Today's decision means Attorney General Merrick Garland and federal judges in Washington wrongfully prosecuted roughly 350 J6ers with the post-Enron felony,
There aren't enough words in the English language to commend Ms. Julie Kelly and the yeoman's work she has done on the incredibly corrupt DOJ and FBI. May the angels watch your back.
What an honor for you Julie. You will always be remembered for your persistence in reporting this evil injustice. Hooray for this. Hooray for American justice. God shed his grace on thee….
Yes, Julie has done a fantastic service in reporting on the due process violations against the 1/6 defendants. Yet, there is also a massive layer of due process transgressions throughout the entire judicial structure. Institutionally, the justice officials destroy the fair trial rights of accused defendants whenever it is to their political advantage. Lost amidst the Supreme Court immunity decision is the fact that this same high court, lower courts and state bar association underwrote the destruction of President Trump’s fair trial rights through illicit publicity conducted by DA Bragg in New York before the case even got to trial.
The judiciary showed cowardice in refusing to hear ALL stolen election cases on their merits. Raw cowardice.
The J6 FEDSURRECTION was set up as an infilltrated/entrapment, designed to prevent a congressional/senate review of contested electors. They successfully stopped that review and the corrupt UniParty feigned courage to certify a stolen election. Did I mention Pence is cowardly, treasonous scum?
The farcically corrupt, “illegitimate” J6 Sub-committee had to destroy their records to hide the stench.
Here is a great quote of yours: "Awaken, really investigate, prosecute, deliver justice." The public has been lulled to sleep as their rights have been taken away. Legal commentators regularly communicate that even if criminal prosecutions are wrongful they never say
that prosecutors, and their overseers, should be disbarred for doing it. That way, the legal commentators greenlight further corruption in the future. They've been doing that way for the last 61 days. Their crowning achievement is blinding the public from knowing that extrajudicial publicity against defendants is disbarrable. Awakening to this reality is the key. The prosecutors and their overseers should be prosecuted through disbarment. Then justice can be delivered.
Our election system is so hackable that career incompetent trash like FJB can be installed, AND WRECK THE COUNTRY. The GOP is so hapless and compromised they are ONLY NOW trying to figure out WHO IS RUNNING THE COUNTRY.
BTW you know of course that "taking the Lord's name in vain" originally had no connection to "bad words" generally. The meaning was much more along the lines of "do not swear to God about something that you will not hold to or is not true". That is to say is you say "I swear to God" that's a firm promise, you can't take that oath in vain, or swear that something is true if it is not.
Wouldn't that be nice-if they could sue all of those scumbag judges and prosecutors. But I'm sure they all enjoy some type of immunity. People in the house and Senate can lie all they want because they have immunity as long as they're on the house and senate floors.
What happened to the J6ers, treating them like Capitol crashers is the most disgusting thing I've ever seen.
What kind of sick mentality do these judges and prosecutors have?
Inthe case of those of us who accepted plea deals and avoided the 100% conviction rate, we signed iron clad agreements that we were forfeiting our right to sue. Those who fought the charges and wound up sentenced to years in prison will be able to sue but our attorney told us that is a very difficult case to win.
Bless you Julie for everything you have done. You are a patriot and a hero. What we have allowed to happen to our justice system is an absolute disgrace. You are one of the very few to stand up and defend our country's principles. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
It was Tucker who had her on his show, which is sadly gone. He has his own network now. TCN. Maybe we’ll see you there sometime, Julie? Please announce the date.
Associate Justice Barrett is beginning to give me some real cause for worry! Two rulings now where she supports the deep state. Is she Sandra Day O’Connor, Jr.? When she was nominated I was convinced she would stand up to the ongoing & rapidly increasing assault on liberty by the deep state. Now I am not so certain. On the other hand I am shocked that Associate Justice Brown went with the conservative majority opinion in this case. She’s not going to be invited to the next deep state cocktail party. If she’s not careful, the deep state may send one of Hillary’s “operatives” to convince her to get back in line.
