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

Skip to comments.

Jack Smith Suggests He Will Ignore Supreme Court if it Reverses ‘Obstruction’ Statute
Gateway Pundit ^ | Apr. 11, 2024 11:20 am | Cristina Laila

Posted on 04/11/2024 11:54:41 AM PDT by Red Badger

Special Counsel Jack Smith suggested he ignore the Supreme Court if it reverses the obstruction statute this summer.

The US Supreme Court recently announced it will hear oral arguments in Fischer v. United States and at issue is statute 18 USC §1512(c)(2):

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.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on Fischer v United States this summer which means hundreds of J6 cases could be upended.

Biden’s corrupt DOJ has charged more than 300 J6ers with 18 USC §1512(c)(2). Additionally, two of the four charges against Trump in Jack Smith’s DC case are conspiracy to obstruct so the Supreme Court’s ruling could torpedo the special counsel’s case against Trump as well.

Jack Smith suggested he will find a workaround if the Supreme Court reverses two of the charges against Trump.

Smith claims the ‘obstruction’ charges will still stand against Trump because the alternative electoral certificates represent “documents” that were fraudulently used in an “official proceeding.”

These papers weren’t even sent or signed by Trump!

Excerpt from The Federalist:

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.”

Jack Smith isn’t the only one who is threatening to circumvent the Supreme Court.

Last month US Attorney from DC Matthew Graves fired a warning shot to the US Supreme Court – and J6ers serving time for 18 USC §1512(c)(2), the ‘obstruction’ statute pending before SCOTUS.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: jacksmith; january6; judgecannon; judgechutkan; supremecourt; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: Red Badger

The potatus ignored the SC ruling so I guess Smith can, too...


21 posted on 04/11/2024 12:37:16 PM PDT by Flaming Conservative ((Pray without ceasing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Gee, I wonder what laws we can ignore WRT certain people’s behavior.


22 posted on 04/11/2024 12:41:12 PM PDT by bk1000 (Banned from Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Jack Smith's argument: The intel and DC deep-state are the highest executive power of the USA. Our random and political designations and proclamations are the final law of the land

The musings of the supreme court are not to be taken seriously. /s

23 posted on 04/11/2024 12:42:08 PM PDT by oldbrowser ( democrats and Democracy are polar opposites)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Just like Biden. You must obey any court rulings, including the Supreme Court’s ruling, but under the Democrats two tier justice system I don’t have to.


24 posted on 04/11/2024 12:47:06 PM PDT by antidemoncrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Dan Rather (not exactly a Conservative and yes, often a hypocrite like all liberals) was fond of saying “This is a nation of laws, not of men”.

Jack Smith has decided he can be the highest law in the land because he is being paid to destroy a political enemy.

What say ye now, Dan?


25 posted on 04/11/2024 12:50:28 PM PDT by motor_racer ("We're gonna punish our enemies, and we're gonna reward our friends" - Barak Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PGR88

Jack ass is saying -

This isn’t fair! We cheated fair and square.


26 posted on 04/11/2024 12:51:07 PM PDT by mund1011 (We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Listen guys and gals these Government Nazis types just need to be taken out by any and all means...Really just sick and tired of them still breath. May sound harsh but only cure.


27 posted on 04/11/2024 12:56:13 PM PDT by dpetty121263
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

The left screams “Nobody is above the law,” while simultaneously declaring itself above the law. Go figure.


28 posted on 04/11/2024 12:56:21 PM PDT by cross_bearer_02
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Okay, let’s stop foolin’ around and disqualify this sumbitch! He’s unlawfully intsalled as “special prosecutor!” The defense motion is out there.


29 posted on 04/11/2024 12:58:26 PM PDT by old school
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Insurrection!!


30 posted on 04/11/2024 1:38:18 PM PDT by coloradan (They're not the mainstream media, they're the gaslight media. It's what they do. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeplorablePaul

They need to be Nifonged.


31 posted on 04/11/2024 2:10:17 PM PDT by curious7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cowboyusa

Yeah, but fuel costs serious money and a rope is reusable.


32 posted on 04/11/2024 2:11:46 PM PDT by curious7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

If the law doesn’t apply to Justice, then it doesn’t apply to anybody and we are officially an anarchy. Have fun!


33 posted on 04/11/2024 2:14:25 PM PDT by Sirius Lee (Do not submit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

Smith, et al, have to ignore the SCOTUS and the Constitution to protect us from the threat to democracy that DJT represents . . .


34 posted on 04/11/2024 2:23:29 PM PDT by MCSETots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RoseofTexas
Jack Smith channels Jack Sparrow....

They’re not exactly rules. More like guidelines.

Maybe we all should adopt the same attitude.

35 posted on 04/11/2024 2:33:09 PM PDT by sjmjax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MCSETots
"...to protect us from the threat to democracy ...

That's 'the threat to "DEMOCRATcy"' not "democracy" that they are worried about. (ignoring for the moment that this is supposed to be a Representative Constitutional Republic not a democracy.)

36 posted on 04/11/2024 2:55:54 PM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

If this happens, I suggest that someone pin his oath of office
to his lapel demonstrating to passers-bye that “to support and
defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and
domestic” is not a casual vow.

It is a sacred oath, and that the failure to abide by that oath
has consequences.


37 posted on 04/11/2024 3:02:18 PM PDT by T. Rustin Noone (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RoseofTexas
Why should we even obey the laws on the books? If the scumbags can do whatever they please why should we the American citizens obey the written laws?

Because they have the power to enforce them and we don't.

38 posted on 04/11/2024 3:56:32 PM PDT by itsahoot (Many Republicans are secretly Democrats, no Democrats are secretly Republicans. Dan Bongino.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: curious7
Good memory. Nifong. Those poor boys at Duke learned a bitter life lesson. Tip generously. I could have told them that.


39 posted on 04/11/2024 4:22:27 PM PDT by DeplorablePaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

He is PURE EVIL and needs an EXORCISM by his RABBI!!!


40 posted on 04/11/2024 4:55:25 PM PDT by Ann Archy (Abortion....... The HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 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