Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jack Smith Signals He’ll Try To Circumvent SCOTUS If It Says Obstruction Charges Aren’t Real Crimes
The Federalist ^ | 04/10/2024 | Shawn Fleetwood

Posted on 04/10/2024 10:38:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Smith is trying to stretch Section 1512 in hopes of bypassing a potential ruling deeming the government’s abuse of the law illegal.

Democrat hacks have claimed that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictments against Donald Trump over the former president’s challenging of the 2020 election are legally sound. So why is Smith grasping at legal straws in his latest court filing?

On Monday, Smith filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court urging the nation’s highest judicial body to dismiss Trump’s presidential immunity claims. Citing the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, the special counsel indicted Trump in August over his speech questioning the administration of the 2020 election. This prompted the former president’s legal team to file a motion essentially arguing that Trump “should be immune from prosecution because the conduct he is accused of constituted official acts of the president,” as Fox News summarized.

“The President’s constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed does not entail a general right to violate them,” Smith claimed.

As legacy media rushed to elevate the special counsel’s arguments against Trump’s immunity claims, they ignored a footnote in Monday’s filing that telegraphs how Smith will attempt to have the former president convicted on several counts — even if those same charges are effectively dismissed in a separate case by SCOTUS.

[RELATED: 6 Ways Jack Smith’s Latest Indictment Is Legally Flawed And Politically Shady]

The footnote in question pertains to 18 U.S. Code § 1512(c), which carries up to a 20-year prison sentence for anyone who “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.

Two of the four charges Smith filed against Trump are based on 1512(c). Smith’s preferred reading of the statute would allow the DOJ to interpret subsection (2) incredibly broadly. As my colleague Tristan Justice previously reported, the statute’s “obstruction of an official proceeding” provision has also been used by federal authorities “to charge so far more than 300 [Jan. 6] defendants with felonies in the [past] three years.”

“It’s the most frequently charged Jan. 6 felony, and the basis for keeping many protesters in jail without bond for months or even years before they reached trial,” Justice noted. “It’s never before been used in the way the DOJ has applied it to Jan. 6 protesters.”

A lawsuit challenging the Justice Department’s abuse of the statute is currently being considered by the Supreme Court, with oral arguments in Fischer v. United States to be heard on April 16. Joseph Fischer, a Jan. 6 defendant, argues the second half of the statute isn’t a license to prosecute anything that “otherwise” impeded a proceeding but rather should be interpreted as a modifier to the first half of the statute. In other words, as The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland explained, the argument is that “the statute only criminalized conduct that rendered evidence unavailable to an ‘official proceeding.’”

A decision in Fischer’s favor would seemingly negate the two 1512(c)-related charges against Trump and “upend hundreds of charges filed by federal prosecutors against those present at the Jan. 6 Capitol riot,” according to Justice.

In an apparent attempt to sidestep such a ruling, however, Smith argued in his Monday brief that even if SCOTUS deems the DOJ’s use of 1512(c)(2) unlawful, the related charges filed against Trump should still stand because Trump somehow impaired evidence for use in an official proceeding.

“Petitioner asserts … that the grant of review in Fischer v. United States … suggests that the Section 1512(c)(2) charges here impermissibly stretch the statute. But whether the Court interprets Section 1512(c)(2) consistently with a natural reading of its text or adopts the evidence-impairment gloss urged by the petitioner in Fischer, the Section 1512 charges in this case are valid,” Smith wrote, additionally claiming that “the use of falsehoods or creation of ‘false’ documents satisfies an evidence-impairment interpretation.”

As investigative reporter Julie Kelly explained, Smith is essentially contending that “the alternative electoral certificates” supported by Trump and his election team and submitted to Congress “represent ‘documents’ that were fraudulently used in an ‘official proceeding.'” By arguing this, Smith is attempting to preserve his ability to go after Trump based on subsection (1) of the statute even if his ability to prosecute based on subsection (2) is nullified.

This argument requires Smith to make the case that “Pieces of paper signed and sent by other Americans to protest of a rigged election are now equal to accounting records destroyed in service of covering up a crime,” Kelly explained. It’s worth noting that contingent electors casting votes for their presidential candidate is neither illegal nor unprecedented.

[READ NEXT: Why SCOTUS Will Likely Smack Down Two Of Jack Smith’s Get-Trump Charges As Non-Crimes]

Smith is desperately trying to stretch the 1512(c) statute in the hopes that he can bypass a potential ruling from SCOTUS deeming the government’s abuse of the law illegal. Such a slimy maneuver seeks to give federal prosecutors with Joe Biden’s DOJ the power to continue their lawfare against Trump ahead of the 2024 election.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: arrestgarland; arrestjacksmith; dojsedition; jacksmith; jerksmith; obstruction; scotus; shortdropsuddenstop
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 04/10/2024 10:38:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Another side effect of 8 years of O-Bomb-mah ruling the roost?


