Staff Reports
In a recent turn of events, former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy has pointed out the glaring oversight by many in downplaying the significance of the Supreme Court’s examination of the Biden DOJ’s use of felony “obstruction of an official proceeding” laws. McCarthy highlighted the potential for a major shake-up in Jack Smith’s January 6 indictment against former President Donald Trump if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the defendants in Fischer v. United States.
The case at hand, Fischer v. United States, revolves around the obstruction count, where peaceful January 6 protesters have been charged under 18 USC Section 1512(c)(2) for obstructing official proceedings. This serious felony charge carries a hefty maximum prison sentence of 20 years. It’s worth noting that numerous defendants have already faced substantial prison terms under this statute, despite their involvement in what some may consider low-level misdemeanors.
Legal Expert Identifies Case That Could 'Blow Up' Jack Smith's Entire Witch Hunthttps://t.co/Y0GRAa92ti
— ????Josh Dunlap???? ULTRA-MAGA (@JDunlap1974) March 5, 2024
Legal representatives for January 6 defendant Joseph Fischer have underscored the inconsistency in the interpretation of Section 1512(c)(2) by the D.C. Circuit compared to other courts of appeal. This discrepancy has raised significant concerns about the potential overreach of the statute and its application in the context of protests at the seat of government.
McCarthy’s appearance on Fox News shed light on the pivotal role that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Fischer v. United States could play in Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump. With two key counts in Smith’s indictment hanging in the balance, the decision on the obstruction case could have far-reaching implications. McCarthy emphasized the potential catastrophic blow to Smith’s case against Trump if the Justice Department is found to have misapplied the statute in question.
Additionally, the Supreme Court will also deliberate on Trump’s assertion of presidential immunity in the January 6 case. This ruling could further impact the legal landscape surrounding the events of that fateful day. Stay tuned as these critical legal battles unfold, potentially reshaping the narrative and outcomes for key figures involved in the aftermath of January 6.
