Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

A Huge Number of Biden’s Jan 6 Prosecutions Could Fall Apart THIS MONTH, Here’s Why…

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Huge Number of Biden’s Jan 6 Prosecutions Could Fall Apart THIS MONTH, Here’s Why…

    A Huge Number of Biden’s Jan 6 Prosecutions Could Fall Apart THIS MONTH, Here’s Why…

    The United States Supreme Court is set to decide Fisher v. United States, a case in which January 6 Capitol riot defendant Joseph W. Fisher is challenging a federal felony charge of obstructing an official proceeding. Justices heard oral arguments in the case in mid-April, and are likely to rule by the end of June.

    Joe Biden‘s Department of Justice (DOJ) has used the felony charge against over 300 individuals who allegedly participated in the 2021 riot in Washington, D.C. Additionally, the obstruction charge forms the core of DOJ special counsel Jack Smith‘s January 6 prosecution against former President Donald Trump.

    Fisher and his attorneys contend the obstruction felony — a provision enacted by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in the wake of the Enron scandal — represents an abusive application of what was supposed to be a statute addressing document destruction in the course of committing a financial crime. U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols ruled in Fisher’s favor in March 2022, dismissing the obstruction charge against three of the January 6 defendants. But the federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Nichols’s ruling in a 2-1 decision in April 2023 — setting up the showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court.
    SARBANES-OXLEY.


    The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted after the 2001 Enron financial accounting fraud scandal, which saw the Texas-headquartered energy firm abruptly declare bankruptcy and dissolve its accounting firm, Arthur Andersen LLP. Congress swiftly moved to address gaps in financial regulations, which they believed allowed Enron executives to perpetrate fraud.

    Sarbanes-Oxley passed in June 2002 and contained 11 financial reporting provisions aimed at the board of directors for U.S.-based companies.. Additionally, the bill enacted enhanced charges for private corporations accused of destroying documents to obstruct a federal investigation. The statute, found in 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), reads:

    “Whoever corruptly—(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

    This provision is what Biden’s DOJ used to file enhanced felony charges against the January 6 defendants and former President Trump after congressional proceedings were delayed for a few hours on January 6, 2021.

    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

  • #2
    Sounds eerily like the way Bragg used the law to change a misdemeanor into a felony for Trump.

    Democrats have no problem twisting the law to attack their enemies and if the other side tries to give them a taste of their own medicine they are all of a sudden "We need to all get along and stop this tit-for-tat mentality" pretending to take the high road.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      Sounds eerily like the way Bragg used the law to change a misdemeanor into a felony for Trump.

      Democrats have no problem twisting the law to attack their enemies and if the other side tries to give them a taste of their own medicine they are all of a sudden "We need to all get along and stop this tit-for-tat mentality" pretending to take the high road.
      Meh. They'll likely just do what they did with all of their election denialism and pretend it never happened while decrying anything the Republicans might do as unprecedented.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        A Huge Number of Biden’s Jan 6 Prosecutions Could Fall Apart THIS MONTH, Here’s Why…

        The United States Supreme Court is set to decide Fisher v. United States, a case in which January 6 Capitol riot defendant Joseph W. Fisher is challenging a federal felony charge of obstructing an official proceeding. Justices heard oral arguments in the case in mid-April, and are likely to rule by the end of June.

        Joe Biden‘s Department of Justice (DOJ) has used the felony charge against over 300 individuals who allegedly participated in the 2021 riot in Washington, D.C. Additionally, the obstruction charge forms the core of DOJ special counsel Jack Smith‘s January 6 prosecution against former President Donald Trump.

        Fisher and his attorneys contend the obstruction felony — a provision enacted by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in the wake of the Enron scandal — represents an abusive application of what was supposed to be a statute addressing document destruction in the course of committing a financial crime. U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols ruled in Fisher’s favor in March 2022, dismissing the obstruction charge against three of the January 6 defendants. But the federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Nichols’s ruling in a 2-1 decision in April 2023 — setting up the showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court.
        SARBANES-OXLEY.


        The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted after the 2001 Enron financial accounting fraud scandal, which saw the Texas-headquartered energy firm abruptly declare bankruptcy and dissolve its accounting firm, Arthur Andersen LLP. Congress swiftly moved to address gaps in financial regulations, which they believed allowed Enron executives to perpetrate fraud.

