Topic category:  Government/Politics

For America's sake, the truth about Obama and ACORN must be shared instead of suppressed, as The New York Times chose to do in October 2008.

In 2008 Senator Barack Obama was elected President because his lies and illicit campaign tactics were not generally appreciated and the liberal media establishment supported his presidential campaign instead of scrutinized it.

In "Time for October Surprise To Expose Obama Lies" (October 18, 2008) (www.webcommentary.com/php/ShowArticle.php?id=gaynorm&date=081018), I asked critical questions, "Can Obama and ACORN keep a lid on the whole truth about ACORN's relationship with Obama and the Obama presidential campaign up to Election Day 2008?" and " Can The New York Times whitewash the Obama/ACORN relationship the way it did the Obama/Ayers relationship?"

Tragically, the answer to each question turned out to be yes.

The fact remains that Obama lied about ACORN and his involvement with it during the last presidential debate when he said:

"...with respect to ACORN, ACORN is a community organization. Apparently what they've done is they were paying people to go out and register folks, and apparently some of the people who were out there didn't really register people, they just filled out a bunch of names.

"It had nothing to do with us. We were not involved. The only involvement I've had with ACORN was I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law that helped people get registered at DMVs."

Ironically, it is the refusal of the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) to enforce part of that motor voter law that imperils Obama now.

As I wrote in October 2008:

"ACORN is the organization with which Obama has been associated throughout his adult life, as organizer, trainer, lawyer, funder and political beneficiary...and Obama's Achilles heel.

"When voters learn how big a lie that was, the mysterious Obama will not be so much of a mysterious and his presidential aspirations will be history."

It is horrific that the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) is outrageously politicized and making race-based decisions. If you're a Black Panther who intimidated white voters with a weapon, hates "every iota" of white people and thinks blacks need to kill white babies, you get an Obama DOJ pass. And apparently the Obama DOJ won't enforce the federal law that's supposed to prevent voter fraud, because the Obama Administration wants as big a voter turnout as possible!

Fortunately, there is hope that enough Americans will learn the truth about the radicals who are working assiduously to "fundamentally transform" America and reject their instrument, Obama, in disgust.

If you are a career (white) DOJ attorney who believes in equal protection of the law like J. Christian Adams, the Obama DOJ is not for you.

When ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief realized that ACORN was not for her after all, that was a good thing, because ACORN was a threat to America. But when Adams learned that he didn't belong in the Obama DOJ because he expected to do more than offer lip service to the rule of law, that signified that American justice had been subverted by Obama's stealth socialist machine.

Wall Street Journal's John Fund wrote about the latest Obama DOJ scandal in a July 8, 2010 article titled "Who Will Investigate the Investigators? Another voter fraud scandal involving the Justice Department."

Fund:

"J. Christian Adams, a former career Justice Department lawyer who resigned recently to protest political interference in cases he worked on, made some news yesterday in testimony before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

"As expected, he claimed that Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, an Obama appointee, overruled a unanimous recommendation by six career Justice attorneys for continued prosecution of members of the New Black Panther Party on charges of voter intimidation in an incident I detailed here yesterday. But Mr. Adams leveled an even more explosive charge beyond the Panther case. He testified that last year Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes made a jaw-dropping announcement to attorneys in Justice's Voting Rights section. She said she would not support any enforcement of a key section of the federal 'Motor Voter' law -- Section 8, which requires states to periodically purge their voter rolls of dead people, felons, illegal voters and those who have moved out of state.

"According to Mr. Adams, Justice lawyers were told by Ms. Fernandes: 'We're not interested in those kind of cases. What do they have to do with helping increase minority access and turnout? We want to increase access to the ballot, not limit it.'

"If true, Ms. Fernandes was endorsing a policy of ignoring federal law and encouraging potential voter fraud. Ms. Fernandes was unavailable for comment yesterday, but the Justice Department has issued a statement accusing Mr. Adams of 'distorting facts' in general and having a political agenda."

SO IN OBAMAWORLD PROMOTING THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT GUARANTEE OF EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAW IS WHAT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION CALLS PROMOTING "A POLITICAL AGENDA" AND ITS RACE-BASED "JUSTICE" IS APOLITICAL???

This is what happens when ACORN's man becomes President of the United States!

Fund (who should know better and be bolder) did not mention Obama or ACORN in his article.

Who successfully litigated the "motor voter" case for ACORN?

Obama.

(Obama even boasted about it in the last presidential debate. See above.)

Is the Obama DOJ attorney who directed that Section 8 of the "motor voter" law not be enforced connected to ACORN?

You betcha!

Click here: http://republicans.judiciary.house.gov/Media/PDFs/031210%20IssaSmithHolder%20ACORN.pdf. See page 3: "Julie Fernandes was the Senior Policy Analyst/Special Counselor Civil Rights (LCCR), for which ACORN is a council member."

Fund focused on "some evidence backing up Mr. Adams."

Fund:

"Last year, Justice abandoned a case it had pursued for three years against Missouri for failing to clean up its rolls. When filed in 2005, one-third of Missouri counties had more registered voters than voting-age residents. What's more, Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, a Democrat who this year is her party's candidate for a vacant U.S. Senate seat, contended that her office had no obligation to ensure individual counties were complying with the federal law mandating a cleanup of their voter rolls.

