B-Man

.

.

SCOTUS Arguments Don’t Bode Well For DOJ Prosecutors Pushing J6 Obstruction Charges LESLIE MCADOO GORDON The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday morning in the case of Fischer v. United States, one of the many criminal cases arising out of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Like defendants in a large subset of those cases, Joseph Fischer was charged, among other offenses, with obstruction of an official proceeding under 18 U.S.C. 1512(c)(2). Fischer’s case in the Supreme Court challenges whether the events of that day can be prosecuted using this obstruction statute. Most of the justices seemed dubious, or at a minimum concerned, about the Department of Justice’s very broad interpretation of the statute allowing it to sweep in the kinds of conduct that Jan. 6 encompassed. If the court rules for Fischer, his case will automatically apply to all Jan. 6 cases that include a Section 1512 charge and radically change those cases, including the prosecution against former President Donald Trump in D.C. In virtually all instances, such a ruling would likely require that the Section 1512 charges be dismissed outright. [snip] The precise scope that the court gives to 1512(c)(2), however, could potentially leave open the possibility that a few defendants, including former President Trump, could still be charged under it using a narrower set of allegations. Such a case would then likely bring to the forefront some of the statute’s other issues, which were only touched upon briefly in Tuesday’s argument, such as the meaning of the “official proceeding” requirement. Absent extraordinary circumstances, the justices should render their decision and opinion in the case by the end of the current court term, which traditionally closes June 30 of each calendar year. (Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ... https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/17/scotus-arguments-dont-bode-well-for-doj-prosecutors-charging-j6rs-under-federal-obstruction-statute/

Imagine that. Billslime takes an old thread that proves how the GOP has always been promoting OTC access for birth control, and tries (and fails) to attack Republicans, but only showing that he doesn't understand what "constitutionally unsound" means.

I was on a jury a few years back, but the funny part about being in a rural area showed up. I didn't know the accused, and even though I wasn't what you would call friends with the judge, she did have to notify the attorneys that she had been at a neighborhood party that I was at also, a few nights before. .

They didn't all get there on their own. Who is organizing/paying ? Is ANY media curious ? .

Don't bother. He thinks being snarky is equivalent to being clever. Meanwhile, back at the thread.

Because it is what the Left does.

Government is using an obscure financial crimes statute about delaying Congressional proceeding to destroy the lives of J6 protesters. Gorsuch just asked whether pulling a fire alarm before a Congressional vote could qualify (e..g, what Democrat Jamaal Bowman did recently) and government atty says no. LOL

While Biden's World Burns, Dems Froth Over Trump's Kangaroo Trials STEPHEN KRUISER At first glance, it would seem like Democrats don't have much to be excited about these days. OK, that's only if you're glancing at reality. While virtually everything that Biden has touched is falling apart, the Democratic faithful are focused on their election tampering efforts via various corrupt courts. They like to talk about Donald Trump all of the time because talking about Joe Biden is too painful for them. If they can keep their Orange Man Bad in an orange jumpsuit fantasies alive, they can temporarily forget about Biden's wrecking ball. The rogue's gallery of scofflaw prosecutors and judges they've put together have kept the fantasy alive for now. Legal precedent be damned, these commies are just making up the law as they go along. The first of the "Iron Curtain Comes to America" show trials got underway yesterday in Manhattan, and the Trump-haters are rejoicing. https://pjmedia.com/stephen-kruiser/2024/04/16/the-morning-briefing-n4928188

The case against Trump is a joke because the records violation of which Trump is accused is a misdemeanor, on which the statute of limitations has run. It is only a felony if the records were falsified to cover up another crime. That is what Bragg alleges. But what crime? Bragg’s indictment doesn’t say. Presumably his theory will be that the payment to Daniels was a campaign finance violation, only it wasn’t. The payment was legal and no false filing was made with the FEC. Trump has not been charged with, let alone convicted of, any such violation. So the case against Trump is terrible. But does it matter? The only reason Bragg brought the case (and the only reason the other prosecutions of Trump have been brought) is so that Democratic Party news outlets can say that Trump is a “convicted felon.” That is all that matters until November. Any conviction will most likely be reversed on appeal, but not until long after the election. So the trial is really a show, with the jury in the starring role. Can Donald Trump get a fair trial in front of a Manhattan jury? No. He is reviled there. Jurors will understand the politics of what they are engaged in, and my guess is that they will play their part to the letter. Any trial lawyer will tell you that the most important thing he does in any trial is pick the jury. And here, I am afraid that is a hopeless task. So, good luck to Trump’s lawyers. Maybe lightning will strike and the jury will include one honest man (or woman). But don’t count on it. Regardless of the weakness of the case, a conviction is highly probable, with the result that newspapers and TV networks will do their “convicted felon” shtick for the next six months. The consequences of that are unpredictable, but they can’t be good. https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/04/trump-goes-on-trial.php

These two stories were published on the same day a few weeks ago. https://notthebee.com/article/cbs-news-and-nbc-news-published-these-two-stories-on-the-same-day-a-few-weeks-ago .

