by John Price
The AG’s mood was not improving, “Forget treason, that arises from war and giving aid and comfort to the nation’s enemies. Likewise, forget misprision of treason, which means having knowledge of treason, but not turning someone in. Stop wasting our time. What about rebellion and insurrection?”
“That’s all in one statute, sir, 18 USC Sec. 2383. It makes it a crime to incite, set of foot, whatever that means, assist or engage in any rebellion or insurrection against the government or its laws. Keep this in mind, because….”
“Come on. That clearly doesn’t pass the snicker test. We’d be laughed out of court. We don’t have a scrap of evidence linking Madison to rebellion, or to insurrection. This statute might work if he was part of an armed insurrection, but not to a speech by a political figure.”
“OK, it was a little weak, so let’s look at seditious conspiracy, section 2384. Maybe we can show that Madison conspired with one other person, that would be easy to prove, to overthrow, put down or destroy by force the US government, or levy war, or oppose by force the authority of the United States. He definitely opposed the authority of the United States. Judge McDermott could be counted on to deny a motion to dismiss a charge like that.”
The AG looked like he might have a stroke, “Stop. Stop. You’re killing me here. You left out the phrase by force. Of course he opposed the government, that’s what any political candidate or speaker does. But he didn’t use force, at least that we know about. Even if McDermott lets the charge stand, so what? Don’t forget, people, we will be facing a jury, someday, and a jury won’t convict if force is a required element to convict. What’s the fifth choice, again?”
“Mister Attorney General, our last choice is really our only choice….I think. Section 2385 of the criminal code prohibits advocating the overthrow of the government. The statute prohibits knowingly or willfully advocating, abetting, advising or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States. Yes, it does include the phrase ‘by force or violence’, but it adds ‘or by the assassination of any officer’ of the government. It also includes organizing or helping to organize any group of persons to overthrow the government. It provides for a twenty year sentence. I think we can make this one work. He did say to ‘take out’ the President. The Vice President was in fact taken out.”
“I’m listening. How do we charge Madison, or anybody for that matter, with advocating the overthrow of the government, if they don’t use force and violence?”
“Admittedly, we have to be creative, but that’s what I understood was the purpose of this meeting. The indictment would simply say that Madison obviously advocated the overthrow of the government in his speech at Austin. He said ‘we have to take him out’. Also, we can say that he essentially advocated the assassination of federal officers by telling the nation that they would lose their right to own firearms if they voted for the President and he won. The people who owned guns, and who might lose them, he was implying, should do something about it. Which they did, lest we forget, several days later. He established an atmosphere of violence by raising voters’ fears against their elected officials. He aided and abetted the shooters by his violence-laden speech. His speech was delivered before McAlister, so we can’t charge him with violating McAlister, though that would be sweet if we could. What do you think?”
All eyes in the AG’s Conference Room were on the AG. It was obvious he was thinking. On the one hand, if he charged Madison with conspiracy to overthrow the government, the White House would be happy, and would get off his back. On the other hand, if he released Madison, his friend at the end of Pennsylvania Avenue would be upset with him, as it would look like the Administration had no reason to hold Madison all those months. It reminded the AG of the old joke that his next attorney would only have one arm, because he was tired of attorneys always saying ‘on the one hand, but then again, on the other hand’.
“Alright, people, here’s what we’re going to do. Draw up the indictment for advocating the overthrow of the government, but juice it up a little, plus let’s add a count of conspiracy to overthrow. Do a third count for conspiracy to violate the federal hate crimes act, that statute can apply to almost anything. I’ll run it past O’Dayson at the White House, unofficially, of course. If it gets approved, we’ll release it Saturday night, on the media graveyard shift. We’ll push it hard in Europe through our buds in the media there. That should shut up Amnesty and the diplomatic set. Tell our District Attorney that due to his extremely busy schedule he won’t be able to try the case for several months, maybe next year. If this case goes south, I’d rather have it go south later, rather than sooner. This case is not going to win any of us any prizes for high standards of justice, you know what I mean? We’re dismissed. God bless America, because we sure didn’t bless it today.”
FIFTY ONE
Letter from Jail/Journal Entry
Jack, my much loved son, visited me again today. It was a sweet and sour experience. It was great to see him. I’m thankful he wanted to take the time to visit his dad in jail. Our time of fellowship, and prayer, was really memorable. Jack is a strong believer, and a forceful and effective pastor. I’m proud of him.