I, too, worry about Justice Barrett. Even though Justice Jackson can't tell us what a woman is, she certainly recognizes prosecutorial overreach. Kudos to Jackson, and a thumb down to ACB.
It appears from ACBs majority opinion ruling that state AGs don’t have standing to sue to prevent government coercion-acknowledged in her statement-to force censorship by social media companies, that she not only is fully on board with deep state propaganda about the 2020 election and the jabs, but that she takes her opinion as self-evident immutable truth that we must all abide by. No reason to let any of this get a day in court. CONSPIRACY THEORISTS!!!!
She also believes (unlike the Courts majority) that the J6ers are guilty of obstructing an official proceeding. She wrote the dissent, and appears completely onboard with government overreach, wherever she finds it.
People want to divide the Court into right wing and left wing with Brown, Sotomayor, and Kagan on the left. A better way is into thirds with Thomas, Alito, and to a lesser degree Gorsuch on the right and Brown, Sotomayor, and Kagan on the left. Roberts, Barrett, and Kavanaugh really belong to neither group. Their vote will depend on which way the wind is blowing at the time.
No, I think it is probably par for the course. We don’t have cause to suggest that an appointed and confirmed Justice step down, although some people make those ridiculous assertions about the smartest Justices on the Court.
I think Trump needs to pick his own Supreme Court justices. Barrett and Kavanaugh both give me pause. Trump got screwed with his FBI director pick (thanks Chris Christie). And just because some of these justices are highly recommended, to make people like McConnell happy, SCREW McConnell. I think Trump is a good judge of character.
I'm not so sure. I'm going to vote for him, but the appointments he made before concern me. Sessions, Wray, Barr, Tillerson the list goes on and on were all bad choices and hurt his presidency.
I can't argue with that-but we all learn from our mistakes. I was seriously disappointed with Sessions. I half believe that he was a plant to monitor Trump. And when Trump won, Mr. Loyalty, Sessions, managed to get a prime position where he could stick it to Trump.
I hope he's learned but having Rubio on the short lest for VP doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. Rubio is RINO to the core. I agree though about Sessions being a swamp plant.
Barrett was terrorized and intimidated into the liberal/progressive hive. She and Kavanaugh are as much warped and misguided as Roberts. All for the same reason. Some Justices use law and the constitution to come to opinions, some put their political beliefs up front and some have their families safety and comfort up front. 3- 3 -3 ...Its really an evenly divided court.
So sorry for Matthew Perna's family. It's still hard to believe such a thing could happen in the United States of America, land of the free. Thank you for being an angel for so many wrongly accused protesters.
As a gag gift, someone should create a deck of playing cards with the faces of the former intelligence officials who claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop "had all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation."
Well that's not that hard to do. It's the plain language reading of the subsection, the argument is over whether it makes sense to read it that way in context of the full section or not. It really does not - why would legislators mean to regulate that kind of thing in the context of a documents-in-court-cases law? But I would say at least that the law is poorly/ambiguously drafted.
Julie Kelly you will be on the pages of history for covering this awful stain on our nation. You should get a Pulitzer Prize. We are so grateful and thankful for your pursuit of this travesty against this nation.
This is a terrific decision for the J6ers. And the rule of law. Now if only I could understand the decision in Missouri v Murthy. I read Justice Alito's dissent and was convinced that at least Jill Hines had and has standing. The standing issue vis a vis the two states confuses me. Who better to protect our rights than our state of residence under our constitutional republic structure? If the federal government infringes on the free speech rights of thousands, must each individual file a suit? And the three part test one must "pass" to achieve standing: imminent threat of injury, traceability, and redressability, perplexes me. Jay Bhattacharya clearly was harmed. Did all the individual plaintiffs have bad lawyers? Or was the Murthy decision just an artful dodge?
I think Alex Berenson's lawsuit against Biden will move ahead Susan G. Although SCOTUS said Missouri didn't have standing, Berenson was singled out specifically by the government and was taken off Twitter. He won his suit with Twitter and I think he said he is now standing alone to protect free speech after SCOTUS denied Missouri. SCOTUS should find in favor of Berenson since he can show damage to his reputation, his livelihood and his life since he was threatened repeatedly on his COVID-19 articles and pamphlets on masks not working, vaccine danger to health, etc. So, there is another bite at this very important Constitutional issue.
