Justice Clarence Thomas Grills DOJ Lawyer on January 6 ‘Obstruction’ Statute That Could Torpedo Jack Smith’s DC Case Against Trump (AUDIO)

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard 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.

Justice Clarence Thomas grilled DOJ Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar as she droned on and on about how the government is fairly using the §1512(c)(2) statute to prosecute hundreds of J6 defendants for merely walking through the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Justice Thomas pointed out that there have been many violent protests that have interfered with proceedings (Kavanaugh hearings).

“There have been many violent protests that have interfered with proceedings. Has the government applied this provision to other protests in the past and has this been the government’s position throughout the lifespan of the statute?” Justice Thomas asked the DOJ lawyer.

Justice Thomas asked Prelogar if the government had ever used this provision for other protestors.

Prelogar broke her back trying to explain to the Supreme Court why leftist protestors weren’t prosecuted as January 6 defendants were.

AUDIO:

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

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!

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.

This post was originally published on this site