You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Government Corruption
Insurrection-Lite: The Supreme Court Downsizes the 'Insurrection' to Trespassing
2024-07-01
See also here. Long. A taste:
[Jonathan Turley] Still waiting for release of all political prisoners...
Below is my column in the Hill on the Supreme Court decision on Friday in Fischer v. U.S. to reject hundreds of charges in January 6th cases for the obstruction of legal proceedings. For many cases, that will leave relatively minor offenses like trespass or unlawful entry. It is only the latest blow to efforts to portray the riot as a massive conspiracy to overthrow the government. While portrayed by pundits and press in strictly ideological terms, it actually produced an interesting line up with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson voting with the majority and Justice Amy Coney Barrett voting in dissent.

Here is the column:

The Supreme Court’s decision on Friday in Fischer v. U.S. struck down one of the most common charges against January 6 defendants. “Obstruction of an official proceeding” had been used in hundreds of cases, and those convictions are now invalid.

But the biggest impact of the decision may occur elsewhere.

For years, calling January 6 an “insurrection” has been a litmus test for press, pundits and politicians. Members of Congress such as Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) claimed a conspiracy of “armed and organized insurrectionists.” The claim is legally absurd but politically advantageous.

It now seems like the insurrection increasingly looks more like a legal case of mass trespass and unlawful entry.

I have always believed that criminal charges were warranted for the riot of Jan. 6, 2021. But this week’s decision shows how the Justice Department has wrongly prosecuted hundreds of people for the obstruction crime. It was all part of what Justice Department official Michael Sherwin proudly declared in a television interview, that “our office wanted to ensure that there was shock and awe…it worked because we saw through media posts that people were afraid to come back to D.C. because they’re, like, ‘If we go there, we’re gonna get charged.’ …We wanted to take out those individuals that essentially were thumbing their noses at the public for what they did.”

The Fischer opinion will bring an end to a minority of cases that were based entirely on the charge under 1512(c)(2). The section had been enacted after the Enron scandal in 2001 with the collapse of an energy company accused of corporate fraud. It was designed to allow criminal charges for the destruction of evidence in the form of documents and records.

Related:
January 6 06/30/2024 Sex, Lies, and Racial Hysteria: The Quiet J6 Killing of Rosanne Boyland
January 6 06/28/2024 SCOTUS Hands DOJ another J6 Loss
January 6 06/26/2024 Big News for Steve Bannon! ‐ Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group Votes that J6 Committee Was ILLEGITIMATE ‐ House to File Amicus Brief with Supreme Court [VIDEO]

Posted by:Frank G

#1  Stop and Imagine the Political Prison Stories we'd be reading just before Election time.

Now ask, who is gonna force the Regime to follow the SCOTUS decision?

What if the Regime decides to drag its heels, in releasing them, and continues to hold them? All to avoid the negative press of their treatment by the Regime?

Don't rule out a LAWFARE scenario & recharging them without bail?


Posted by: NN2N1   2024-07-01 08:20  

00:00