There aren't enough words in the English language to commend Ms. Julie Kelly and the yeoman's work she has done on the incredibly corrupt DOJ and FBI. May the angels watch your back.
So very true. Julie deserves a medal.
not that it would happen due to 'wokeness', but her work screams Pulitzer.....bless her
What an honor for you Julie. You will always be remembered for your persistence in reporting this evil injustice. Hooray for this. Hooray for American justice. God shed his grace on thee….
Amen and ditto!
Yes, Julie has done a fantastic service in reporting on the due process violations against the 1/6 defendants. Yet, there is also a massive layer of due process transgressions throughout the entire judicial structure. Institutionally, the justice officials destroy the fair trial rights of accused defendants whenever it is to their political advantage. Lost amidst the Supreme Court immunity decision is the fact that this same high court, lower courts and state bar association underwrote the destruction of President Trump’s fair trial rights through illicit publicity conducted by DA Bragg in New York before the case even got to trial.
The election was stolen.
The judiciary showed cowardice in refusing to hear ALL stolen election cases on their merits. Raw cowardice.
The J6 FEDSURRECTION was set up as an infilltrated/entrapment, designed to prevent a congressional/senate review of contested electors. They successfully stopped that review and the corrupt UniParty feigned courage to certify a stolen election. Did I mention Pence is cowardly, treasonous scum?
The farcically corrupt, “illegitimate” J6 Sub-committee had to destroy their records to hide the stench.
AWAKEN, really investigate, prosecute, deliver justice.
Next, we'll be hearing there was no J6 Sub-committee. The right just made it up.
I am also disappointed in Mike Pence. He has now join the likes of John Kasich and Paul Ryan.
Shemp, Joe, and Curley Joe.
They're not even good enough to be the originals.
Here is a great quote of yours: "Awaken, really investigate, prosecute, deliver justice." The public has been lulled to sleep as their rights have been taken away. Legal commentators regularly communicate that even if criminal prosecutions are wrongful they never say
that prosecutors, and their overseers, should be disbarred for doing it. That way, the legal commentators greenlight further corruption in the future. They've been doing that way for the last 61 days. Their crowning achievement is blinding the public from knowing that extrajudicial publicity against defendants is disbarrable. Awakening to this reality is the key. The prosecutors and their overseers should be prosecuted through disbarment. Then justice can be delivered.
Our election system is so hackable that career incompetent trash like FJB can be installed, AND WRECK THE COUNTRY. The GOP is so hapless and compromised they are ONLY NOW trying to figure out WHO IS RUNNING THE COUNTRY.
Sounds to me like the J6 committee should be charged with that statute since they destroyed documents.
Holy shit you are totally right! What an awful, awful exercise that J6 committee was.
Save the word: HOLY, FOR OUR LORD, HEAVENLY TALK, PLEASE.....
BTW you know of course that "taking the Lord's name in vain" originally had no connection to "bad words" generally. The meaning was much more along the lines of "do not swear to God about something that you will not hold to or is not true". That is to say is you say "I swear to God" that's a firm promise, you can't take that oath in vain, or swear that something is true if it is not.
That was not what S. Pendergraft was asserting.
thus the connector BTW in my *second* reply. the first reply was the one that appears second
Yes, Holy means Holy.
And the shit that I'm speaking about was blessed by an ordained priest.
Nice pseudonym, though.
This is turning out to be a stellar Independence celebration, don't you think? We've lit the fuse.
I appreciate that you think you know what your deity wants from you and me, but I assure you I don't share your certainty.
The J6 committee had their (made up) results before they even conveined.
And Jack Smith for his mishandling of "evidence" in the attack of Trump over classified documents.
Perhaps someone like Stephen Miller's law firm will do just that!!
Good point!
Great job as usual, does this open the door for lawsuits against the DOJ?