        Sarbanes-Oxley passed in June 2002 and contained 11 financial reporting provisions aimed at the board of directors for U.S.-based companies.. Additionally, the bill enacted enhanced charges for private corporations accused of destroying documents to obstruct a federal investigation. The statute, found in 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), reads:

        “Whoever corruptly—(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

        This provision is what Biden’s DOJ used to file enhanced felony charges against the January 6 defendants and former President Trump after congressional proceedings were delayed for a few hours on January 6, 2021.
        Got to love the conservatives with their subtle inferences: "the Biden prosecutions" the Biden DOJ."
        I guess they think that Biden is directing the justice department to prosecute his son Hunter. LOL!!
        No, they know better. They just want people to believe that Biden is no different than their wannabe dictator, Donald Trump, who actually did control and direct the DOJ.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          Sounds eerily like the way Bragg used the law to change a misdemeanor into a felony for Trump.
          Once again, you can not turn a misdemeanor into a felony!!!


          Democrats have no problem twisting the law to attack their enemies and if the other side tries to give them a taste of their own medicine they are all of a sudden "We need to all get along and stop this tit-for-tat mentality" pretending to take the high road.
          No, there was no twisting of laws Sparko. But if you are going to post that kind of made up nonsense then you should at least give detail your assertions.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            A Huge Number of Biden’s Jan 6 Prosecutions Could Fall Apart THIS MONTH, Here’s Why…

            The United States Supreme Court is set to decide Fisher v. United States, a case in which January 6 Capitol riot defendant Joseph W. Fisher is challenging a federal felony charge of obstructing an official proceeding. Justices heard oral arguments in the case in mid-April, and are likely to rule by the end of June.

            Joe Biden‘s Department of Justice (DOJ) has used the felony charge against over 300 individuals who allegedly participated in the 2021 riot in Washington, D.C. Additionally, the obstruction charge forms the core of DOJ special counsel Jack Smith‘s January 6 prosecution against former President Donald Trump.

            Fisher and his attorneys contend the obstruction felony — a provision enacted by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in the wake of the Enron scandal — represents an abusive application of what was supposed to be a statute addressing document destruction in the course of committing a financial crime. U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols ruled in Fisher’s favor in March 2022, dismissing the obstruction charge against three of the January 6 defendants. But the federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Nichols’s ruling in a 2-1 decision in April 2023 — setting up the showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court.
            SARBANES-OXLEY.


            The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted after the 2001 Enron financial accounting fraud scandal, which saw the Texas-headquartered energy firm abruptly declare bankruptcy and dissolve its accounting firm, Arthur Andersen LLP. Congress swiftly moved to address gaps in financial regulations, which they believed allowed Enron executives to perpetrate fraud.

            Sarbanes-Oxley passed in June 2002 and contained 11 financial reporting provisions aimed at the board of directors for U.S.-based companies.. Additionally, the bill enacted enhanced charges for private corporations accused of destroying documents to obstruct a federal investigation. The statute, found in 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), reads:

            “Whoever corruptly—(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

            This provision is what Biden’s DOJ used to file enhanced felony charges against the January 6 defendants and former President Trump after congressional proceedings were delayed for a few hours on January 6, 2021.
            What's ironic is that Trump's indictment regarding 1512(c)(2) would likely withstand the most likely reversal by SCOTUS — that 1512(c)(2) must involve "alteration, destruction, mutilation, or concealment of documents". Most of the people charged with violating 1512(c)(2) might still be prosecutable under 1512(c)(2) with that restriction but Trump very likely could because a major part of the indictment is his participation in the conspiracy to use fake or "alternate" slates of electors, altering electoral college slates.

            So unless the Thomas/Alito/Kavanaugh bloc picks up two more, we're plausibly looking at a situation that makes prosecution of 1512(c)(2) harder for most people charged in the Jan. 6 riot but not for Trump himself.

            -Sam
            "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              Sounds eerily like the way Bragg used the law to change a misdemeanor into a felony for Trump.
              No, it doesn't. The critiques of the two applications of law are completely different. The argument here is that 1512(c)(2) is statutorily restricted by a prior clause and so must be applied only in cases of evidence tampering. The argument with Trump's state conviction is (wrongly) that a misdemeanor offense cannot be escalated to a felony without first charging and obtaining a conviction for the predicate crime.

              Unless all applications of law look the same when and because you don't like the application, there's nothing similar about the two legal disputes.

