The Dems are Desperate to Keep Power because they know that they are committing crimes that will be prosecuted after we take back our nation in the November Election
by Michael Patrick Leahy, The Tennessee Star, May 19, 2024
Scott J. Bloch, Special Counsel of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) under former President George W. Bush from 2003 to 2008, told The Tennessee Star on Saturday that a a provision of the 1939 Hatch Act, now codified as 18 U.S.C. 595, could be used to prosecute Biden Administration Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security officials for election interference and affecting the 2024 election.
Bloch (pictured above) responded to The Star’s inquiry via email on Saturday asking:
Could Section 2 of the 1939 Hatch Act (codified today as 18 U.S.C 595), which prohibits election interference by federal, state, and local officials, be used to prosecute the pantheon of Biden administration officials who have organized the multiple lawsuits against Donald J. Trump?
Bloch wrote, “What is going on in the current administration goes even beyond what I investigated at OSC. I am referring to many examples in the news of use of the justice system to affect the election, the suppression of speech by DOJ and Homeland Security relating to political opponents, which appears to be tinged with intent to interfere with elections.”
“We brought many administrative prosecutions of Hatch Act violations when I was head of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (2003-2008),” he noted.
“In 2007-2008, I called for and organized and went after a broad scale use of the federal government to affect elections nationally, which resulted in a major report (after I left office) of the Bush Administration program to get more members of Congress and Governors elected using official capacity at the federal level as well as federal resources. I received a special appropriation of $1M to conduct that particular investigation. This was spurred by an initial large investigation of GSA and its head for offering federal buildings and resources nationally to help get GOP candidates elected,” he continued.
“I came close to referring that matter to the DOJ for possible criminal prosecution, but I did not do so because I did not see specific intent to interfere with elections, but I might have referred it once that report came out (which was not completed when I was in office),” Bloch added.
Click Here to Watch Video of Steve Bannon and Mike Davis laying out the charges to be brought against Democrat Operatives Next Year!
“What is going on in the current administration goes even beyond what I investigated at OSC. I am referring to many examples in the news of use of the justice system to affect the election, the suppression of speech by DOJ and Homeland Security relating to political opponents, which appears to be tinged with intent to interfere with elections,” he noted.
“As such, if I were current Special Counsel, provided I had a complaint and found sufficient prima facie evidence of intent, I would refer to DOJ the criminal prosecution of individuals in the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security and possibly elsewhere under 18 USC 595 which is broader than interference with elections or the political process; it also includes actions by officials of the U.S. government that ‘affects’ elections,” he concluded.
As Bloch notes, the language of 18 U.S.C 595 is quite broad:
Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States, or by any department or agency thereof, or by the District of Columbia or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, or any political subdivision, municipality, or agency thereof, or agency of such political subdivision or municipality (including any corporation owned or controlled by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States or by any such political subdivision, municipality, or agency), in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part by loans or grants made by the United States, or any department or agency thereof, uses his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
This section shall not prohibit or make unlawful any act by any officer or employee of any educational or research institution, establishment, agency, or system which is supported in whole or in part by any state or political subdivision thereof, or by the District of Columbia or by any Territory or Possession of the United States; or by any recognized religious, philanthropic or cultural organization. (emphasis added)
A brief search of election interference prosecution could find no instance of anyone ever being prosecuted by the DOJ for violating 18 U.S.C. 595, though it has been cited as an authority in a few federal cases as well as one state case. Surprisingly, 18 U.S.C 595 was also cited as a legal authority in an Amicus Brief filed in April in support of the DOJ’s position opposing former President Trump claim of presidential immunity by former Senator John Danforth and others in the pending current Supreme Court case.
A former DOJ official told The Star it is not surprising that few if any prosecutions have been brought under 18 U.S.C. 595 due to the vagueness and broadness of the statute.
Other statutes beyond 18 U.S.C. 595 might also apply, Bloch said.
“There might also be political coercion of federal employees by the Administration, under 18 USC 610. There also appears to be some evidence of intimidation of voters by DOJ and the FBI, under 18 USC 594. There might also be evidence of offers of judgeships in exchange for political attacks on enemies of the administration, which is also a crime under 18 U.S.C. 599 and 600. All of those criminal statutes are solely under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Justice,” he added.
“The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is an independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency. OSC’s statutory authority comes from four federal laws: the Civil Service Reform Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, the Hatch Act, and the Uniformed Services Employment & Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA),” according to the agency’s website.
Click Here to Watch the Newest We the People Convention News & Opinion Podcast!
The current Special Counsel of OSC is Hampton Dellinger, who “was sworn in as Special Counsel on March 6, 2024. Dellinger graduated from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor and Yale Law School. Prior to joining OSC, Dellinger served in the U.S. Department of Justice as an Assistant Attorney General overseeing the Office of Legal Policy. In both government and private practice, Dellinger has represented whistleblowers and other clients challenging government activities, and is an experienced litigator and legal advocate. He is also a former Deputy Attorney General in the North Carolina Department of Justice and served as Chief Legal Counsel in the Office of the North Carolina Governor.”
Dellinger was confirmed in his position by the U.S. Senate in a party line vote of 49 to 47 on February 27. His father is the late Walter Dellinger, who served as Acting U.S. Solicitor General in the Clinton administration.
Former Special Council Bloch’s tenure at the Office of Special Counsel ended in controversy. Today, that controversy may be seen in a new light, given the numerous instances of lawfare against conservative attorneys during the Biden administration.
