Appeals court struggles with Jan. 6 obstruction of Congress charges

[berg80]

Appeals court judges wrestled on Monday with a challenge to a key felony charge that prosecutors have wielded against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants, weighing an issue that could upend hundreds of prosecutions connected to the attack on the Capitol.

A defense attorney for some of the Jan. 6 rioters argued that the way prosecutors have charged hundreds of defendants with felony obstruction — carrying a 20-year maximum sentence — could be deployed against run-of-the-mill peaceful protesters. But the judges disputed that contention, emphasizing that they viewed the Capitol attack as a unique event that lent itself to unique charging decisions.

Appeals court struggles with Jan. 6 obstruction of Congress charges

A defense attorney for some rioters argued that the way prosecutors have charged hundreds of defendants could be deployed against run-of-the-mill peaceful protesters.

www.politico.com

Not surprisingly, the reason this matter is pending before an appeals court is because a Trump appointed judge looks favorably on violent insurrectionists.

Most of the federal District Court judges in Washington have sided with prosecutors’ interpretation of the obstruction law. But one, Judge Carl Nichols, ruled that defendants in the Jan. 6 cases can be charged with obstruction only if prosecutors can show the defendants’ actions targeted documents like the records of cast electoral votes that were hustled from the Senate chamber that day as the demonstrators swarmed the building.

 

[martybegan]

Appeals court judges wrestled on Monday with a challenge to a key felony charge that prosecutors have wielded against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants, weighing an issue that could upend hundreds of prosecutions connected to the attack on the Capitol.

A defense attorney for some of the Jan. 6 rioters argued that the way prosecutors have charged hundreds of defendants with felony obstruction — carrying a 20-year maximum sentence — could be deployed against run-of-the-mill peaceful protesters. But the judges disputed that contention, emphasizing that they viewed the Capitol attack as a unique event that lent itself to unique charging decisions.

Appeals court struggles with Jan. 6 obstruction of Congress charges

A defense attorney for some rioters argued that the way prosecutors have charged hundreds of defendants could be deployed against run-of-the-mill peaceful protesters.

www.politico.com

Not surprisingly, the reason this matter is pending before an appeals court is because a Trump appointed judge looks favorably on violent insurrectionists.

Most of the federal District Court judges in Washington have sided with prosecutors’ interpretation of the obstruction law. But one, Judge Carl Nichols, ruled that defendants in the Jan. 6 cases can be charged with obstruction only if prosecutors can show the defendants’ actions targeted documents like the records of cast electoral votes that were hustled from the Senate chamber that day as the demonstrators swarmed the building.

The "Unique event" cop-out makes me thing of bill of attainders, which are Unconstitutional.

Prog Judges siding with prog prosecutors over a political witch hunt, shocking.

 

[Meister]

Not surprisingly, the reason this matter is pending before an appeals court is because a Trump appointed judge looks favorably on violent insurrectionists.

Most of the federal District Court judges in Washington have sided with prosecutors’ interpretation of the obstruction law. But one, Judge Carl Nichols, ruled that defendants in the Jan. 6 cases can be charged with obstruction only if prosecutors can show the defendants’ actions targeted documents like the records of cast electoral votes that were hustled from the Senate chamber that day as the demonstrators swarmed the building.

Who appointed the other judges?

 

[BlindBoo]

It was clearly a unique 4 year constitutional event that was targeted for intimidation by a MOB of Rioters who followed the call to DC, who were sent to the Capitol, who stopped the proceedings.

 

[SeaMajor7]

It was clearly unique 4 year constitutional event that was targeted for intimidation by a MOB of Rioters who followed the call to DC, who were sent to the Capitol, who stopped the proceedings.

It was more like 4 HOURS you dolt!
4 YEARS was the demented LEFT's temper tantrum throughput Trump's term.

 

[BlindBoo]

It was more like 4 HOURS you dolt!
4 YEARS was the demented LEFT's temper tantrum throughput Trump's term.

Every four years the Congress counts the EC votes on Jan 6th.

But that is a very nice hyper-partisan suit you're wearing.

 

[berg80]

The "Unique event" cop-out makes me thing of bill of attainders, which are Unconstitutional.

Prog Judges siding with prog prosecutors over a political witch hunt, shocking.

Not an unique event? A violent mob of gullible, deluded simps attack the Capital itself as well as police protecting it in the name of an obese conman trying to steal a presidential election. C'mon now, that doesn't happen every day.

 

[1srelluc]

Every four years the Congress counts the EC votes on Jan 6th.

But that is a very nice hyper-partisan suit you're wearing.

And that is sanctimonious tripe you are peddling.

