Department of Justice expert testifies blacks dumber and less sophisticated than whites

It is amazing what Eric Holder’s minions are willing to say in order to facilitate vote fraud. Up to and including demeaning arguments about the intelligence and sophistication of blacks. The mainstream media can relied upon to avoid publicizing the testimony just provided by Charles Stewart, an MIT political scientist hired by Eric Holder’s Justice Department to testify in a case involving election integrity laws in North Carolina.

J. Christian Adams writes at Breitbart:

When asked if terminating the ability to register to vote on the day that someone casts a ballot impacts blacks disproportionately, Stewart testified in court that it did. Stewart:

It's also the case that -- well, yes, so it would, empirically more likely affect African Americans. Also, understanding within political science, that people who register to vote the closer and closer one gets to Election Day tend to be less sophisticated voters, tend to be less educated voters, tend to be voters who are less attuned to public affairs. That also tells me from the literature of political science that there are likely to be people who will end up not registering and not voting. People who correspond to those factors tend to be African Americans, and, therefore, that's another vehicle through which African Americans would be disproportionately affected by this law.

Translation: blacks are dumber than other voters. Imagine if a GOP AG’s Department had argued this.

When asked if ending the ability to register to vote at the same time one casts a ballot would harm blacks more, Stewart testified:

As I said before, this is particularly a mechanism and a time that's well situated for less sophisticated voters, and, therefore, it's less likely to imagine that these voters would -- can figure out or would avail themselves of other forms of registering and voting.

 The complete transcript of Stewart’s testimony can be found here.

It is completely impolite to question whether there is a public interest in encouraging ill-informed and poorly motivated poeple to vote, of course. I have long objected to "public sevice" advertising like "Rock the Vote" based on the theory that the more people who vote, the better. But having the government pay experts to testify that it is in the public interest to ensure that unsophisticated people who are ignorant of the most basic facts, such as where their precinct is, should vote is still a slap in the face.

It is amazing what Eric Holder’s minions are willing to say in order to facilitate vote fraud. Up to and including demeaning arguments about the intelligence and sophistication of blacks. The mainstream media can relied upon to avoid publicizing the testimony just provided by Charles Stewart, an MIT political scientist hired by Eric Holder’s Justice Department to testify in a case involving election integrity laws in North Carolina.

J. Christian Adams writes at Breitbart:

When asked if terminating the ability to register to vote on the day that someone casts a ballot impacts blacks disproportionately, Stewart testified in court that it did. Stewart:

It's also the case that -- well, yes, so it would, empirically more likely affect African Americans. Also, understanding within political science, that people who register to vote the closer and closer one gets to Election Day tend to be less sophisticated voters, tend to be less educated voters, tend to be voters who are less attuned to public affairs. That also tells me from the literature of political science that there are likely to be people who will end up not registering and not voting. People who correspond to those factors tend to be African Americans, and, therefore, that's another vehicle through which African Americans would be disproportionately affected by this law.

Translation: blacks are dumber than other voters. Imagine if a GOP AG’s Department had argued this.

When asked if ending the ability to register to vote at the same time one casts a ballot would harm blacks more, Stewart testified:

As I said before, this is particularly a mechanism and a time that's well situated for less sophisticated voters, and, therefore, it's less likely to imagine that these voters would -- can figure out or would avail themselves of other forms of registering and voting.

 The complete transcript of Stewart’s testimony can be found here.

It is completely impolite to question whether there is a public interest in encouraging ill-informed and poorly motivated poeple to vote, of course. I have long objected to "public sevice" advertising like "Rock the Vote" based on the theory that the more people who vote, the better. But having the government pay experts to testify that it is in the public interest to ensure that unsophisticated people who are ignorant of the most basic facts, such as where their precinct is, should vote is still a slap in the face.