Posted on 04/22/2024 6:11:48 AM PDT by CFW
During oral arguments on Tuesday, Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito exposed the Biden administration’s inexcusable practice of selective prosecution of protesters and rioters.
The case, Fischer v. United States, involved the contention by Pennsylvanian Joseph Fischer that the charges of “obstruct[ion of] … any official proceeding,” based on 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c), should not apply to his actions during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Fischer, who also was charged with assaulting police officers, is hardly a sympathetic figure. His claims that he wasn’t trying to obstruct or “impede” official (and important) congressional business, in the ordinary (nonlegal) sense of those words, are specious, but Gorsuch and Alito were interested in a point broader than Fischer’s particular circumstances.
More than 300, of nearly 1,400 total, other Jan. 6 defendants also have been charged with violating 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c). The two justices were puzzled by inconsistencies with which President Joe Biden’s appointees apply the law and with the wide scope they claim for it against disfavored defendants. Contrarily, when people on the Left, even including members of Congress, disrupt government proceedings, including by use of force, Biden and his officials look the other way.
[snip]
Prelogar stumbled throughout the questioning, including when Alito picked up on similar themes. At one point, she said that for a criminal charge under the statute at issue, “we would have to have the evidence of intent.” Yet it is clear that at least a significant subset of the Jan. 6 rioters, while knowing they should not be in the Capitol, and thus being criminally liable for trespassing or disorderly conduct, were clueless about the congressional proceedings rather than intentionally trying to interfere with them. Yet this administration is throwing the book at scores of them.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
When does “prosecution” become “persecution”?
When Democrat Socialists gain national office.
“Show me the man and I will show you the crime.” - Lavrentiy Beria, the most ruthless and longest-serving secret police chief in Joseph Stalin’s regime in the Soviet Union.
The idea is not so new-fangled at all.
The world will only see it if the ruling is proper. Please, Lord.
Hopefully the following case will be brought up too
“EXCLUSIVE: She Survived a Death Camp. Facing Biden DOJ Charges, She Is Prepared to Die in Prison”
Intent. This seems to be the way the left practices its selective prosecution by the intent of the person charged except it's not actually the intent of the person charged. Rather, it's the assessment of the intent by the prosecutor regardless of the actual intent of the person charged. This is how you can have James Comey not charge Hillary Clinton for multiple crimes with classified material because he assessed that her intent was not to violate the law while the J6 prosecutors assess that certain people were in DC that day to disrupt official proceedings and therefore deserve to be in a dungeon.
Therefore, every J6 person charged with interfering should have those charges dropped or overturned.
The entire Para 1512 us code is titled “U.S.C. § 1512 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant”.
It is all about tampering with evidence of a crime to prevent prosecution, including para c1&2.
The J6 protesters were not tampering with a crime, for c1 or 2, even to apply. Obstructing or delaying the collection of evidence of a crime simply doesn’t fit.
This is a ridiculously charged offense. If scotus justices can not see that, then they are absolutely ignorant or partisan beyond belief.
later
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.