Well, it's obvious why but I doubt if David Frum comes out and says it. I was halfway through the headline when I wrote the post title. I'm reading "Why Biden Should Not Debate Trump/The networks want their show, but to give the challenger equal status on a TV stage would be a dire normalization of his attempted coup" by David Frum (in The Atlantic). The second half of the headline confirms my suspicion. We're not supposed to read Biden's refusal to debate to mean that he lacks the mental capacity to debate. Frum and others will instruct us, repeatedly, in articles repeating the talking point. Click for more »https://althouse.blogspot.com/2024/04/well-its-obvious-why-but-i-doubt-if.html#more https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/04/joe-biden-donald-trump-presidential-debate/678079/ Posted by Ann Althouse

Joe Biden’s Wars I & I Editorial Board It’s long been known around Washington, as former Defense Secretary Robert Gates once said, that Joe Biden “has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four” – now five – “decades.” So the conflicts raging around the world and forecasts of World War III should have been expected. But, hey, at least we didn’t elect in 2020 the guy who sent impetuous tweets that upset elites and snowflakes. As president, Biden has projected American weakness in a Carter-esque fashion, starting with his chaotic and deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan, which a State Department report said suffered from “constantly changing policy guidance,” and a top general described as a “strategic failure.” He’s been no Ronald Reagan. He’s not even been a Donald Trump. So it’s no coincidence that Russia invaded Ukraine a little more than two years after Biden took office. And we all knew it was coming, because three months after Biden stumbled into the Oval Office, Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, as Sen. Tom Cotton noted just before the invasion, “sent tens of thousands of soldiers, tanks, and munitions to the Ukrainian border.” In response, Biden proposed a presidential summit in Geneva, which, says Cotton, elevated “Russia in the eyes of the world” and “allowed the image-obsessed Putin to strut on the international stage and pretend that Russia was once again an equal to the United States.” But at least we didn’t elect the guy whom the media accused – falsely – of being a Russian stooge. While that war tore through city and country, Hamas invaded Israel last October, killing, raping, pillaging, and taking Israelis (as well as several American citizens) hostage. Biden’s response has been incoherent, to say the least. After initially saying that the U.S. stands with Israel, he’s done nothing but undermine Israel’s effort to defend itself. Hamas’ attack was aided and abetted by a newly enriched Iran, a country that had been knocked back on its heels under Trump until Biden fattened the regime with billions of dollars, following the lead of his former boss, Barack Obama. More at the link: https://issuesinsights.com/2024/04/16/joe-bidens-wars/ .

Indiana Court Rejects Claim That Driver's Licenses Must Include Third Gender Option Reason, by EugeneVolokh From Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Simmons, decided yesterday by the Indiana Court of Appeals: (snip) "The Appellees initiated litigation seeking to compel the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles and Commissioner Joseph B. Hoage to include a third gender option on driver's licenses and identification cards. The trial court so ordered. Finding error, we reverse and remand with instructions" https://reason.com/volokh/2024/04/10/indiana-court-rejects-claim-that-drivers-licenses-must-include-third-gender-option/ .

.

Supreme Court Upholds Idaho’s Ban on Puberty-Blocking Drugs, Sex-Change Surgeries for Minors by Zach Kessel The United States Supreme Court on Monday allowed Idaho to enforce its statewide ban on puberty-blocking drugs, hormone therapy, and sex-change surgeries for minors. The Court, in a 6–3 decision, ruled that the 2023 law may go into effect, though the state cannot apply it to the two plaintiffs who challenged the legislation. The Court granted Idaho’s emergency request after U.S. District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled that the state’s government could not enforce the law during ongoing litigation and argued that the measure likely violates what she saw as parents’ rights to decide the medical treatment their children receive. https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-upholds-idahos-ban-on-puberty-blocking-drugs-sex-change-surgeries-for-minors/ .