Home United States USA — mix Appeals judges rule trial courts blundered in hundreds of J6 sentences

Appeals judges rule trial courts blundered in hundreds of J6 sentences

57
0
SHARE

A federal appeals court has ruled judges across the Washington, D.C., judiciary, largely leftists in the leftist enclave, blundered when they sentenced possibly hundreds of January 6 defendants, using a special procedure to enhance their sentences that was improper.
A federal appeals court has ruled judges across the Washington, D.C., judiciary, largely leftists in the leftist enclave, blundered when they sentenced possibly hundreds of January 6 defendants using a special procedure to enhance their sentences that was improper.
A report from the Washington Examiner explained there are « potentially hundreds » of defendants who will have to be resentenced, without the mistake.
It is the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that said the lower courts’ decisions to claim repeatedly that the defendants, some of whom were charged for entering the Capitol building through open doors, some of whom actually rioted, were interfering with the « administration of justice » were wrong.
Many of those people were there to object to the certification of Joe Biden as president following the 2020 election, which evidence now confirms was suspect.
For example, never before in American elections had a sum of money like the $400 million plus that Mark Zuckerberg handed out to elections officials been an influence. And that money was entirely outside the ordinary campaign funding programs that are monitored.
Further, the FBI interfered by telling media corporations to suppress accurate reporting about Biden family scandals revealed in a laptop computer abandoned by Hunter Biden. A subsequent polling showed had those details been routinely reported, enough voters would have withdrawn their support for Biden so that he almost assuredly would have lost to President Trump.
The Examiner explained a three-judge panel on the court refused to accept the Justice Department’s claim in an appeal involving defendant Larry Brock.

Continue reading...