanic”) who shot Mr. Martin, a black 17-year-old.

    Most Americans cannot understand why the Department of Justice would be involved in providing security at a protest, which sprung up should the “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman be acquitted of all charges in the shooting of Trayvon Martin. But the explanation is really quite simple, once one gets the modus operandi of the hard left.

    Both Eric Holder and Barack Obama were students at Columbia University, a far-left Ivy League university. In his biography Dreams From My Father, Obama writes that during his years at Columbia he “went to socialist conferences at Cooper Union and African cultural fairs in Brooklyn.” Eric Holder promoted “black consciousness” and took part in an armed takeover of a former ROTC office with the demand that it be renamed the “Malcolm X Lounge.”

    The radical left thrives on agitation and false promises of “change,” and acts like the arbiter of frustration and “hope” for entire communities — which it unilaterally claims and territorially enforces with rabid demonization, should anyone be so bold as to think for himself. The hard left’s key to power has been to rub raw the wounds of past racial, ethnic and gender animosity; and thus, it cannot move “forward.”‘

    The anti-Zimmerman protests provide a tempting venue for civil rights activists to intervene into in order to promote “racial justice” and not blind justice. With the likes of Eric Holder and Al Sharpton speaking for the “black community,” there literally can be “no justice” and “no peace.”

     

    http://www.ijreview.com/2013/07/64710-eric-holders-department-of-justice-funded-anti-zimmerman-protest/

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    Outrageous and fcking illegal.  Judge should issue an immediate mistrail, if not throw the case out completely with a major btch slap to Holder and DOJ.

    INEXCUSABLE



    And you believe this...?

    Really?!

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    Sorry, but this story does not come close to being believeable.

                                                                

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    Believe what you will!

    A division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was deployed to Sanford, Florida in 2012 to provide assistance for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton, according to newly released documents.

    The Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of DOJ, reported expenses related to its deployment in Sanford to help manage protests between March and April 2012, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

    CRS spent $674.14 between March 25-27 related to having been “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.” CRS spent another $1,142.84 for the same purpose between March 25-28.

    CRS spent $892.55 “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida” between March 30-April 1, and $751.60 “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”

    Sharpton, who promoted the Tawana Brawley hoax in the 1980s and in 1995 led a protest against the “white interloper” owner of a Harlem clothing store that ended in a deadly shooting rampage at the store, was a featured speaker at the March 31 rally, called “The March for Trayvon Martin,” where he advocated for Zimmerman’s prosecution.

    CRS expenditures related to the anti-Zimmerman protests continued through mid-April. Between April 11 and April 12, CRS spent $552.35 “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/doj-provided-security-for-anti-zimmerman-protests/#ixzz2Ylx7wtsR

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

     

     

    Outrageous and fcking illegal.  Judge should issue an immediate mistrail, if not throw the case out completely with a major btch slap to Holder and DOJ.

    INEXCUSABLE

     

     



    And you believe this...?

     

     

    Really?!

     

     




    Believe what?  The story, or that the DOJ funding a potential verdict in the land of the presumption of innocense?

     



    The OP is opinion, i.e., not factual.

    The DOJ is doing no such thing, so you must have made that part up.

     

     

     

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    The DOJ is doing no such thing, so you must have made that part up.

     




    LOL ok!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    Believe what you will!

    A division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was deployed to Sanford, Florida in 2012 to provide assistance for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton, according to newly released documents.

    The Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of DOJ, reported expenses related to its deployment in Sanford to help manage protests between March and April 2012, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

    CRS spent $674.14 between March 25-27 related to having been “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.” CRS spent another $1,142.84 for the same purpose between March 25-28.

    CRS spent $892.55 “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida” between March 30-April 1, and $751.60 “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”

    Sharpton, who promoted the Tawana Brawley hoax in the 1980s and in 1995 led a protest against the “white interloper” owner of a Harlem clothing store that ended in a deadly shooting rampage at the store, was a featured speaker at the March 31 rally, called “The March for Trayvon Martin,” where he advocated for Zimmerman’s prosecution.

    CRS expenditures related to the anti-Zimmerman protests continued through mid-April. Between April 11 and April 12, CRS spent $552.35 “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/doj-provided-security-for-anti-zimmerman-protests/#ixzz2Ylx7wtsR



    Do the words echo chamber mean anything to you?

    This is all spin, no substance.

