SCOTUS asks why prosecute J6 protesters but not Jamaal (fireman) bowman?

T

Text Drivers are Killers

Biden likes little girls
No justice in america for conservatives while democrats are always above the law.

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2024/0...ary-6th-protesters-and-jamaal-bowman-n2172858

apr 16 2024 Oral arguments are taking place on Tuesday in the case of Fischer vs. United States, and things have already gotten contentious. They've also gotten hilarious depending on your viewpoint.

The issue the Supreme Court is looking to settle is whether the DOJ's use of a statute regarding obstructing a congressional proceeding applies in Joseph Fischer's case. That decision could affect the cases of hundreds of January 6th defendants and possibly scuttle some of the federal charges against Donald Trump.

To this point, the conservative justices have shown some skepticism of the government's case, which U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is presenting. On that front, Justice Neil Gorsuch asked a question that many of us have been pondering. Namely, he asked whether Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), who pulled a fire alarm before an important House vote and impeded a congressional proceeding, could be charged under the same statute. Astonishingly, the government responded with a "no."

Theoretically, the left-wing protesters who block roads and prevent official proceedings (in this case, court proceedings) from occurring could be charged under the same statute as the January 6th protesters

Returning to Bowman, he pulled a fire alarm during a voting session in the House of Representatives. Congressional members had to be evacuated, and the vote was postponed. That is a textbook example of obstructing an official proceeding, and the government's justification for not charging him is basically "because we say it doesn't count."
Click to expand...
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
No justice in america for conservatives while democrats are always above the law.
Click to expand...

If you read the actual argument and not what some right wing narrative you’d know that the response to Gorsuch’s sophomoric attempt to defend the Trump cause was that the attack on the Capitol, the Capitol police, was more than just an interruption of Congress, or a momentary delay that temporarily withheld proceedings.
 
archives said:
If you read the actual argument and not what some right wing narrative you’d know that the response to Gorsuch’s sophomoric attempt to defend the Trump cause was that the attack on the Capitol, the Capitol police, was more than just an interruption of Congress, or a momentary delay that temporarily withheld proceedings.
Click to expand...

Yup.

And also INTENT.

If the SC Jurists are not playing stupid, they can address the issue of 'Intent' which is key to most charges, including these ones.
 
Trump is on trial.
People are not trying to find his remains.
That's what should be going on now.

Instead, he's right there on trial,
and at the end of the story, his hand picked SCOTUS
will set him free.

Annoying idiots like TDAK will continue to walk about freely
on the dumpster-fire-remains of what was America.

Our relevance on the global scene will be non-existent.
Our existence on the domestic scene will be intolerable.

Obama got Bin Laden as he was supposed to.
Biden just let Trump go to court.
It's sickening.
 
archives said:
If you read the actual argument and not what some right wing narrative you’d know that the response to Gorsuch’s sophomoric attempt to defend the Trump cause was that the attack on the Capitol, the Capitol police, was more than just an interruption of Congress, or a momentary delay that temporarily withheld proceedings.
Click to expand...

That's what the left wing media says. No one believes it.

There was no insurrection. People have a right to challenge elections. Democracy is dead if you ban that.
 
archives said:
If you read the actual argument and not what some right wing narrative you’d know that the response to Gorsuch’s sophomoric attempt to defend the Trump cause was that the attack on the Capitol, the Capitol police, was more than just an interruption of Congress, or a momentary delay that temporarily withheld proceedings.
Click to expand...
Say what you want I have listened to the actual audio of the exchange. And the solicitor general response was basically because we say that doesn't count. That isn't going to fly with SCOTUS this is going to be a 6-3 vote and the government is going to lose. The ruling will gut Jack Smith's case against Trump.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Trump is on trial.
People are not trying to find his remains.
That's what should be going on now.

Instead, he's right there on trial,
and at the end of the story, his hand picked SCOTUS
will set him free.

Annoying idiots like TDAK will continue to walk about freely
on the dumpster-fire-remains of what was America.

Our relevance on the global scene will be non-existent.
Our existence on the domestic scene will be intolerable.

Obama got Bin Laden as he was supposed to.
Biden just let Trump go to court.
It's sickening.
Click to expand...

It is going to be a hung jury.
 
QP! said:
Yup.

And also INTENT.

If the SC Jurists are not playing stupid, they can address the issue of 'Intent' which is key to most charges, including these ones.
Click to expand...

Intent has ZERO to do with it. The act is what counts. By your standard someone robbing a bank to give to charity should be excused for robbing the bank.
 
archives said:
If you read the actual argument and not what some right wing narrative you’d know that the response to Gorsuch’s sophomoric attempt to defend the Trump cause was that the attack on the Capitol, the Capitol police, was more than just an interruption of Congress, or a momentary delay that temporarily withheld proceedings.
Click to expand...

The 1/6 riot delayed nothing. Everything went on as planned.
 
archives said:
If you read the actual argument and not what some right wing narrative you’d know that the response to Gorsuch’s sophomoric attempt to defend the Trump cause was that the attack on the Capitol, the Capitol police, was more than just an interruption of Congress, or a momentary delay that temporarily withheld proceedings.
Click to expand...

Gorsuch was smart enough to realize your argument is nothing but left lip narrative........
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Intent has ZERO to do with it. The act is what counts. By your standard someone robbing a bank to give to charity should be excused for robbing the bank.
Click to expand...

You are showing your stupidity again as INTENT is key to these crimes and without intent THERE IS NO CRIME.

So if you, Terry, pull an alarm by accident that interrupts a proceeding there is no crime. But if you do it deliberately to interrupt the proceeding, it is a crime. But if a prosecutor believes he cannot prove your intent, he will not charge it.

Not every law requires intent, but most do.
 
Last edited:
Text Drivers are Killers said:
That's what the left wing media says. No one believes it.

There was no insurrection. People have a right to challenge elections. Democracy is dead if you ban that.
Click to expand...

We know, we know, it was just a peaceful protest inwhich a few got out of hand, having to quickly escort the VP out of the building for his own personal safety happens all the time
 
QP! said:
I am not going to prove you to you the J6 insurrectionists delayed the proceedings in the Senate. You are going to have to google that yourself.

It is a lie you are telling.
Click to expand...

The vote went on as planned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top