Supreme Court to weigh if Jan. 6 rioters can be charged with obstruction

Defense lawyers say prosecutors improperly stretched the law by charging hundreds with obstruction of an official proceeding

In the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, federal prosecutors had to decide what charges to bring against hundreds of participants in the pro-Trump mob that disrupted the certification of a presidential election for the first time in U.S. history.

In more than 350 cases, they included a federal charge that carries a hefty 20-year maximum penalty and is part of a law enacted after the exposure of massive fraud and shredding of documents during the collapse of the energy giant Enron.

As of this month, more than 100 rioters have been convicted and sentenced under that statute for obstructing or impeding an official proceeding — in this case the joint session of Congress that convened on Jan. 6 to formally certify Joe Biden’s 2020 victory.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments about whether prosecutors improperly stretched the law by charging people with that violation in the first place.

The court’s decision could have political implications for this year’s election, since Donald Trump — the likely Republican nominee — has made accusations of prosecutorial overreach a core part of his appeal to voters. The case could also directly impact Trump’s own trial for allegedly trying to remain in power after his 2020 defeat; two of the four charges he faces are based on the obstruction statute, and he could move to have those charges dismissed if the Supreme Court rules for the rioters.

What did he say that isn’t factually correct?  Not counting speculation about what is going to happen in the future which nobody knows.  And are you seriously comparing his analysis to that of Barbara Streisand?

I made the mistake of viewing that video by Tarl Warwick (aka Styxhexenhammer666). He is utterly clueless on this subject because he disregards or doesn't know that Putin will not settle for anything less than total control of Ukraine - by direct control or by a proxy government. He disses celebrities for their positions because they have no expertise that he is aware of, but he is himself known only for being a political/religious bloviating self-created celebrity. Pot, meet kettle.

The following claims could have come from past alter egos of Styx in the previous wars that Russia and the Soviet Union lost to smaller countries:

1994: "It's delusional to think Chechnya can win." (First Chechan War, 1994-1996)
1979: "It's delusional to think Afghanistan can win." (1979 - 1989)
1919: "It's delusional to think Poland can win." (Polish-Soviet war of 1919-1920j
1918: "It's delusional to think Estonia can win." (Estonian war of independence, 1918 -1920)
1918: "It's delusional to think Latvia can win." (Latvian war of independence, 1918 -1920)

Those are just the ones in the twentieth century.