Jesse Jackson, Judge Mathis sued by Rev. Peterson & J-Watch

U.S. Newswire ^ | 01-16-02

[BC21]

Jesse Jackson Sued for Civil Rights Violations, Assault and Battery; Suit Alleges Conservative Black Activist Attacked at Meeting To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor Contact: Judicial Watch, 202-646-5172

News Advisory:

-- Jesse Jackson sued for civil rights violations and assault and battery -- Suit alleges conservative black activist Jesse Lee Peterson was attacked at meeting by Jackson, Jackson's son Jonathan, and Judge Mathis

What: Press Conference

Date: Jan. 17

Time: 12 Noon

Location: National Press Club The Zenger Room 529 14th St N.W. Washington D.C.

Details: Judicial Watch and civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson will hold a press conference tomorrow to announce the filing of a civil rights lawsuit against Jesse Jackson, his son Jonathan, Judge Mathis, and others. The press conference will be attended by Rev. Peterson and his counsel Larry Klayman, chairman and general counsel of Judicial Watch. Rev. Peterson heads BOND (The Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny). Judicial Watch is a public interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes public corruption and abuse. The lawsuit will be filed today in state court in California and names Jesse Jackson, his son Jonathan, Gregory Mathis, and Rainbow/Push Coalition as defendants.

The lawsuit alleges the defendants, during a Dec. 10, 2001 public meeting to discuss the awarding of minority-oriented contracts by Toyota, surrounded and assaulted Rev. Peterson -- calling him "nigger" as they taunted and harmed him. Rev. Peterson is a nationally known conservative civil rights activist who has been critical of Jesse Jackson and his Rainbow/Push operation. At one point during the assault, Gregory Mathis, who hosts the nationally televised program "Judge Mathis," is alleged to have yelled "where's your buddy (Bill) O'Reilly (of Fox News) now?" (Rev. Peterson is a regular guest on the O'Reilly's program, "The O'Reilly Factor.")

"Jesse Jackson and his collaborators must be held accountable under the rule of law," stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.

http://www.usnewswire.com -0- /U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ 01/16 12:25

Copyright 2002, U.S. Newswire

[Mercuria]

Gonna see ya Monday? Huh? Huh? Huh?

**G**

[RonDog]

I will be there. ;)

[Jhoffa_]

JW, just WIN this one..

Okay?

[TheGrimReaper]

Bump for B.O.N.D.!!

[kattracks]

BTTT for Rev. Peterson!

[sneakypete]

Was this the son that is the congresscritter?

[timestax]

bump

[Mercuria]

No, sneaky, that's Jesse Jackson Jr.

It was Jonathan Jackson who was at the Toyota gathering.

[Brownie74]

Good luck to Peterson. Someone needs to take Jackson down.

[Brownie74]

Any lawsuit Larry Klayman files lacks credibility.

This is what bothers me. I don't think I would retain Klayman to fix a parking ticket for me.

[Twodees]

Miz Merc, I suspect that the "most severe critics of JW" will never support JW. They always list among their reasons the fact that no prosecutions have been brought as a result of JW suits. This ignores the obvious fact that JW is not a group of federal prosecutors.

It seems more likely to me that the more rabid of JW's critics simply fear that JW will reveal corruption of their own sainted republicans. They are pretty much absent from other threads about Rev. Peterson anyway, aren't they?

[Clara Lou]

It seems more likely to me that the more rabid of JW's critics simply fear that JW will reveal corruption of their own sainted republicans.
Ha ha ha--- not likely. Most critics of JW simply recognize Larry Klayman for what he is-- your basic ambulance-chaser. Name something this loser has accomplished that amounts to a hill of beans.

[Twodees]

His suits brought public attention to bear on many of the Clinton administration's crimes. With Clinton in firm control of the DoJ, there's little wonder that the suits didn't result in any prosecutions. However, with a republican majority in both houses of Congress, it's inexcusable that the IC's investigation was allowed to skirt the crimes and concentrate on minor scandals.

By your response, am I correct in assuming that you're a rabid critic of Klayman?

[Clara Lou]

I wouldn't say I'm a "rabid" critic. I appreciated Klayman when he was harrassing Clinton. It's his constant pointless lawsuits and money-grubbing since then. I just totally disrespect Larry. As far as I'm concerned, he reached his nadir when he tried to inject himself into court proceedings in Fla. during the election furor there. The judge in the proceedings told him he had no standing. That's Larry, alright.

[Twodees]

That's pretty much typical lawyer behavior on Klayman's part. Lawyers are often maddening people, but they can be useful, and are a necessary evil. Klayman did a lot to bring Clinton's crimes to the attention of people who may otherwise never have known about the full extent of his corruption.