In her excellent report on Melowese Richardson, the Ohio woman who in 2012 voted for Barack Obama not once, not twice, but six (count ‘em 6) times, J.E. Dyer observed:
[A]lthough she was sentenced to 5 years for her voting crimes, Richardson served less than 8 months before being released 10 days ago, reportedly because she suffers from bipolar disorder.
Most of us would probably agree that the prisons have better things to do than keep Melowese Richardson incarcerated.
Count me among those who agree, albeit reluctantly. While I firmly believe that if you do the crime, you should do the time, I will concede that Richardson is not a hardened criminal.
I’m not so sure the same can be said for Attorney General Eric Holder. A post at Breitbart by J. Christian Adams notes that in the 410 since Richardson admitted on camera that she committed multiple federal felonies, federal charges were never brought against her. Adams, some will recall, is the former Justice Department employee who accused the department of racial bias in 2009, following its dismissal of an open and shut case of voter intimidation against the New Black Panthers.
So why has Holder take no action in this case? Adams writes:
Federal law makes it a felony to vote more than once for President. In fact, 42 U.S.C. Section 1973i(e) subjects Richardson to twenty-five years in federal prison for her six votes for Obama.
Adams goes on to observe that bringing federal criminal charges is this case is not precluded by double jeopardy (Richardson was found guilty in a state court) and adds that the case meets three conditions for a federal prosecution delineated in the Justice Department’s U.S. Attorney’s Manual:
[F]irst, the matter must involve a substantial federal interest; second, the prior prosecution must have left that interest demonstrably unvindicated; and third, applying the same test that is applicable to all federal prosecutions, the government must believe that the defendant’s conduct constitutes a federal offense, and that the admissible evidence probably will be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction by an unbiased trier of fact.
The incident is just the latest in a long line of decisions made by the AG that strongly suggest he follows a double standard, subscribing to one set of laws for “his people,” another for the rest of us.
Related Articles
- Eric Holder: State laws barring felons from voting ‘too unjust to tolerate’
- Eric Holder shakes down ‘racist’ lenders to tune of $1 billion
- Is Eric Holder making up gay marriage law as he goes along?
- State’s rights, shmate’s rights, says Eric Holder (once again)
- Articles of impeachment introduced against Attorney General Eric Holder
- Effort underway in House to get Eric Holder impeached
- Salon writer asks If Eric Holder Is Obama’s ‘Inner N**ger’
- Eric Holder launches ‘snitch line’ on Zimmerman
- What Eric Holder told his son about Trayvon
