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.
“The 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 the 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.
via magatribute
