Pennsylvania Democrats were caught on surveillance tape reportedly accepting cash bribes in return for opposing voter ID in the Pennsylvania legislature. Gifts of Tiffany’s jewelry were also given to Democrat legislators from Philadelphia, reportedly in exchange for “NO” votes on a Pennsylvania voter ID bill that passed in 2012.
Despite this evidence, Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane has not charged any officials. Kane is a Democrat.
Kane’s excuse for her inaction? Racism: some of the legislators caught on tape accepting bribes were black Democrats from Philadelphia. From the Philadelphia Inquirer:
In a statement to The Inquirer on Friday, Kane called the investigation poorly conceived, badly managed, and tainted by racism, saying it had targeted African Americans.
Those who favored the sting believe Kane killed a solid investigation, led by experienced prosecutor Frank G. Fina, that had ensnared several public officials and had the potential to capture more. They said they were outraged at Kane’s allegation that race had played a role in the case.
Before Kane ended the investigation, sources familiar with the inquiry said, prosecutors amassed 400 hours of audio and videotape that documented at least four city Democrats taking payments in cash or money orders, and in one case a $2,000 Tiffany bracelet.
Fine — a Pennsylvania Democrat won’t do anything about other corrupt Pennsylvania Democrats. But what about Eric Holder? After all, Holder has shown a tough-as-nails willingness to go after elected officials who accept gifts in exchange for official actions.
Just ask Bob McDonnell, former governor of Virginia, who now faces multiple criminal charges for doing just that.
Justice Department prosecutors in the previous administration were perfectly willing to go after white Philadelphia politicians. Can the same be said of Eric Holder when black Democrats are caught on tape?
Federal criminal laws certainly seem to apply in the behavior of Philadelphia. Nothing is preventing U.S. Attorney Zane Memeger from pursuing those who accepted bribes, correct? Nobody seems to have bothered to ask the question.
The revealation also says a great deal about opponents of voter ID, and raises the question of how much corrupt cash flowed elsewhere to oppose election integrity laws.
Did the same sort of sugar sweeten the opposition to voter ID in Texas, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Mississippi?