Your Economy (No Politics)

[al44]

The D.C. Court’s fiendish plan if the Supremes overrule J6ers’ 1512(c)(2) convictions

By Andrea Widburg

The Supreme Court is deciding Fischer v. United States, a case challenging how the DOJ and the D.C. court have been using 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) against January 6 defendants. Because it’s obvious that they’ve violated the most basic precepts of statutory interpretation, it’s likely that the Supreme Court will reverse the conviction. However, the D.C. court just issued an order establishing that defendants other than Joseph Fischer who use the decision to appeal their convictions will suffer an even worse fate. This is a reminder that the “law” in Democrat enclaves is unconcerned with justice. Instead, it exists to further the Democrat party’s power.

Section 1512(c)(2) contains a seemingly magical phrase that the DOJ and D.C. court have used to send hundreds of law-abiding citizens to jail or otherwise destroy their lives: “Whoever corruptly...obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.” According to the DOJ and the D.C. court, when Americans showed up to protest what they believed was an improper election certification based upon a corrupt election, they were obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding.


However, if one examines the statute, it’s obvious, from the title on down (“Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant”), that § 1512 addresses the crime of destroying or corrupting evidence in a criminal proceeding or investigation. It has nothing to do with exercising free speech in the legislative context. Taking language out of its statutory context to achieve an end the legislature never intended is a big judicial no-no. (See here for a somewhat more in-depth analysis.)

The DOJ and D.C. court know that their interpretation of § 1512(c)(2) is likely to be reversed. Even the most ideologically corrupt Supreme Court justice will have a very difficult time pretending that the statute can be extended beyond its manifest purpose of protecting evidence.

Any reversal will apply only to Joseph Fischer, the J6 defendant whose case is before the Supreme Court. However, once the Court overturns his conviction, the way is clear for every other J6 defendant convicted using § 1512(c)(2) to challenge the conviction. This has the DOJ and the D.C. court in a panic, but they’ve come up with a plan.

For those few J6 defendants convicted only under § 1512(c)(2), there’s nothing the DOJ and D.C. court can do to stop them from tasting freedom and having their records wiped clean. However, most of the J6 defendants were charged and convicted on myriad grounds. (One of the things prosecutors do is stack as many charges as possible in an indictment. This gives them huge leverage in negotiating plea bargains and means a probable win on something—anything—if the matter goes to trial.)

With an eye to the charge stacking common in criminal prosecutions, the D.C. court has just issued an order in the case of Larry Brock telling him that, if he dares challenge his § 1512(c)(2) conviction, the court has something much worse in store for him: It will change its initial order so that the various penalties originally imposed upon him will no longer be served concurrently but, instead, will be served consecutively.

Here's what that means. Under the “concurrent” standard, if a defendant was sentenced to two years for Crime A and two years for Crime B, both those sentences will be fulfilled by the same two years in prison. After two years, he’s a free man. However, if they’re switched to a “consecutive” system, the defendant will serve two years for Crime A. Once those two years are completed, the term for Crime B immediately begins. Thus, it will take four years for the prisoner to be freed:

I really hope SCOTUS is paying attention to how DC judges are scheming to keep J6ers in prison on 1512c2 convictions if SCOTUS reverses that charge in J6 cases.

This order is not just a warning to the defendant involved—Larry Brock, a decorated military veteran with no criminal… pic.twitter.com/f9CncQUz8W
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) April 26, 2024

You may have noticed that what you’re seeing is an order, meaning it comes from the judges. However, the D.C. judges haven’t impressed anyone as a particularly intelligent bunch. They are ideologues. That’s all. That’s why I keep throwing in the DOJ when I discuss this issue. I’d bet good money that the bright minds in the Democrat party, both in the DOJ and among the Democrat cadre of lawyers who lurk behind the scene, are the ones who came up with this idea.

I practiced law in the San Francisco Bay Area. What became obvious very early was that Democrat party judges held themselves to a very special standard. They saw themselves as above the justice-based principles of due process, the facts of the case, and the applicable law.

Instead, almost all of them believed that their black robes put them in direct contact with the higher power of social justice, allowing them to determine entirely upon ideological rather than constitutional and legal grounds. The only surprise for me now is that Democrat judges have become so open in their corruption and so blatantly partisan in their desired outcomes. This is evil and will stop only if they are held to account for their criminal trespasses. It’s to be hoped that when Trump returns to the White House, reforming our broken judicial system is one of his first acts.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/04/the_d_c_court_s_fiendish_plan_if_the_supremes_overrule_j6ers_1512_c_2_convictions.html