 

[berg80]

It was more like 4 HOURS you dolt!
4 YEARS was the demented LEFT's temper tantrum throughput Trump's term.

The only demented temper tantrum is the one the whiny little bitch, otherwise known as the Orange Insurrectionist, has been carrying on with for over 2 years.

 

[berg80]

Justice Department lawyer James Pearce said some of Smith’s concerns about the obstruction statute’s being used to prosecute ordinary protests on Capitol Hill were addressed by a requirement in the law that prosecutors seeking to prove an obstruction charge show that a defendant acted “corruptly.”

“It is perfectly OK to advocate that members of Congress … not certify the election through the Electoral Count Act’s process,” Pearce said, adding that the government’s definition of obstruction “ensures that what they are doing is, in fact, corrupt or wrongful and places a limitation on their conduct.”

 

[berg80]

Seeing as it's likely one of the criminal charges Individual 1 will face related to 1/6 is going to be obstruction of an official act of Congress, what better thing for a Trumpleton judge to do to help out the fat man than to challenge the appropriateness of the charge.

 

[Nostra]

Appeals court judges wrestled on Monday with a challenge to a key felony charge that prosecutors have wielded against hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants, weighing an issue that could upend hundreds of prosecutions connected to the attack on the Capitol.

A defense attorney for some of the Jan. 6 rioters argued that the way prosecutors have charged hundreds of defendants with felony obstruction — carrying a 20-year maximum sentence — could be deployed against run-of-the-mill peaceful protesters. But the judges disputed that contention, emphasizing that they viewed the Capitol attack as a unique event that lent itself to unique charging decisions.

Appeals court struggles with Jan. 6 obstruction of Congress charges

A defense attorney for some rioters argued that the way prosecutors have charged hundreds of defendants could be deployed against run-of-the-mill peaceful protesters.

www.politico.com

Not surprisingly, the reason this matter is pending before an appeals court is because a Trump appointed judge looks favorably on violent insurrectionists.

Most of the federal District Court judges in Washington have sided with prosecutors’ interpretation of the obstruction law. But one, Judge Carl Nichols, ruled that defendants in the Jan. 6 cases can be charged with obstruction only if prosecutors can show the defendants’ actions targeted documents like the records of cast electoral votes that were hustled from the Senate chamber that day as the demonstrators swarmed the building.

How dare a judge expect the Government to show obstruction in their charges of obstruction!

 

[SassyIrishLass]

99.5% of America doesn't care

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not an unique event? A violent mob of gullible, deluded simps attack the Capital itself as well as police protecting it in the name of an obese conman trying to steal a presidential election. C'mon now, that doesn't happen every day.

True.

Which is why the notion that those engaged in lawful, peaceful protest could be charged with ‘felony obstruction’ is meritless nonsense.

 

[martybegan]

Not an unique event? A violent mob of gullible, deluded simps attack the Capital itself as well as police protecting it in the name of an obese conman trying to steal a presidential election. C'mon now, that doesn't happen every day.

It's mental gymnastics to make a law apply that really doesn't apply.

 

[Chillicothe]

99.5% of America doesn't care

Well, let's watch Monday's final J6 Committee hearing. (December 19th, 1pm, ET)
Maybe that event will test the "99.5%" gambit.

I personally think it is 'must see' TV for all responsible Americans.

Don't you?

 

[Billiejeens]

Well, let's watch Monday's final J6 Committee hearing. (December 19th, 1pm, ET)
Maybe that event will test the "99.5%" gambit.

I personally think it is 'must see' TV for all responsible Americans.

Don't you?

It is a poorly written, poorly produced infomercial that only the fringe left is watching.
Nohing more
No minds have been changed.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Every four years the Congress counts the EC votes on Jan 6th.

But that is a very nice hyper-partisan suit you're wearing.

You are right in pointing out that the frame of reference of my post was off but screw you my point stands.

 

[BlindBoo]

You are right in pointing out that the frame of reference of my post was off but screw you my point stands.

Only if you do a headstand!

You were only off a few hours, and you ignore that Congress on that day was specifically targeted for intimidation by a MOB of Rioters who followed a call to DC, who were sent to the Capitol by the former President, the man who called them to DC in the first place.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Only if you do a headstand!

You were only off a few hours, and you ignore that Congress on that day was specifically targeted for intimidation by a MOB of Rioters who followed a call to DC, who were sent to the Capitol by the former President, the man who called them to DC in the first place.

Why hasn't the J/6 Clown Show gotten to the bottom of who gave the orders to open up the gates and wave the "insurrectionists" in?

DC Police Waving People Towards Yesterday's Riots

Also, who gave the orders for the Capitol Police to stand down?

Capitol Police Stood Down

I think the next Congress will ask those questions.