Why The SCOTUS Might Toss 350 J6 Convictions

[Rightguide]

Why SCOTUS Will Toss 350 J6 Convictions
A clear majority questions the DOJ's use of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to prosecute J6 defendants.​

by DAVID CATRON

April 21, 2024, 10:35 PM


It’s unlikely that many Americans sat down with a second cup of coffee and listened to last Tuesday’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court in Fischer v. United States. Nonetheless, it was an edifying tutorial on how the Department of Justice abused a federal law in order to charge J6 rioters with a serious felony. The statute is part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, passed in 2002 to prevent corporations from tampering with evidence to obstruct congressional inquiries or other official proceedings. For 19 years, the law was used only for that purpose. Then, in 2021, the DOJ redefined “official proceedings” to mean anything the government does, including certification of Electoral College votes.

This arbitrary revision became necessary because the actual “crimes” committed by most of the J6 defendants amounted to little more than trespassing and disorderly conduct. This obviously conflicted with the narrative being pushed by President Biden, congressional Democrats and the corporate media, all of whom insisted from the beginning that the riot was a “deadly insurrection.” Consequently, the DOJ had to come up with something that would sound more serious to the public than charging a few hundred knuckleheads with misdemeanors. At length they landed on Section 1512(c)(2) of Sarbanes-Oxley, which includes language that was distorted by prosecutors to charge roughly 350 rioters with felonies:

1512(c) 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.

Joseph W. Fischer was among those charged with “obstruction of an official proceeding.” However, when his case got to an actual court, U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols dismissed the “obstruction” charge because Fischer did nothing “with respect to a document, record, or other object in order to corruptly obstruct, impede or influence Congress’s certification of the electoral vote.” The DOJ took their case to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed Judge Nichols’s ruling. Fischer then appealed to SCOTUS, which granted certiorari in December. It’s risky to predict a SCOTUS ruling based on oral arguments, but most of the justices were dubious about the DOJ’s use of Sarbanes-Oxley in J6 prosecutions

More here: https://spectator.org/why-scotus-will-toss-350-j6-convictions/

So, it shouldn't be too long before we get a decision, Anyone want to try and predict the outcome?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Didn't you do this thread already?

Why not just add onto the previous one? That's why they call them "threads."

You filling up more space with the same thing doesn't make stated opinions stronger.

 

[ll74]

So which is it? They might toss it or they will? Your title says one, the post says the other.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Will J6 Convictions Be Overthrown

Right there, dude. Only seven pages deep, plenty of space. The last post in it was Thursday of last week.

What was wrong with continuing that thread?

Why you always do this shit, mayne? Never can close any of the circles you start making. That's why you gotta begin new shit, you never have faith in what you start cuz it gets pulled apart and you run away with a tucked tail.

So delinquent. I bet you never finished the plates of food you were given as a kid and got yelled at.

 

[wizzard426]

Can you imagine the collective communists splodey head meltdown!

It would be the perfect troll!

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Can you imagine the collective communists splodey head meltdown!

that part in Scanners was awesomesauce. Cronenberg dropped a classic back in the day.

 

[stxjimmy]

Will J6 Convictions Be Overthrown

Right there, dude. Only seven pages deep, plenty of space. The last post in it was Thursday of last week.

What was wrong with continuing that thread?

Why you always do this shit, mayne? Never can close any of the circles you start making. That's why you gotta begin new shit, you never have faith in what you start cuz it gets pulled apart and you run away with a tucked tail.

So delinquent. I bet you never finished the plates of food you were given as a kid and got yelled at.

It’s a constant stream of shit so that some may stick to the wall, but mostly it just falls to the floor.

 

[Rightguide]

So which is it? They might toss it or they will? Your title says one, the post says the other.

I don't know how they will rule. I did listen to the arguments online and it would seem they are ready to throw out those convictions based on Sarbanes-Oxley but one never really knows until it happens. What do you think will happen?

 

[ll74]

I don't know how they will rule. I did listen to the arguments online and it would seem they are ready to throw out those convictions based on Sarbanes-Oxley but one never really knows until it happens. What do you think will happen?

I was talking about your duplicate post and conflicting language within.

I believe the court will rule that obstruction is not applicable.

 

[Bray123]

Obama, 'We have a vacancy for SCOTUS'. GOP, 'You can't, there's only a year to go before the election.'
Trump, 'I need a SCOTUS to acquit me of my crimes. There's over a week to go before the election, that's plenty of time.'

 

[desecration]

This arbitrary revision became necessary because the actual “crimes” committed by most of the J6 defendants amounted to little more than trespassing and disorderly conduct.

Interesting. Dunno if SCOTUS will do it, but these are likely going to get tossed for that reason and the fact that they have a good defense in many cases since police opened the doors rather than resist.

