Big hearing today in Oath Keepers case. Two motions on the schedule - change of venue and motion to dismiss obstruction of official proceeding count.
Listening now. Last month, Judge Mehta scolded DOJ for discovery delays in the case:
amgreatness.com/2021/08/13/the…
Listening now. Last month, Judge Mehta scolded DOJ for discovery delays in the case:
amgreatness.com/2021/08/13/the…
First trial date is set for end of January for detained defendants. Five Oath Keepers are behind bars awaiting trial, some have been in jail since January. Accused of no violent crimes.
Mehta addressing Ken Harrelson -- John Pierce was his attorney. He's been MIA.
Mehta addressing Ken Harrelson -- John Pierce was his attorney. He's been MIA.
David Fischer is Thomas Caldwell's attorney. He has filed a lengthy motion that argues obstruction of an official proceeding did not apply to Electoral College certification. Other attorneys have as well.
There is zero change Mehta will dismiss this charge.
There is zero change Mehta will dismiss this charge.
DOJ has charged about 200 defendants with obstruction -- it's a felony punishable by up to 20 years in jail. It's been added to mostly misdemeanor cases like Jacob Chansley and Paul Hodgkins who both pleaded guilty to obstruction.
Here is my explainer on the charge from March.
I don't see any Beltway judge dismissing the charge bc they know the political ramifications.
amgreatness.com/2021/03/15/cap…
I don't see any Beltway judge dismissing the charge bc they know the political ramifications.
amgreatness.com/2021/03/15/cap…
Judge Moss last month warned DOJ the charge suffered from a "constitutional vagueness problem."
More on the Oath Keepers case here from me in June
amgreatness.com/2021/06/03/gov…
More on the Oath Keepers case here from me in June
amgreatness.com/2021/06/03/gov…
The qualifier "knowingly corruptly" in the statute is another snag for DOJ. This statute was passed in 2002 in response to Enron scandal - when GW Bush signed it, he explicitly warned it was not to be used against political protesters.
Mehta accused defendants of "crossing barriers, rushing past police to enter the Capitol with the intent to obstruct an official proceeding."
(They haven't been convicted. You see where this is headed.)
REMEMBER FOLKS THIS WILL HAVE TO APPLY TO FUTURE POLITICAL PROTESTS IN DC!
(They haven't been convicted. You see where this is headed.)
REMEMBER FOLKS THIS WILL HAVE TO APPLY TO FUTURE POLITICAL PROTESTS IN DC!
One lawyer brings up interruption of SCOTUS hearings.
Mehta: But they weren't charged with obstruction of official proceeding.
NO DUH that's the point.
Kavanaugh protesters got slap on a wrist for doing same thing in October 2018.
Mehta: But they weren't charged with obstruction of official proceeding.
NO DUH that's the point.
Kavanaugh protesters got slap on a wrist for doing same thing in October 2018.
These judges DO NOT want to hear comparisons to Kavanaugh protests. Activists had the same objective - to halt official business of Congress.
Lawyer: This has never been applied to a demonstration in 20 years.
Very dangerous precedent here.
Lawyer: This has never been applied to a demonstration in 20 years.
Very dangerous precedent here.
Mehta turns to DOJ to defend obstruction charge. It is unambiguous, prosecutor says.
"I wish it were that simple," Mehta says. Notes statute born of corporate crime, Enron. It's a "stretch" to go from document shredding to activity on January 6. 1512 is tampering with evidence.
"I wish it were that simple," Mehta says. Notes statute born of corporate crime, Enron. It's a "stretch" to go from document shredding to activity on January 6. 1512 is tampering with evidence.
Mehta: "This resembles nothing like the shredding of documents."
"There is no limitation to what 1512c2 can cover?"
DOJ: No.
WHOA.
"There is no limitation to what 1512c2 can cover?"
DOJ: No.
WHOA.
Mehta: Very different than destroying documents, tampering with a witness.
DOJ: They were trying to intimidate Congress. LOL.
Mehta asks if someone came in to interrupt court hearing, could they be charged with 1512c2?
DOJ: Yes.
1A being criminalized right before our eyes.
DOJ: They were trying to intimidate Congress. LOL.
Mehta asks if someone came in to interrupt court hearing, could they be charged with 1512c2?
DOJ: Yes.
1A being criminalized right before our eyes.
Caldwell lawyer again noted no one has been prosecuted under this statute for this type of conduct.
Double standard of justice for Trump supporters.
Double standard of justice for Trump supporters.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
