..."an endeavor to influence a judicial proceeding!"

George Parry is an attorney in Philadelphia. In a recent article in the American Spectator, he took up the subject of Senator Schumer's recent threats to Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.

...the federal Obstruction of Justice statute, which defines “obstruction of justice” as an act that “by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice”

All of this came to mind Wednesday when I heard Sen. Schumer’s address to the pro-abortion rally on the steps of the Supreme Court in which he warned Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh that “you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” The “awful decisions” was an obvious reference to how the justices are expected to rule in the abortion rights case that had occasioned the rally.

Is there any way to interpret these astounding remarks other than as an endeavor to influence a judicial proceeding?

Schumer may have been threatening Gorsuch and Kavanaugh with impeachment. But for purposes of establishing criminal liability that is irrelevant. Under the statute, a threat of any kind made to influence their decisions in an ongoing case is prima facie proof of obstruction of justice. No threat of violence is required.

The senator’s actions warrant either an arrest or, at the very least, a formal investigation for endeavoring to obstruct justice. They could also warrant similar treatment for threatening to assault the justices, since on its face Schumer’s remark regarding “what hit you” could also be understood as a threat of violence or as an incitement to the crazies who infest our bitterly divided society to take action.

After all, as Schumer should be aware, it wasn’t that long ago that the Republican House of Representatives baseball team was gunned down by a deranged Bernie Sanders supporter.

...The only question now is whether or not, under our two-tiered system of justice, the Democrat senator from New York will be immunized by his office from either investigation by the Justice Department or arrest for endeavoring to obstruct justice.

Read more here.

A red flag order for Schumer

In The Truth about Guns, we learn

In the wake of Senator Chuck Schumer’s threat against two Supreme Court Justices…

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you, if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Gun Owners of America have sent a letter and “red flag” order application to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo requesting a Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Order for the Senator.

Read more here.

The Threatener!

Schumer stirring up the radicals to commit violence against Supreme Court Justices

The Daily Mail has the story of Chuck Schumer threatening Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Story and video here.

Body language interpreting!

Have you seen this body language interpreter on YouTube? Last week's Oval Office meeting with Trump, Pence, Schumer, and Pelosi provides a good opportunity for body language interpreting!

Or, maybe just a half mile

Hat tip Oregon Muse

Choose!

So, what's next in the Trump, Schumer, Pelosi DACA mess? At the Ace of Spades website, J.J. Sefton writes,

...the President must declare war on both parties, the Deep State and the media/academia/culture complex on behalf of the people who put him in office. If he is prevented from doing what we want, I can completely understand that so long as he went to the mattresses for us. But this deal making just for the sake of making a deal will be the bitter end, especially on this (the Obamacare non-repeal and tax reform is something else as well). Mr. President, you and we are at a crossroads. You can be the catalyst that begins the road back and go down as a national hero, or squander the last legitimate chance we will ever have to save this nation. Here and now. Choose.

Read more here

Is Trump inside Schumer's head?

From the New York Post:

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., caused a scene at a Manhattan restaurant when he began yelling at a wealthy and well-connected Donald Trump supporter that the POTUS is “a liar.”

Schumer, the top Senate Democrat, lost his cool on Sunday night at Upper East Side restaurant Sette Mezzo, according to witnesses.

He was dining with friends when he encountered Joseph A. Califano Jr. — the former U.S. secretary of health, education and welfare under President Jimmy Carter and domestic policy adviser to President Lyndon B. Johnson — and his wife, Hilary, who were having a quiet dinner.

Onlookers said Schumer was incensed that Hilary — the daughter of William S. Paley, the founder and chairman of CBS — had voted for Trump, even though her husband, Joseph, is a well-known Democrat.

One witness said of the restaurant rant, “They are a highly respected couple, and Schumer made a scene, yelling, ‘She voted for Trump!’ The Califanos left the restaurant, but Schumer followed them outside.” On the sidewalk, Schumer carried on with his fantastical filibuster: “ ‘How could you vote for Trump? He’s a liar!’ He kept repeating, ‘He’s a liar!’ ”

Hilary confirmed the confrontation, telling Page Six, “Sen. Schumer was really rude . . . He’s our senator, and I don’t really like him. Yes, I voted for Trump. Schumer joined us outside and he told me Trump was a liar. I should have told him that Hillary Clinton was a liar, but I was so surprised I didn’t say anything.”