    You're being duped.

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    The DOJ is doing no such thing, so you must have made that part up.

     




    LOL ok!

     



    Good.

    I'm glad we agree.  

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    The whole thing STINKS!

     

    (CNN) -- The George Zimmerman investigation was hijacked "in a number of ways" by outside forces, said the former police chief of Sanford, Florida.

    Bill Lee, who testified Monday in Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial, told CNN's George Howell in an exclusive interview that he felt pressure from city officials to arrest Zimmerman to placate the public rather than as a matter of justice.

    "It was (relayed) to me that they just wanted an arrest. They didn't care if it got dismissed later," he said. "You don't do that."

    When Sanford police arrived on the scene on February 26, 2012, after Zimmerman fatally shot unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, they conducted a "sound" investigation, and the evidence provided no probable cause to arrest Zimmerman at the scene, he said.

    It had nothing to do with Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law, he said; from an investigative standpoint, it was purely a matter of self-defense.

    Zimmerman told police he killed Martin after the teen attacked him. While the evidence at the time corroborated that claim, the ex-chief said, Lee's lead investigator made a recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter.

    It was a matter of protocol, Lee said. Arresting Zimmerman based on the evidence at hand would have been a violation of Zimmerman's Fourth Amendment rights, he said. Thus, the Sanford police presented a "capias request" to the state's attorney, asking that the prosecutor determine whether it was a "justifiable homicide," issue a warrant for arrest or present the case to a grand jury.

    "The police department needed to do a job, and there was some influence -- outside influence and inside influence -- that forced a change in the course of the normal criminal justice process," Lee said. "With all the influence and the protests and petitions for an arrest, you still have to uphold your oath."

    "That investigation was taken away from us. We weren't able to complete it," he said.

    One example involved the 911 tapes, in which neighbors implored dispatchers to send police as a voice in the background screamed for help.

    The Sanford police intended to release the tapes once the probe was over, Lee said, because you can't publicize evidence amid an investigation.

    Instead, the mayor told him on March 16 the tapes had been released to Martin's family and the public. The family was asked to help identify voices, Lee said, but if police were in charge of the investigation, they wouldn't have presented evidence to a group.

    "It should be done individually so there's no influence on the other people in the room," he said. "Then, there's no questions that can be brought up about how (an identification) was obtained or whether it was influenced."

    Releasing the evidence to the public was problematic, as well, because it created the potential for someone to concoct a "story about what they observed when they really didn't observe it," he said.

    Martin family attorney Jasmine Rand said she doesn't believe playing the tapes to a room full of people "makes any difference to the outcome of the case."

    "We have to remember that that was played for the family in a private room because they were hearing the last moments of their son's life as he cried for help," Rand told CNN's Erin Burnett on Wednesday night. "And I think Sybrina Fulton (Martin's mother) got up and walked out of that room. She didn't sit in there and talk to everybody, because she had a visceral reaction when she heard her son yell for help and she couldn't help him because she knew he was dead."

    Lee was placed on paid leave March 22, 2012, after the Sanford City Commission expressed a lack of confidence in him. The same commission rejected his resignation in a 3-2 vote a month later, with dissenting commissioners questioning the fairness of Lee's losing his job.

    Two months later, Lee was sacked. City Manager Norton Bonaparte said in a news release, "The police chief needs to have the trust and respect of the elected officials and the confidence of the entire community."

    Lee believes lack of confidence did play a role in his dismissal, he told CNN, but he also believes Bonaparte faced political pressure and terminated him "without cause," which was permitted under his employment contract.

    "I upheld my oath," Lee said. "I'm happy that at the end of the day I can walk away with my integrity."

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/10/justice/sanford-bill-lee-exclusive/index.html

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    The whole thing STINKS!


    Fine.

    Still doesn't make the OP's bald assertion any more truthful.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that the Department of Justice spent thousands of taxpayer dollars to provide assistance for anti-Zimmerman protests in 2012, the Daily Caller reported Wednesday. Among the protests assisted by the Justice Department was one headlined by activist and MSNBC host Al Sharpton.

    At issue is the money spent by so-called "peacekeepers" in the Community Relations Service, a division of the DOJ that, according to Judicial Watch, the organization that requested the information, "purports to spot and quell racial tensions nationwide before they arise..."