 

[Rightguide]

Will J6 Convictions Be Overthrown

Right there, dude. Only seven pages deep, plenty of space. The last post in it was Thursday of last week.

What was wrong with continuing that thread?

Why you always do this shit, mayne? Never can close any of the circles you start making. That's why you gotta begin new shit, you never have faith in what you start cuz it gets pulled apart and you run away with a tucked tail.

So delinquent. I bet you never finished the plates of food you were given as a kid and got yelled at.

I always have faith that everything I do injures your diminishing nut sack. So for the time being at least there's something more to look forward to. BTW, that image of your mom is probably the reason why you turned out the way you did, serving a 17-year sentence as a shut-in with a keyboard.

 

[Rightguide]

It’s a constant stream of shit so that some may stick to the wall, but mostly it just falls to the floor.

Right where you sleep.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I always have faith that everything I do injures your diminishing nut sack.

Oh, my delusional imagination-butchering schmuck...nothing you do "injures" anyone. The last thing you probably injured was the white bread on the baloney sandwich your dentures bit into.

You fail at one thread and you're pressed to start another on the same subject with the new thread not even moving any goal pieces from the previous one.

Community board lifer losers do this sort of thing on the regular, but that doesn't mean you're absolutely useless to the convention. Tuck up and buck up, bucko.

 

[wizzard426]

Obama, 'We have a vacancy for SCOTUS'. GOP, 'You can't, there's only a year to go before the election.'
Trump, 'I need a SCOTUS to acquit me of my crimes. There's over a week to go before the election, that's plenty of time.'

Awwwwww Merrick doesn't get to play in the reindeer games!

 

[desecration]

Judge Challenges Appeals Court Over Computer Monitoring Ban in January 6 Parole

 

[Rightguide]

Judge Challenges Appeals Court Over Computer Monitoring Ban in January 6 Parole

Walton is becoming a crazed nut.

 

[SmokingFap]

Hey, just wanted to check in. Have all those convicted pieces of shit been released from prison yet?

 

[SmokingFap]

Why SCOTUS Will Toss 350 J6 Convictions​

A clear majority questions the DOJ's use of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to prosecute J6 defendants.​

by DAVID CATRON

April 21, 2024, 10:35 PM


It’s unlikely that many Americans sat down with a second cup of coffee and listened to last Tuesday’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court in Fischer v. United States. Nonetheless, it was an edifying tutorial on how the Department of Justice abused a federal law in order to charge J6 rioters with a serious felony. The statute is part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, passed in 2002 to prevent corporations from tampering with evidence to obstruct congressional inquiries or other official proceedings. For 19 years, the law was used only for that purpose. Then, in 2021, the DOJ redefined “official proceedings” to mean anything the government does, including certification of Electoral College votes.

This arbitrary revision became necessary because the actual “crimes” committed by most of the J6 defendants amounted to little more than trespassing and disorderly conduct. This obviously conflicted with the narrative being pushed by President Biden, congressional Democrats and the corporate media, all of whom insisted from the beginning that the riot was a “deadly insurrection.” Consequently, the DOJ had to come up with something that would sound more serious to the public than charging a few hundred knuckleheads with misdemeanors. At length they landed on Section 1512(c)(2) of Sarbanes-Oxley, which includes language that was distorted by prosecutors to charge roughly 350 rioters with felonies:



Joseph W. Fischer was among those charged with “obstruction of an official proceeding.” However, when his case got to an actual court, U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols dismissed the “obstruction” charge because Fischer did nothing “with respect to a document, record, or other object in order to corruptly obstruct, impede or influence Congress’s certification of the electoral vote.” The DOJ took their case to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed Judge Nichols’s ruling. Fischer then appealed to SCOTUS, which granted certiorari in December. It’s risky to predict a SCOTUS ruling based on oral arguments, but most of the justices were dubious about the DOJ’s use of Sarbanes-Oxley in J6 prosecutions

More here: https://spectator.org/why-scotus-will-toss-350-j6-convictions/

So, it shouldn't be too long before we get a decision, Anyone want to try and predict the outcome?

Going on two months since this post. Have all the MAGA zombie retards been released yet?

 

[Rightguide]

Going on two months since this post. Have all the MAGA zombie retards been released yet?

The decision along with several others will come down this month.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I don't know how they will rule.

So maybe take a seat and see how they will rule, instead of flooding the forum with new threads every time you get a hard on over another oped.

 

[stxjimmy]

So maybe take a seat and see how they will rule, instead of flooding the forum with new threads every time you get a hard on over another oped.

But then what would he do with his day?

 

[Aglaopheme]

I’m not even reading any of this, but I thank you for the snickers it produced.