This Could Be Very Interesting

On March 1 (updated March 2), Trending Politics posted an article about a recent decision by a federal appeals court in Washington D.C.

The article reports:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled Friday that defendant Larry Brock — a retired Air Force colonel who was sentenced to two years in federal prison for peacefully protesting in a building — was improperly sentenced. The court took issue with the inclusion of charges of “interference with the administration of justice.”

According to Circuit Judge Millett, who authored the court’s opinion, interference with Congress’ certification of the presidential election in 2021 does not apply to a sentence enhancement.

“Brock challenges both the district court’s interpretation of Section 1512(c)(2)’s elements and the sufficiency of the evidence to support that conviction. He also challenges the district court’s application of the three-level sentencing enhancement for interfering with the ‘administration of justice,’” the opinion reads.

The court upheld Brock’s conviction but disagreed with the sentencing. “”As for Brock’s sentence, we hold that the ‘administration of justice’ enhancement does not apply to interference with the legislative process of certifying electoral votes,” Judge Millett wrote.

Obviously this decision could affect the sentences of all the January 6th political prisoners.

The article concludes:

Brock was initially arrested and charged on January 6, 2021 on just two charges: knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, and violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.

The “interference” charge was added at a later date.

“Larry Brock participated in the violent January 6th riot at the United States Capitol that forced the evacuation of members of Congress and their staff and prevented Congress’s certification of the 2020 presidential election until the next day. After a bench trial, the court convicted Brock of six crimes, including corruptly obstructing Congress’s certification of the electoral count under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2),” Judge Millet wrote. “At sentencing, the district court applied a three level sentencing enhancement to Brock’s Section 1512(c)(2) conviction on the ground that Brock’s conduct resulted in ‘substantial interference with the administration of justice.’”

The Supreme Court is also reviewing the validity of the Biden DOJ’s use of the “obstruction of an official proceeding” statute.

Stay tuned.

 

This Is Appropriate

Fox 32 in Chicago is reporting that actor Jussie Smollett was indicted today in Chicago by special prosecutor Dan Webb, stemming from the alleged racist and anti-gay attack on him that occurred in January of 2019.

The article reports:

Smollett is due in court February 24 at the Criminal Court Building at 26th and California. He is indicted on six counts, accused of lying to Chicago police when he reported the attack last year, special prosecutor Webb said. Smollett faces six counts of disorderly conduct.

Mr. Smollett’s story was fishy from the start. As I am sure you remember, Jussie Smollett claimed to have been attacked by two Trump supporters wearing MAGA hats and shouting racial slurs. The attackers were also accused of shouting, “This is MAGA country.” That in itself should have raised suspicions–does anyone really believe that Chicago is MAGA country?

The article reports:

“Dan K. Webb, special prosecutor for Cook County, today announced that the Office of the Special Prosecutor (“OSP”) has now completed all of its investigative steps regarding Jussie Smollett, and has made the decision to further prosecute Mr. Smollett. Based on the recommendation of the OSP, a Cook County grand jury returned a six-count indictment charging Jussie Smollett with making four separate false reports to Chicago Police Department officers related to his false claims that he was the victim of a hate crime, knowing that he was not the victim of a crime,” Webb said in a statement.

Please follow the link to the article to read the details of the case.

Can’t Both Viewpoints Have A Parade?

Last weekend there was a Straight Pride Parade in Boston. A group of people decided that since there have been gay pride parades, they should be able to have a straight pride parade. As expected, there were protestors in attendance. Some of them were not very nice.

The Washington Times is reporting today that some of the people who misbehaved during the parade, who expected to get off with a slap on the wrist after being arrested, are not necessarily getting off that easily.

The article reports:

Two Boston Municipal Court judges refused to throw out the charges against the 18 defendants who appeared Tuesday in court, frustrating defense attorneys and prosecutors who sought to have minor charges dismissed, as reported by local news outlets.

Judge Thomas Horgan also told out-of-towners that they risked 90-day jail sentences if they set foot in Boston for any reason other than court and lawyer appointments, rejecting one defendant’s request to visit relatives in the city’s Jamaica Plain neighborhood.

“Stay out of Boston,” said Judge Horgan, according to the Boston Herald.

The article continues:

Meanwhile, Larry Calderone, vice president of the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association, praised the courtroom outcome, noting that many of those arrested came from outside the city and state and accusing them of coming to “create havoc.”

He said the four officers injured have not been able to return to work yet, and that the union wants the offenders “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

“A lot of the assaults that happened during the day, you only knew of a few of them,” Mr. Calderone told reporters outside the courtroom. “Many officers were assaulted throughout the day with bottles of urine being thrown at them, bottles of chemicals, bottles of unidentified material, rocks.”

The city is looking into complaints that police used excessive force during the event.

“Multiple times I asked why I was arrested, he said ‘for calling me a pig,’” Joshua Abrams, who was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, told WBZ-TV before his arraignment. “Well, that’s my First Amendment right to do so.”

If Mr. Abrams was resisting arrest, that is a crime. This is how protestors who cross the line from protest to assault need to be treated. Enforcing the law serves as a warning to those who want to cause trouble that they will be held accountable for the trouble they cause. The First Amendment allows protest; it does not allow assault.

As a side note, American Greatness reported the following yesterday:

Far-left Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley lent a helping hand to violent antifa agitators over the weekend after a number of them were arrested on assault and battery charges.

The two “Squad” members urged their followers on Twitter to contribute to the bail fund for the “counter-protesters” who tangled with law enforcement while protesting the Straight Pride Parade in Boston on Saturday. A masked Antifa protester told reporters that the violence was necessary in order to shut up Straight Pride marchers.

This is the fact of the new Democrat party. If you are for law and order, there is no way you can support this. I have not yet heard any Democrats denouncing these tweets.

I Support Protecting Children From Abuse, But This Incident Does Not Seem To Be Abuse

It is getting to the point where if your neighbor does not like you, he can report you to whatever authorities he chooses and there is a chance your children will be taken away. This is definitely government overreach.

Chicks On The Right posted a story today about a family living in Kentuckyoff the grid.’ It seems that somehow living off the grid is an offense to local authorities, there have recently been a few cases of people being treated very badly because they are living off the grid.

The story reports:

According to that sourcelink, police seized 10 kids from their rural Kentucky home after receiving an anonymous tip to investigate the family’s “off the grid” lifestyle.

Joe Naugler happened to be away with eight of his children when the authorities arrived on the scene. Nicole Naugler, who happens to be five months pregnant, took their oldest children with her to drive away, but the authorities stopped her and took took them. She was arrested for “disorderly conduct and resisting arrest,” but she claims she was arrested after not allowing the officers to take her children without a “fight.” Officers told her husband he needed to hand over the other children or face felony charges, and he complied. 

Pace Ellsworth, a family friend, said he believes the Nauglers were targeted because the government disagrees with their “free” lifestyle of “unschooling,” which focuses on learning through life experience and each child’s individual strengths.

That sounds like the way we used to do it! The authorities seem to have some question as to whether or not the children’s needs were being met, but the neighbors and friends tell a very different story. The neighbors have stated that the children are being raised in a loving environment and are well taken care of.

The children were taken on an anonymous tip. If this was supposed to be an investigation, why were the children taken? Has anyone asked the children basic questions to see if their education is appropriate for their age levels? Has anyone compared the education of the children to the education children in public schools are getting?

It seems to me that unless there was actual evidence of abuse or neglect of the children, the authorities did not have the right to take them. I hope that when this is sorted out, the parents find a good lawyer, figure out who issued the order to take the children, who was responsible for the anonymous tip that resulted in the taking of the children, and proceed to become millionaires.