4 ms·
> The subpoenas suggest that the Justice Department is examining whether Walz’s and Frey’s public statements disparaging the surge of officers and federal actio
by legitster 9mo ago
> The subpoenas suggest that the Justice Department is examining whether Walz’s and Frey’s public statements disparaging the surge of officers and federal actions have amounted to criminal interference in law enforcement work.
The Justice department is literally arguing that free speech is enough to impede an investigation.
This will surely be shot down in court, but this is just all noise to try to interfere in MN's midterm elections.
- kldavis4 9mo agoSounds similar to this case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States?wprov...
- deepfriedchokes 9mo ago“In 1969, Schenck was largely overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio, which limited the scope of speech that the government may ban to that directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot).”
- cosmicgadget 9mo agoYeah, pure theatrics. Pretty standard for this administration.