2 posted on 04/10/2024 10:41:20 AM PDT by ASOC (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If SCOTUS sides with Trump and Smith tries that Trump should then completely refuse to cooperate any further.


3 posted on 04/10/2024 10:44:38 AM PDT by V_TWIN (America...so great even the people that hate it refuse to leave!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Using specious laws as a cudgel to slay the democrat's number one Republican rival is even worse than hell holes like Haiti and Cuba.

America is better than this but I guess Jack Smith is not. When are the adults going to wake up and take care of this little shithead?

4 posted on 04/10/2024 10:45:11 AM PDT by Bullish (...And just like that, I was dropped from the ping-list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So now Jack Smith is a SCOTUS DENIER?


5 posted on 04/10/2024 10:45:24 AM PDT by Singermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He deserves a helicopter ride.


6 posted on 04/10/2024 10:47:35 AM PDT by cowboyusa (AT THIS POINT, I'M WARMING TO AN AMERICAN PINOCHETE. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Just like President Retard when he gets knocked down for breaking laws


7 posted on 04/10/2024 10:47:55 AM PDT by NWFree (Sigma male 🤪)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The Supremes should take this into consideration when they decide the issue of whether Smith was legitimately assigned.


8 posted on 04/10/2024 10:49:09 AM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (When your business model depends on slave labor, you're always going to need more slaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ASOC

I am just so shocked that these bastards have not been disbarred already!! I thought the law of the land rested squarely on the Supreme Court and whatever they ruled they ruled and everybody abided by it. These bastards need to be disbarred all of them they’re corrupt to the core! If they continue this way, then rest assure that the American citizens will no longer obey the written laws on the books that have been imposed on them since the foundation of this nation. I thought it Supreme Court Justice had control of district they were in charge of … whose district is New York? iThey should recommend they be disbarred immediately on all these pieces of 💩!


9 posted on 04/10/2024 10:49:48 AM PDT by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I certainly don’t agree with Smith’s theory of the case as it currently is charged, but identifying alternative legal theories in support of your position is just good and competent lawyering.


10 posted on 04/10/2024 10:50:59 AM PDT by Bob Wills is still the king (Just a Texas Playboy at heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The Old Soviets are gasping is surprise....................


11 posted on 04/10/2024 10:51:03 AM PDT by Red Badger (Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegals are put up in 5 Star hotels....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
From my personal standpoint, the most important development of the last two years is that I now consider any lawyer to be irreparably defective as a candidate for elected office on the national level.

I would vote for a child molester in a presidential election before I ever vote for a lawyer again.

12 posted on 04/10/2024 10:53:47 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (If something in government doesn’t make sense, you can be sure it makes dollars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
“The President’s DHS Secretary's constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed does not entail a general right to violate them,”

See how that works both ways?

Bet Mad Jack The Grand Iniquisitor would argue six ways from Sunday that it doesn't.

13 posted on 04/10/2024 10:55:35 AM PDT by Regulator (It's fraud, Jim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cowboyusa

7.62 is a way cheaper option. Helicopter ride contributes to globull warming with all the gas needed to get to a good altitude.


14 posted on 04/10/2024 10:58:05 AM PDT by OHPatriot (Si vis pacem, para bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The legal hack Jack Smith has confirmed he is a tyrant. We have laws against tyranny, and it’s past time to start enforcing them.
This paid legal assassin should be brought up on trial himself.


15 posted on 04/10/2024 10:58:06 AM PDT by Fireone (Who killed Obama's chef?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Smith is a true minion of Hellspawn Beelzebama!


16 posted on 04/10/2024 10:58:14 AM PDT by sheik yerbouty ( Make America and the world a jihad free zone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Jack Smith... Yes, Jack Smith...

How many divisions does he have, again?


17 posted on 04/10/2024 10:58:28 AM PDT by OKSooner ("You won't like what comes after America." - Leonard Cohen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Smith thinks he has them by the SCROTUS.


18 posted on 04/10/2024 11:04:15 AM PDT by moovova ("The NEXT ELECTION is the most important election of our lifetimes!“ LOL...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob Wills is still the king
... but identifying alternative legal theories in support of your position is just good and competent lawyering.

From my conversations with attorneys in several states, this approach to "lawyering" is considered highly unethical when employed by a prosecutor.

A prosecutor's job isn't to run off on wild tangents with remote plausible connections to existing statutes in a desperate attempt to pursue a criminal conviction against a citizen whose innocence is presumed in the absence of solid evidence.

19 posted on 04/10/2024 11:05:17 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (If something in government doesn’t make sense, you can be sure it makes dollars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He has a long standing record of pushing novel theories, being sanctioned, overruled, and getting struck down 8-0 (actual 9-0) by the supreme court.
He has spent most of his career outside the USA and as a practical matter, is a citizen of Holland.

And now he has decided that insulting the court is a bright idea. Complete assclown.


20 posted on 04/10/2024 11:24:58 AM PDT by DesertRhino (2016 Star Wars, 2020 The Empire Strikes Back, 2024... RETURN OF THE JEDI. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson