I had thought that DOJ only brought obstruction cases against J6 participants who had personally engaged in some violent act, not necessarily assaulting a police officer, but something. I thought DOJ did that to avoid conflicts with the interference with Congress statute, the one the Code Pink people were charged with. Is that not true? Are there any obstruction cases being brought against people who did nothing more than trespass?
From what I've read, the DOJ has charged more than 300 protesters with obstruction. I don't know what each of them is accused of having done. However, according to reports, a number of the 300 didn't assault anyone.
From what I've read, around 1,000 people have been charged by the DOJ in connection with Jan. 6. From this, I infer that the DOJ has only brought obstruction charges against people it believes did more than just trespass. However, it may be the case that some of those charged, in fact, did no more than that.
Again, I'm not sure what the "something" more than trespass and less than assault is. Is it yelling? Disregarding orders from the police? Pushing one's way into a building or area?
Whatever the case, I think Sen. Cotton's point is valid. The people who tried to block the Jim Jordan hearing did more than just trespass. Same with the Tennessee protesters. Yet, the DOJ will not investigate them and, in fact, Biden was full of praise for those who obstructed the Tennessee House.
The double standard between the January 6 protestors and those picketing outside Supreme Court justices' homes is even worse than it looks. The January 6 obstructers are criminally liable for obstruction only if they obstructed with a corrupt intent, and it's hard to see any motive beyond the obstruction itself. The SCOTUS protestors can be prosecuted if they picketed in an attempt to change a justice's mind, with no need to show corrupt intent. Jim Dueholm
I had thought that DOJ only brought obstruction cases against J6 participants who had personally engaged in some violent act, not necessarily assaulting a police officer, but something. I thought DOJ did that to avoid conflicts with the interference with Congress statute, the one the Code Pink people were charged with. Is that not true? Are there any obstruction cases being brought against people who did nothing more than trespass?
Thanks for raising this question.
From what I've read, the DOJ has charged more than 300 protesters with obstruction. I don't know what each of them is accused of having done. However, according to reports, a number of the 300 didn't assault anyone.
From what I've read, around 1,000 people have been charged by the DOJ in connection with Jan. 6. From this, I infer that the DOJ has only brought obstruction charges against people it believes did more than just trespass. However, it may be the case that some of those charged, in fact, did no more than that.
Again, I'm not sure what the "something" more than trespass and less than assault is. Is it yelling? Disregarding orders from the police? Pushing one's way into a building or area?
Whatever the case, I think Sen. Cotton's point is valid. The people who tried to block the Jim Jordan hearing did more than just trespass. Same with the Tennessee protesters. Yet, the DOJ will not investigate them and, in fact, Biden was full of praise for those who obstructed the Tennessee House.
I don't see what the disruption of the Tennessee House has to do with this. That was not the disruption of a federal proceeding.
The double standard between the January 6 protestors and those picketing outside Supreme Court justices' homes is even worse than it looks. The January 6 obstructers are criminally liable for obstruction only if they obstructed with a corrupt intent, and it's hard to see any motive beyond the obstruction itself. The SCOTUS protestors can be prosecuted if they picketed in an attempt to change a justice's mind, with no need to show corrupt intent. Jim Dueholm