              -Sam
              "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                A Huge Number of Biden’s Jan 6 Prosecutions Could Fall Apart THIS MONTH, Here’s Why…

                The United States Supreme Court is set to decide Fisher v. United States, a case in which January 6 Capitol riot defendant Joseph W. Fisher is challenging a federal felony charge of obstructing an official proceeding. Justices heard oral arguments in the case in mid-April, and are likely to rule by the end of June.

                Joe Biden‘s Department of Justice (DOJ) has used the felony charge against over 300 individuals who allegedly participated in the 2021 riot in Washington, D.C. Additionally, the obstruction charge forms the core of DOJ special counsel Jack Smith‘s January 6 prosecution against former President Donald Trump.

                Fisher and his attorneys contend the obstruction felony — a provision enacted by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in the wake of the Enron scandal — represents an abusive application of what was supposed to be a statute addressing document destruction in the course of committing a financial crime. U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols ruled in Fisher’s favor in March 2022, dismissing the obstruction charge against three of the January 6 defendants. But the federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Nichols’s ruling in a 2-1 decision in April 2023 — setting up the showdown at the U.S. Supreme Court.
                SARBANES-OXLEY.


                The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted after the 2001 Enron financial accounting fraud scandal, which saw the Texas-headquartered energy firm abruptly declare bankruptcy and dissolve its accounting firm, Arthur Andersen LLP. Congress swiftly moved to address gaps in financial regulations, which they believed allowed Enron executives to perpetrate fraud.

                Sarbanes-Oxley passed in June 2002 and contained 11 financial reporting provisions aimed at the board of directors for U.S.-based companies.. Additionally, the bill enacted enhanced charges for private corporations accused of destroying documents to obstruct a federal investigation. The statute, found in 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), reads:

                “Whoever corruptly—(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

                This provision is what Biden’s DOJ used to file enhanced felony charges against the January 6 defendants and former President Trump after congressional proceedings were delayed for a few hours on January 6, 2021.
                Relax. In a few months the reappointed President Trump could be able to pardon and even decorate the lot.
                And he may be able to disband the present DOJ for his own version?
                All those politicians, lawyers, judges and others who have been so nasty to him could wake up to a whole new future.
                And you can all find out whether it's God or Mammon that Mr Trump truly worships.

                Good Luck with all that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JimL View Post
                  Once again, you can not turn a misdemeanor into a felony!!!



                  No, there was no twisting of laws Sparko. But if you are going to post that kind of made up nonsense then you should at least give detail your assertions.
                  Bless your heart, JimL.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sam View Post

                    No, it doesn't. The critiques of the two applications of law are completely different. The argument here is that 1512(c)(2) is statutorily restricted by a prior clause and so must be applied only in cases of evidence tampering. The argument with Trump's state conviction is (wrongly) that a misdemeanor offense cannot be escalated to a felony without first charging and obtaining a conviction for the predicate crime.

                    Unless all applications of law look the same when and because you don't like the application, there's nothing similar about the two legal disputes.

                    -Sam
                    Bless your heart too, Sam.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by eider View Post
                      Relax.
                      No need - I pretty much stay relaxed.

                      In a few months the reappointed President Trump
                      Reappointed?

                      could be able to pardon and even decorate the lot.
                      And he may be able to disband the present DOJ for his own version?
                      All those politicians, lawyers, judges and others who have been so nasty to him could wake up to a whole new future.
                      And you can all find out whether it's God or Mammon that Mr Trump truly worships.

                      Good Luck with all that.
                      Well, yeah, IF he gets "reappointed".

                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        Got to love the conservatives with their subtle inferences:....
                        Jim, the writer or speaker implies.
                        The reader or listener infers.

                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                          Jim, the writer or speaker implies.
                          The reader or listener infers.
                          I outfer.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                            I outfer.
                            I heard you were a transfer!
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                              I heard you were a transfer!
                              And if'n you votes for us for president you get a two-fer

                              rogue-sparko 4 prez.jpg

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Mountain Man, Today, 07:35 AM
                              6 responses
                              34 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seer
                              by seer
                               
                              Started by seer, Today, 06:47 AM
                              3 responses
                              21 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Started by NorrinRadd, Yesterday, 09:07 PM
                              4 responses
                              32 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 06:26 AM
                              14 responses
                              121 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post JimL
                              by JimL
                               
                              Started by Cow Poke, 06-17-2024, 06:29 AM
                              48 responses
                              240 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Working...
                              X