As for the non-sweet part of the visit, we clashed, again, on my opposition to the President, and my tactics in opposing our nation’s Chief Executive. Jack still doesn’t think that I should have gotten myself arrested for what I have done to fight to keep our Constitutional rights. I’ve brought up Dietrich Bonhoeffer before in my discussions/arguments with Jack. Bonhoeffer was executed by the government he opposed. Not that I’m planning on a similar end game, just that he was a principled man who was willing to do what was right to help others, in his case, to fight for saving the lives of Jewish residents of his nation. I’m fighting to try and save the rights of Americans to defend ourselves.
Jack, of course, supports our right to own firearms. He’s owned a gun since he was sixteen. We would hunt and go to the shooting range together. He told me today that he will turn in his firearm before the end of the Redemption Period. I didn’t expect him to violate the law and hold on to his gun, but I thought he should make some form of protest in connection with doing so. He doesn’t agree. As a pastor, it’s his position that he should preach the gospel and not be involved in what he calls ‘current events’. He’s not persuaded when I bring up either Bonhoeffer, who was a pastor, or Martin Luther King, Jr., who likewise was a man of the cloth.
I guess I can’t expect my son to be like his dad in all respects, especially when it comes to civil disobedience. But, that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t hurt when he gets that look on his face. You know, the look that kind of says, ‘I respect you as my dad, but you’re hurting our family by your actions’. Debbie has talked with him, and spent time with Allison, and expressed nothing but her support for me and what I’m trying to accomplish. So, Jack can’t have any reason to think that we’re not together on this. I truly don’t know what I’d do if Debbie was side-wise with me. She’s paying a huge price for me being in prison, naturally, but she seems to be handling it well. We have a good extended family, neighborhood and church support team. One of our small group guys hired her at his company, which supplements our daily financial needs while I’m a guest of the government. My room and board here are covered, no need to worry. The government provides me ‘three hots and a cot’’, as they say here.
I’ve shared with Debbie and Jack how I’ve been used here. Because it’s widely known that I’m in the can because of my gun rights activities, I’m a little bit of a hero with many of my fellow inmates. Probably because of that I’ve not experienced what I understand a lot of new inmates go through, with various forms of harassment, sexual and otherwise. They kind of give me a wide berth and a certain level of visible respect. I’ve had some good spiritual discussions with some guys, who have some true needs.
Our biggest argument today was when Jack asked me what I thought about the new ATF t
elevision ad, created and aired to try and scare gun owners into turning in their guns. Maybe I’m a little sensitive because the ad was staged in a jail cell. Seriously though, I told Jack that I thought it was not the role of the government in a free country to tell its citizens, using their money, that if they don’t do what the government tells them to do, they can spend several years in forced confinement. What kind of a country does that?
Jack’s response was that the internal revenue code works like that, and everybody accepts it. I sort of lost it at that point, and went off on IRS abuses, which led to a tiff over the Federal Reserve and downhill from there.
So, what should a parent do when agreement with an adult child is just not happening? I changed the subject. I brought up my potential future trial. We were both happy to talk about something else, I think. I know I was, because it makes my stomach hurt to fight with my son. I don’t mind at all fighting with abusive Senators or probing District Attorneys, but I don’t handle fighting with Jack very well. Or Debbie, for that matter, but as I said, that’s not generally been a problem, thankfully.
As I said, I brought up my possible criminal charges and trial.
Jack asked me if I thought there was any chance that any charges against me would be just dismissed, thrown out? I explained that the Attorney General had been appointed by this President, that he worked for this President and that he would do what this President asked him to do. Jack then asked if the Judge might grant some kind of a dismissal pleading. I explained that my attorney told me yesterday that my case was being venued out of Texas next week to Oregon, and that I would be transferred soon thereafter to the Pacific coast, to the federal prison at Sheridan, Oregon.
Jack immediately realized that the change of location was motivated by at least two goals, to harass me by separating me from my family and support network by several hundreds of miles and also to pick up a federal judge and jury who would not be friendly, shall we say, to a Texas gun rights leader. My attorney’s conclusions, exactly. Maybe Jack should have been an attorney. I told him that his hunch was correct, as I learned right before he arrived today that my new federal judge in Oregon will be Hiram ‘Hanging Judge’ McDermott, a Carter appointee, who has a record of imprisoning for maximum terms persons convicted in his court of gun law violations. One blog I read said that the Judge had told an attorney in a private conversation that the payer name on his twice a month check was ‘U.S. Government’, and he never forgot who his employer was. So, we are not counting on any favors from my new Judge, let alone a dismissal of any sort. Debbie is looking into moving to Oregon, if she can find a decent job. It won’t be easy on her, which, of course, makes it tough for me, which is the government’s purpose, pretty clearly.