"The case made slow but steady progress through the courts for more than three years, amid little or no evidence of progress in cleaning up Missouri's voter rolls. Despite this, Obama Justice saw fit to dismiss the case in March 2009. Curiously, only a month earlier, Ms. Carnahan had announced her Senate candidacy. Missouri has a long and documented history of voter fraud in Democratic-leaning cities such as St. Louis and Kansas City. Ms. Carnahan may now stand to benefit from voter fraud facilitated by the improperly kept voter rolls that she herself allowed to continue."

Naturally!

Fund senses "a massive cover up."

Fund: "Mr. Adams' allegations would seem to call for the senior management of Justice to be compelled to testify under oath to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. But Justice is making none of its officials available and is refusing to enforce subpoenas issued by the commission. The more this story develops, the more it appears Justice is engaged in a massive coverup of its politicization of voting rights cases."

Of course the Obama administration is trying to discredit Adams, but the facts support Adams.

See http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/breaking-former-doj-officials-stepping-forward-to-support-j-christian-adams/?singlepage=true:

"...former DOJ employees have expressed a willingness to go on record regarding Adams’ professionalism, excellent performance, and outstanding record of enforcing the law without racial bias.

"Additionally, they would like to corroborate Adams’ statements about the DOJ.

"And perhaps — pay attention, DOJ press liaisons — offer their own accounts regarding the DOJ’s hostility to race-neutral law enforcement."

Asheesh Agarwal, deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division from 2006-2008 and supervisor of the Division’s Voting Section, currently an attorney in private practice:

"During his tenure with the Department of Justice’s Voting Section, J. Christian Adams was a model attorney who vigorously enforced federal voting rights laws on behalf of all voters, without respect to race or ideology. Mr. Adams was also one of the most productive and successful voting attorneys in recent memory.

"His victories include two cases on behalf of African-American voters under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, two cases on behalf of white voters under Section 2, and six cases on behalf of Hispanic voters under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. He also brought and won three cases on behalf of military voters. Having worked closely with Mr. Adams for several years, I can attest to the unsurpassed quality of his character, judgment, and commitment to the cause of civil rights on behalf of all Americans."

Robert Driscoll, Deputy Assistant Attorney General from 2001-03, now an attorney in private practice:

"When I served as chief of staff and deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division under John Ashcroft, I became familiar with the internal politics of the Division, and am therefore not surprised by the accounts of J. Christian Adams describing the New Black Panther voting case.

"While I met many excellent lawyers in the Division dedicated to the rule of law, too many of the career staff (a term never to be confused with 'apolitical') viewed the role of the Civil Rights Division as simply that of a government-funded advocacy group whose responsibility was to work on behalf of favored political and agenda-driven constituencies — and not to neutrally apply the law (as written by Congress, and interpreted by the courts) to the facts.

"In contrast, as a private attorney I encountered J. Christian Adams...while handling a voting rights matter against the DOJ. Adams and the rest of the team acted professionally and consistent with their understanding of the law and facts. While I disagreed with Mr. Adams and the DOJ team on some matters of interpretation, I could not have told you the political views of Mr. Adams or any of the attorneys I encountered based on my interaction with them.

"Moreover, the position taken by Mr. Adams in that case was certainly not pushing any conservative agenda, as the suit sought to increase African-American representation on an elected body (based on ambiguous evidence of vote dilution) and resulted in the adoption of a voting plan designed to enhance the ability of minority voters to influence the outcome of elections.

"While it is certainly within the authority of the senior levels of the DOJ Civil Rights Division to make the final litigation decision on any case, including the New Black Panther matter, it would seem to me that dismissal of that case — after default has been entered and where video evidence exists — is a highly unusual decision that is worthy of congressional oversight. While some may cast such oversight in partisan terms, it need not be.

"The video of the defendants in the Black Panther matter was seen by millions. While most have not studied civil rights law or the Voting Rights Act in detail, viewers of the video assume that the kind of conduct shown in the video is inappropriate at a polling place. A lawsuit was filed by experienced voting rights lawyers at DOJ to remedy the situation and prevent such future conduct. And yet the case was dismissed voluntarily by the DOJ (after a shift in administration), a result that seems — at a visceral level — strange to anyone who has seen the video.

"The detailed testimony of the decision-makers (not the subsequent appointee who was not around at the time of the decision) would be enlightening and educational. If the dismissal of the case against the Black Panthers was a result of political influence (as Mr. Adams alleges — an allegation that does not seem far-fetched, based on my experience), that is important to know. Political decisions can have political consequences and one can imagine there would be consequences if a political appointee 'weighed in' on behalf of a fringe group like the New Black Panthers. But even if the DOJ is correct that no political influence played a role, oversight is perhaps even more important.

"If this is indeed the view of senior career DOJ staff — that after reviewing the facts of the New Black Panther case and the video, current laws against voter intimidation provide no ability for the DOJ to properly bring an action against the New Black Panther members shown on video and mentioned in the lawsuit — then Congress needs to have a conversation with Attorney General Holder about whether the problem lies with the Voting Rights Act itself, or with those whose job it is to enforce it."

The problem lies with the audacity of the liars who are subverting America and their media allies and the ignorance and/or timidity of citizens who have not done what people like Ms. MonCrief and Adams dared to do--the right thing!

Michael J. Gaynor

Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.

Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.

The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.

Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.

Gaynor's email address is gaynormike@aol.com.