I was wondering the same thing whether lawsuits could be brought against the DOJ or a class action lawsuit. (disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer).
Wouldn't that be nice-if they could sue all of those scumbag judges and prosecutors. But I'm sure they all enjoy some type of immunity. People in the house and Senate can lie all they want because they have immunity as long as they're on the house and senate floors.
What happened to the J6ers, treating them like Capitol crashers is the most disgusting thing I've ever seen.
What kind of sick mentality do these judges and prosecutors have?
They ALL need to be replaced!!!
Inthe case of those of us who accepted plea deals and avoided the 100% conviction rate, we signed iron clad agreements that we were forfeiting our right to sue. Those who fought the charges and wound up sentenced to years in prison will be able to sue but our attorney told us that is a very difficult case to win.
Something needs to be done to the DOJ for this incredible injustice. Garland has drooled over these unjust, horrific sentences. He is an evil man.
Bless you Julie for everything you have done. You are a patriot and a hero. What we have allowed to happen to our justice system is an absolute disgrace. You are one of the very few to stand up and defend our country's principles. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
I'd like to know why Fox News doesn't have Julie on anymore.
Same reason they don't have Tucker Carlson anymore either.
It was Tucker who had her on his show, which is sadly gone. He has his own network now. TCN. Maybe we’ll see you there sometime, Julie? Please announce the date.
Associate Justice Barrett is beginning to give me some real cause for worry! Two rulings now where she supports the deep state. Is she Sandra Day O’Connor, Jr.? When she was nominated I was convinced she would stand up to the ongoing & rapidly increasing assault on liberty by the deep state. Now I am not so certain. On the other hand I am shocked that Associate Justice Brown went with the conservative majority opinion in this case. She’s not going to be invited to the next deep state cocktail party. If she’s not careful, the deep state may send one of Hillary’s “operatives” to convince her to get back in line.
I, too, worry about Justice Barrett. Even though Justice Jackson can't tell us what a woman is, she certainly recognizes prosecutorial overreach. Kudos to Jackson, and a thumb down to ACB.
It appears from ACBs majority opinion ruling that state AGs don’t have standing to sue to prevent government coercion-acknowledged in her statement-to force censorship by social media companies, that she not only is fully on board with deep state propaganda about the 2020 election and the jabs, but that she takes her opinion as self-evident immutable truth that we must all abide by. No reason to let any of this get a day in court. CONSPIRACY THEORISTS!!!!
She also believes (unlike the Courts majority) that the J6ers are guilty of obstructing an official proceeding. She wrote the dissent, and appears completely onboard with government overreach, wherever she finds it.
People want to divide the Court into right wing and left wing with Brown, Sotomayor, and Kagan on the left. A better way is into thirds with Thomas, Alito, and to a lesser degree Gorsuch on the right and Brown, Sotomayor, and Kagan on the left. Roberts, Barrett, and Kavanaugh really belong to neither group. Their vote will depend on which way the wind is blowing at the time.
If I were to bet, she lacks courage and has been intimidated into submission.
If that is true, she needs to resign from the court immediately.
No, I think it is probably par for the course. We don’t have cause to suggest that an appointed and confirmed Justice step down, although some people make those ridiculous assertions about the smartest Justices on the Court.
All new positions are intimidating. Growth comes with experience.
I think Trump needs to pick his own Supreme Court justices. Barrett and Kavanaugh both give me pause. Trump got screwed with his FBI director pick (thanks Chris Christie). And just because some of these justices are highly recommended, to make people like McConnell happy, SCREW McConnell. I think Trump is a good judge of character.
"I think Trump is a good judge of character."
I'm not so sure. I'm going to vote for him, but the appointments he made before concern me. Sessions, Wray, Barr, Tillerson the list goes on and on were all bad choices and hurt his presidency.
I can't argue with that-but we all learn from our mistakes. I was seriously disappointed with Sessions. I half believe that he was a plant to monitor Trump. And when Trump won, Mr. Loyalty, Sessions, managed to get a prime position where he could stick it to Trump.
