Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nevilledog

(51,122 posts)
Fri Aug 20, 2021, 03:38 PM Aug 2021

emptywheel: Reuters Doesn't Mention Terrorism When Claiming DOJ Won't Charge Serious Offenses




https://www.emptywheel.net/2021/08/20/reuters-doesnt-mention-terrorism-when-discussing-the-january-6-investigation/

*snip*

Not once does the story mention obstruction, which also carries a maximum sentence of 20 years. If you don’t mention obstruction — and your sources don’t explain that obstruction will get you to precisely where you’d get with a sedition charge, but with a lot more flexibility to distinguish between defendants and a far lower bar of proof (unless and until judges decide it has been misapplied) — then your sources are not describing what is going on with the investigation.

Furthermore, Reuters purports to rule out “more serious, politically-loaded charges,” but it never mentions terrorism.

One reason it wouldn’t, though, is because for domestic terrorists, you don’t charge terrorism, you charge crimes of terrorism or you argue for an enhancement under U.S.S.G. §3A1.4 at sentencing. And that has and will continue to happen. For example, both the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys conspiracies include 18 USC 1361 charges (damage to a government building exceeding $1,000, a charge that is a bit of a stretch for the Oath Keepers) that constitutes a crime of terrorism, and the government has raised that and noted it is a crime of terrorism in a number of bail disputes. Effectively, DOJ has already called the leaders of the militia conspiracies terrorists. But Reuters doesn’t think that’s worth noting.

Similarly, for both the assault pleas DOJ has obtained thus far, the government has reserved the right to invoke a terrorism enhancement at sentencing. In the case of Scott Fairlamb, who also pled guilty to obstruction, which effectively amounts to pleading guilty to having a political purpose for his assault, I suspect such an enhancement is likely.

Somehow this entire story got written without mentioning what DOJ is using instead of seditious conspiracy: obstruction (which has been charged against over 200 defendants) and terrorism enhancements; civil disorder is likewise not mentioned, but has been charged against around 150 defendants. DOJ isn’t using seditious conspiracy because it doesn’t need it (again, unless and until the courts reject this use of obstruction).

*snip*
2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
emptywheel: Reuters Doesn't Mention Terrorism When Claiming DOJ Won't Charge Serious Offenses (Original Post) Nevilledog Aug 2021 OP
Reuters reality1 Aug 2021 #1
Huh? muriel_volestrangler Aug 2021 #2

muriel_volestrangler

(101,322 posts)
2. Huh?
Fri Aug 20, 2021, 06:07 PM
Aug 2021

Reuters is a 170-year old news agency, head office in London, now owned by a Canadian corporation. It's always been very much a commercially-oriented agency, with businesses as major customers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters

TASS is a Russian government news agency.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»emptywheel: Reuters Doesn...