    Judicial Watch said that:

    • CRS employee spent $1,142.84 to travel to Sanford, Florida from March 25-28, 2012 “to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies”;
    • CRS employee spent $751.60 to travel to Sanford, Florida from March 30-April 1, 2012 “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31”;
    • CRS employee spent $1,307.40 to travel to Sanford, Florida from April 3-12, 2012 “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford”;
    • CRS employee spent $672.24 to travel to Tampa, Florida from April 18-20, 2012 “to meet with RNC official related to possible protests and demonstrations during the RNC”

    Judicial Watch also said it obtained an audio recording of a “community meeting” held at Second Shiloh Missionary Baptist Church in Sanford on April 19, 2012.

    The meeting reportedly opened with a gospel hymn and organ music and reportedly led to the official ouster of Sanford’s Police Chief Bill Lee, Judicial Watch said.

    According to Judicial Watch, that meeting produced a nine-point plan, the main demand being Chief Lee's removal.

    Since the case broke last year, George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer on trial for the shooting death of Martin, has received thousands of death threats. It is impossible to determine how many of those threats are a direct result of taxpayer-funded activities by the DOJ.

     

    "They went down there and started all of this,"

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??


    ..why? because it's consistant with what now happens in Obamerica....you voted for it....people are getting what they asked for....embrace it....

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    Race War: The Obama administration spent thousands of federal dollars to help the Rev. Al Sharpton pressure the state of Florida to railroad George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin shooting case.

    The Justice Department not only met with Martin's parents and the notorious racial arsonist Sharpton, as we reported earlier this week. It even helped them organize rallies against Zimmerman, who trial evidence shows shot Martin in self-defense.

    Newly released documents reveal the department spent more than $5,320 to send officials to Florida "to work marches, demonstrations and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen."

    According to Washington-based Judicial Watch, a government watchdog group that uncovered the records through a Freedom of Information Act request, the department launched six separate deployments to Sanford, Fla., between March 25, 2012, and April 12, 2012, when officials got their way and Zimmerman was arrested for murder.

    The purpose of one trip from March 30 to April 1, according to the expense report, was "to provide support for protest." Sharpton was a featured speaker at the March 31 protest, dubbed "The March for Trayvon Martin," where he agitated for Zimmerman's arrest.

    A week earlier, Sharpton met with Martin's parents and escorted them to a meeting with justice officials in Florida. "Earlier today, Trayvon's parents, attorney and I met with the Justice Department here," Sharpton bellowed on his MSNBC show "Politics Nation." "And later tonight, we rally for justice for Trayvon."

    Behind the scenes, Attorney General Eric Holder assured Sharpton that he would take "swift action" in the case to investigate whether local police had committed a "civil rights crime" in releasing Zimmerman from custody. Holder also deployed FBI agents to Sanford.

    Soon after, Sanford's police chief was fired. Bill Lee now says he was axed due to "political pressure" and that "outside forces" hijacked the Zimmerman case.

    "They just wanted an arrest" to placate protesters threatening violence, Lee told CNN earlier this week, even though the evidence provided no probable cause to arrest Zimmerman. He said it was purely a matter of self defense, and he was right.

    As soon as the case was taken away from Lee, evidence was leaked to the Martin family and Sharpton and his thugs. They got to hear the 911 tapes and coordinate their stories.

    Who leaked them? The same person who fired Lee — Sanford City Manager Norton Bonaparte, a member of the National Forum for Black Public Administrators.

    Before he sacked the police chief, Bonaparte met in Washington with — you guessed it — Eric Holder. The attorney general had summoned both him and Sanford's mayor to discuss the allegedly "unprovoked hate crime against a black teen."

    The evidence is clear that Zimmerman was framed to look like a homicidal racist. It's also now clear there was a larger political orchestration behind the racial rabble-rousing, one that was led from the highest levels in Washington.



    Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/071113-663403-justice-department-aided-sharpton-rallies-against-zimmerman.htm#ixzz2YrA2Sumf
    Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    Curious...

    Why are conservatives always gunning for/predicting a "race war" that invariably never comes...?

    It's not like they're vancouver hockey fans or something....  :P

     

    While the rampant, unhinged conspiracy mongering is amusing, it's really counter-productive.  It's no wonder the house gop can't get out of their own way to pass a freakin' bill.

     

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Why would our federal DOJ fund a protest for a specific side of a court case with taxpayer money??

    You three are the radical blind left of BDC! LOL

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share