The Biden admin’s abuse of executive power is staggering. No one’s tried to get away with this.
And now a federal court is accusing the Biden admin of this horrible crime.
On Friday, a federal appeals court made the ruling that the sentences of many offenders who were found guilty of interfering “with the administration of justice” on January 6, were unduly and excessively prolonged.
The DOJ argued that defendants who disrupted Congress’ certification of the 2020 presidential election should be sentenced with a “sentencing enhancement” aimed at defendants who interfere with judicial proceedings.
Now, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Jan. 6 defendant Larry Brock, dismissing this argument. For his role in impeding an official procedure, Brock received a two-year jail sentence last year.
“We must apply the Guideline as written, and Brock’s interference with one stage of the electoral college vote-counting process — while no doubt endangering our democratic processes and temporarily derailing Congress’s constitutional work — did not interfere with the ‘administration of justice,’” Judge Patricia Millett, originally appointed by Barack Obama, wrote from the court.
Judges Judith Rogers and Cornelia Pillard were both appointed by Clinton and Obama, respectively, to the panel.
JUST IN: The D.C. Circuit has ruled that some Jan. 6 defendants had their sentences improperly lengthened by district judges' decisions to label their crimes "interference with the administration of justice." https://t.co/Yzz8QDhysW pic.twitter.com/9HCchVa8H4
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) March 1, 2024
According to the panel, “judicial, quasi-judicial, and adjunct investigative proceedings” are included in the “administration of justice,” but this does not cover the distinct role of Congress in certifying electoral college ballots. According to Politico, the revision has the potential to raise sentences by more than a year.
Brock is one of hundreds of defendants who will be heard by the Supreme Court in April in a case that questions the breadth of the obstruction regulation, Section 1512(c)(2).
Ever since Joe Biden and the Democrats took control of the executive branch, they have been absolutely obsessed with going after anyone and everyone they could with the full weight of the federal government for the events that took place on January 6.
That was now more than three years ago and Democrats are still claiming that it was the “greatest” attack on America’s democracy. That, is of course, laughable when there have been literal attacks on America’s democracy like when the Japanese surprise attacked Pearl Harbor or when the British quite literally burned down the U.S. Capitol.
The Left is just trying to suck the January 6 drama as dry as possible.
Just consider how they’ve been going after former U.S. President Donald Trump, claiming that he is guilty of somehow trying to rig the results of the 2020 election. Whether or not someone believes Donald Trump wanted to do that, the fact remains that he has been found guilty of no crime.
The U.S. Supreme Court even had to step in and hand down a stunning unanimous ruling reminding the nation that no one can simply remove Donald Trump from the 2024 election picture because of a crime he didn’t commit.
In a 9-0 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court voted to restore Trump to the ballot in states like Illinois where a partisan TRAFFIC COURT judge unconstitutionally ruled he could not run. That judge should have both her law license & driver’s licenses revoked.
— Rod Blagojevich (@realBlagojevich) March 5, 2024
Simply put, no presidential administration has pushed the envelope of abusing executive power to go after political enemies quite like the Joe Biden regime has.
The concern now is what future presidents may feel emboldened to do with executive overreach now that pandora’s box has been opened and there’s no way to put it all back.
The line between a “democracy” run amok and a banana republic is thin. It’s a clear line, to be certain. But it’s thin.
Stay tuned to the DC Daily Journal.
