Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Fiendish Thingy
Fiendish Thingy's Journal
Fiendish Thingy's Journal
December 20, 2022
Much, much more, with evidence and receipts, at link above.
Marcy goes into great detail how the committees referral omits or ignores the stringent judicial standards for prosecuting obstruction, standards which the evidence gathered by the committee clearly shows has been met.
Hopefully, DOJ will feel free to ignore the committees framing of their obstruction referral, and proceed with their own, more judicially sound, prosecution.
Emptywheel: The Thinness of the January 6 committee's Obstruction referral
https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/12/20/the-thinness-of-the-january-6-committees-obstruction-referral/ dont so much mind that the Committee made these referrals. But I think they did a poor job of things.
For example, they dont even consider whether Trump is exposed for aiding and abetting the actual assaults, something that Judge Amit Mehta said is a plausible (civil) charge against Trump. Some of the Committees evidence, especially Trumps foreknowledge that the mob he sent to the Capitol was armed, would very much support such a charge. If Trump were held accountable for something like the tasing of Michael Fanone it would clarify how directly his actions contributed to the actual violence.
Im also mystified why the Committee referred the obstruction conspiracy under 371 without consideration of doing so under 1512(k), even as DOJ increasingly emphasizes the latter approach. If DOJs application of obstruction is upheld, then charging conspiracy on 1512 rather than 371 not only brings higher base level exposure (20 years as opposed to 5), but it also lays out enhancements for the use of violence. If this application of obstruction is upheld, by charging conspiracy under 1512(k), you have a ready way to hold Trump accountable for the physical threat to Mike Pence.
Its in the way that the Committee referred the obstruction charge, however, Im most disappointed. This referral matters, mostly, if it can be used by DOJ to bolster its own defense of the statute or by a sympathetic judge to write a compelling opinion.
And this referral is weak on several counts. First, even with evidence that Trump knew his mob was armed when he sent them to the Capitol, the referral does not incorporate emphasis that the David Carter opinion they rely on did: That Trump (and John Eastman) not only asked Mike Pence to do something illegal, but then used the mob as a tool to pressure Pence.
For example, they dont even consider whether Trump is exposed for aiding and abetting the actual assaults, something that Judge Amit Mehta said is a plausible (civil) charge against Trump. Some of the Committees evidence, especially Trumps foreknowledge that the mob he sent to the Capitol was armed, would very much support such a charge. If Trump were held accountable for something like the tasing of Michael Fanone it would clarify how directly his actions contributed to the actual violence.
Im also mystified why the Committee referred the obstruction conspiracy under 371 without consideration of doing so under 1512(k), even as DOJ increasingly emphasizes the latter approach. If DOJs application of obstruction is upheld, then charging conspiracy on 1512 rather than 371 not only brings higher base level exposure (20 years as opposed to 5), but it also lays out enhancements for the use of violence. If this application of obstruction is upheld, by charging conspiracy under 1512(k), you have a ready way to hold Trump accountable for the physical threat to Mike Pence.
Its in the way that the Committee referred the obstruction charge, however, Im most disappointed. This referral matters, mostly, if it can be used by DOJ to bolster its own defense of the statute or by a sympathetic judge to write a compelling opinion.
And this referral is weak on several counts. First, even with evidence that Trump knew his mob was armed when he sent them to the Capitol, the referral does not incorporate emphasis that the David Carter opinion they rely on did: That Trump (and John Eastman) not only asked Mike Pence to do something illegal, but then used the mob as a tool to pressure Pence.
Much, much more, with evidence and receipts, at link above.
Marcy goes into great detail how the committees referral omits or ignores the stringent judicial standards for prosecuting obstruction, standards which the evidence gathered by the committee clearly shows has been met.
Hopefully, DOJ will feel free to ignore the committees framing of their obstruction referral, and proceed with their own, more judicially sound, prosecution.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Sep 6, 2004, 12:00 PMNumber of posts: 15,601