Civil Rights Division of the DOJ "Lawless"?

It's not just refusal to support justice for all in the case of voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party. It's also refusal to enforce laws mandating that ineligible voters (dead, duplicate, etc.) be removed from voter rolls. Because the new goal of the Civil Rights Division in the Obama era is to increase voting by minorities - not to enforce the law. And removal of ineligible voters would decrease minority voting, or something. Is it all about maximizing the ACORN vote? ACORN is known for fraudulent voter registrations. Mr. Adams is very specific in his allegations. Watch the entire video.

“The real problem here, as I testified yesterday, is a lawlessness that’s in the Civil Rights Division that will enforce some laws and not others.”

Unfortunately, the literature on whistleblowing in general indicates that going to the media (even though Mr. Adams had to go to the "new media" in this case is about the only chance someone within a corrupt organization has of salvaging some part of their professional life after bringing to light corruption. For example, scientists who discover fraud are counseled by whistleblowing advisors not to reveal what they have discovered unless they are prepared to lose their family and have their career destroyed - particularly if the malfeasance is on the part of a superior. Note that J. Christian Adams' supervisor was removed from his post and is not allowed to testify to the Civil Rights Commission. His career at DOJ is probably effectively over as a result of his integrity. People who have already left the organization are at much less risk of personal destruction.

Based on personal (family) experience, I would counsel anyone who has discovered serious malfeasance within the organization where they work to leave the organization and become established in a new job before revealing the malfeasance. Maybe with the help of an attorney. It is also recommended that potential whistleblowers meet with friends and family first to warn them about the potential ramifications of blowing the whistle.