Former Department of Justice attorney in the Voting Rights section J. Christian Adams has been blowing the whistle on the department for months regarding their lax enforcement of voting rights for any case other than those involving blacks as victims.

Today at PJ Media, he reports that Judicial Watch has unearthed a bombshell: Proof that it was political appointees and not career civil servants, as DoJ has been insisting, who scuttled the Black Panther Party voting rights case:

Judicial Watch made an explosive announcement today about the Justice Department's stonewalling in the New Black Panther voter intimidation case dismissal. Forced to bring a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit after DOJ rebuffed its public records request (so much for transparency), Judicial Watch obtained a privilege log from the DOJ last week.

It shows - in a rather dramatic way - that the DOJ has been untruthful about who was involved in the dismissal of the case.

In July, I complied with a subpoena and provided testimony to the United States Commission on Civil Rights. I did so in part because inaccurate statements had been made about the case by DOJ officials. Some of these statements falsely claimed that ethical rules mandated the dismissal of the charges against the New Black Panthers. This was nonsense.

But the real whopper? DOJ's claim - repeated over and over again - that career civil servants were wholly responsible for the spiking of the case.

Today we learn, from the Department's own records, that this claim is demonstrably false.

The privilege log produced in the FOIA litigation contains stunning entries. They show regular discussions and deliberations between the highest political officials inside the DOJ, including the deputy attorney general and the associate attorney general, about what to do with the case. This contradicts numerous statements made to Congress, the Civil Rights Commission, and to the public.

Some of these statements were under oath.

No doubt if the GOP regains control of the House, investigating DoJ's actions in this case - and others - will be a top priority.