Democrats strategy on Gorsuch

Sundance provides us with this delicious close-up of Senator Chuck Schumer, who

“urges his colleagues to vote no”; where “urging colleagues” means get in line, or else. Thus setting the stage for a filibuster, well, that would be, if all 48 Democrat Senators follow the compliance demand.

Therein lies the outline of the very tenuous Democrat strategy against Gorsuch: Force Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to use the nuclear option to pass Altar Boy Gorsuch to the Supreme Court with 51 votes instead of 60.


Obviously, if 8 Democrat Senators vote to confirm Judge Gorsuch – Schumer will have been rebuked. Those Democrats will have their offices moved to the never cleaned bathroom stall at the end of the cellar (ie. no-financial DNC support for their reelection bids).

Senator Schumer is not “technically” calling for a filibuster, that would be impolitic, audacious, undiplomatic and transparent to the national electorate. So Senator Schumer instead “urges his colleagues” to vote no. Same/Same.

However, accepting all reasonableness is now cast asunder in favor of political posturing, if his colleagues comply they run the very real risk of seeing nomination #2 (Kennedy’s replacement), and nomination #3 (Ginsburg’s replacement), also reduced to nothing more than a 51-vote-threshold.

Read more here.

Schumer's announcement

Bookworm is thinking about sociopaths today. Is Chuck Schumer a sociopath?

Honestly, after reading that Schumer announced that the Dems will filibuster Gorsuch, I don’t know if Schumer is an idiot or a sociopath with a grand game plan. It strikes me as insane for the Democrats to filibuster Gorsuch.

In a logical world, the filibuster triggers the nuclear option doing away with the filibuster entirely for Supreme Court nominees. It creates the risk that, if a certain hard-Left, very aged Supreme Court justice whom I shan’t name leaves the Court, a simple majority vote will get the most conservative judge in the world onto the Supreme Court. After all, the filibuster benefits conservatives more than Leftists, because Leftist always get on the Supreme Court.

One theory is that the Dems know the filibuster is dead anyway, so they need to grandstand today to pacify their rabid base. Another, more Machiavellian theory is that Blue state Dems will start a short and meaningless filibuster, while explicitly authorizing Red state Dems to vote for Gorsuch. That way, there’s no reason to blow-up the filibuster rule, but the Dems can still say to their base “at least we tried.” In that case, Schumer is a sociopath, not an idiot, because that would be quite a clever, albeit unprincipled approach.

Read more here.

Hypocrite

hat tip Bookworm

Hugging Rubio to death

Allahpundit reports at Hot Air that Senator Chuck Schumer is showing how to stab a guy with ostensibly friendly words of praise. "Month after month..." "His fingerprints are all over the bill..."

Read more here.

Schumer not fooling Harsanyi

David Harsanyi sees right through Chuck Schumer's opposition to the Iran deal. At The Federalist David writes,

The more pertinent question is: would Schumer have taken this position if he were the decisive vote or if he had any legitimate shot at helping override President Obama’s veto of a motion disapproving the deal? It seems doubtful. In fact, it seems like Schumer waited long enough to make sure his vote wouldn’t matter much, if at all.

...But none of Schumer’s criticisms about this deal are new. We were all aware of the parameters months ago. It is seems implausible that Schumer, a powerful senior senator from New York, wouldn’t have been privy to many of negotiation details, or that he’d come to some big revelation about the Iranian regime’s nature this very week. A month ago, even a few weeks ago, his opposition might have had some serious impact. But it matters far less now that the Obama administration has framed any opposition to the deal as an attempt by Jewish Americans to lobby their way into a war.

At this point, Schumer is just trying to have it both ways: standing against the Iran nuclear deal while knowing full well it won’t make any difference.

Read more here.