I hope he's learned but having Rubio on the short lest for VP doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. Rubio is RINO to the core. I agree though about Sessions being a swamp plant.
Don’t think he will choose Rubio.
Barrett was terrorized and intimidated into the liberal/progressive hive. She and Kavanaugh are as much warped and misguided as Roberts. All for the same reason. Some Justices use law and the constitution to come to opinions, some put their political beliefs up front and some have their families safety and comfort up front. 3- 3 -3 ...Its really an evenly divided court.
I have heard it said that Barrett was a law professor and somehow that explains her opinions thus far. I’m not buying it.
Free the J6 political prisoners.
God bless their strength and perseverance.
The GOP and too many media personalities have been AWOL in this war.
“Can you hear the people sing…” Lord forgive us.
“Can you hear the people sing…” Lord forgive us.
NO I CAN'T!
If people on the left were behind bars and treated like the J6ers, the left and the Hollywood wing of the party would have been on TV 24/7.
The right is weak.
As Dan Bongino says, all democrats are democrats and 50% of the republicans are democrats.
The republicans need a spine.
Maybe they can come up with legislation authorizing all republicans in congress to get a free spine-paid for by the taxpayers.
I’d settle for a spinal implant for No-Johnson Johnson. What a cowardly, weak FARCE. He may as well change his first name to Hakeem.
Julie, the word stalwart means resolute, strong, imposing, brave and bold. You epitomize the concept.
Yes, Julie knows her purpose in life and is deserving of admiration and respect.
So sorry for Matthew Perna's family. It's still hard to believe such a thing could happen in the United States of America, land of the free. Thank you for being an angel for so many wrongly accused protesters.
As a gag gift, someone should create a deck of playing cards with the faces of the former intelligence officials who claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop "had all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation."
Who would be the Joker?
Hunter Biden?
How in the world did three Justices, find a "rationale" basis to uphold the application of this law.
Well that's not that hard to do. It's the plain language reading of the subsection, the argument is over whether it makes sense to read it that way in context of the full section or not. It really does not - why would legislators mean to regulate that kind of thing in the context of a documents-in-court-cases law? But I would say at least that the law is poorly/ambiguously drafted.
Julie Kelly you will be on the pages of history for covering this awful stain on our nation. You should get a Pulitzer Prize. We are so grateful and thankful for your pursuit of this travesty against this nation.
RE COURT CASES WON->ALL monie$, UNFORTUNATELY, are taxpayer dollars,
These individuals should sue, but, I wish the settlements came out of the retirement packages of those who wrongly accused folks!
This is a terrific decision for the J6ers. And the rule of law. Now if only I could understand the decision in Missouri v Murthy. I read Justice Alito's dissent and was convinced that at least Jill Hines had and has standing. The standing issue vis a vis the two states confuses me. Who better to protect our rights than our state of residence under our constitutional republic structure? If the federal government infringes on the free speech rights of thousands, must each individual file a suit? And the three part test one must "pass" to achieve standing: imminent threat of injury, traceability, and redressability, perplexes me. Jay Bhattacharya clearly was harmed. Did all the individual plaintiffs have bad lawyers? Or was the Murthy decision just an artful dodge?
Standing argument is convenient for cowards. It is the nearest exit.
And excruciating for plaintiffs with legitimate claims denied a hearing on a technicality.
I think Alex Berenson's lawsuit against Biden will move ahead Susan G. Although SCOTUS said Missouri didn't have standing, Berenson was singled out specifically by the government and was taken off Twitter. He won his suit with Twitter and I think he said he is now standing alone to protect free speech after SCOTUS denied Missouri. SCOTUS should find in favor of Berenson since he can show damage to his reputation, his livelihood and his life since he was threatened repeatedly on his COVID-19 articles and pamphlets on masks not working, vaccine danger to health, etc. So, there is another bite at this very important Constitutional issue.
Censure Nancy Pelosi. Kakistocracy is defined as "Government by the least suitable or competent citizens of a state " BY George, we've got it