Well, dear journal/readers of my jailhouse letters, how am I doing, you may ask? Besides that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play? Sorry, jailhouse humor, I guess. I’m human, so it’s not easy. But, I know Who has control of all this, so I’m OK. Pretty much, that is. Can’t mislead your own journal, right?
As Jack was here today, seeing his youthfulness and energy, I couldn’t help but recall when I was that young, a long time before my eye-opening education in how things really work in government and politics. As a young businessman and new father, I didn’t have a lot of time to pay attention to current affairs, what was happening in DC, or Austin or even at City Hall in Tyler. Like most people, I sort of just took it for granted that people in public office were all doing a good job, for the most part. I paid my taxes, voted and hoped for the best.
Then, my life changed. Somebody invited me, as a new insurance company employee to Rotary. The first time I attended, I met two guys who both became important in my life. One guy I met was named Ralph Snyder. Ralph took me to a meeting that led me down my political activism path that I’ll cover later in this journal in greater depth, but I’ll need some time to get all that collected in my memory and written down, maybe next week. I’ve got nothing but time here.
The other guy I met at Rotary on my first visit, Fred Rose, is a Tyler businessman, a house contractor, as I recall. He invited me to a luncheon Bible Study. As an American and a Texan, I always pretty much thought of myself as a Christian. If anyone had asked me, I would have said, ‘sure, I’m a Christian, I’m not a Buddhist’. Well, at the Bible Study, which was attended by about thirty some guys, some of whom I knew, somebody did ask me. But not the way I expected. Fred Rose asked me “when did I come to know the Lord?” I put his question in quotes here because that’s how he asked me. I, of course, had no answer. I kind of spluttered out something like, “well, I’ve always been a Christian”, which didn’t answer his question. A slightly raised eyebrow, and then a quick smile told me that I might hear some more about this from Fred.
Sure enough, he stopped by the insurance company the afternoon of the next day and asked if I had any time to talk. Turned out I did. I expected 15-20 minutes, max. We were still talking when Sally asked if I needed anything else before she left work for the day. I couldn’t believe it was quitting time. Fred told me about his messed up, booze-heavy, womanizing life that had nearly destroyed his family. He told me that a carpenter had saved him. Well, I knew he was a contractor, so I asked him if one of his workers had helped him out with some good advice. He smiled.
No, he said, this carpenter is Jewish, and he died a couple thousand years ago. I’m a little dense sometimes, so I asked how that could be and he told me that the carpenter was Jesus of Nazareth. Honestly, my first reaction when he said that was to glance at my phone to see if maybe Sally might buzz me and I could terminate this meeting. But, I’m really glad now I didn’t try such a stunt. Fred shared with me the gospel. That Jesus was crucified and resurrected and through Him I can have a new, abundant life. I’d heard some of that kind of talk before. I’m a Texan, remember, but it hadn’t really sunk in. My parents weren’t particularly religious. The only time I went to a church when I was kid was when a neighbor or friend invited to something special.
But, this time I guess I was just ready. Once I understood what Christ had done for me, and what He expected from me, that’s all it took. I still don’t know how I’d been so blissfully ignorant all those years, but I was. So Fred led me in a prayer. I prayed. I repented of my (many) sins. Then I told Jesus that I believed in Him as my savior and Lord, and I asked Him to come into my life, to take over the throne of my life. No fireworks, just a totally changed life. Jesus didn’t waste any time shaping me up. I don’t know who all may read this someday, so I’ll leave out all the lurid, racy stuff that I gave up, but I know, and my best friends know, how thoroughly, and rapidly, He changed my lifestyle. Whew!
Naturally, I told Debbie that night what I had done. She looked at me like, “yeah, sure you did”, but she said nothing, except “that’s nice, John”. But, within about a month or so, she had seen enough of her new husband (‘where is my old husband and what have you done with him?’) to want to know more about what happened to me. I count it a real blessing that I could share my new Best Friend with my wife at the kitchen table, and she came to know Him, also.
OK, dear journal/readers of my jailhouse letters, how did I get on this memory lane? Oh, yeah. Jack was here today. He has such potential. He loves the Lord. He’s a great preacher, at least a lot of people in Dallas must think so. He draws from all over the Park Cities area. Great family man. I just wish he would agree with his ol’ dad on the issues that are dividing our country. You know, the issues that landed me in prison. Oh, yeah, well, maybe that has something to do with why Jack isn’t in agreement with me. But, there’s always hope. More later on Ralph Snyder and what he did to me, make that for me.
FIFTY TWO
Concord, Massachusetts – Old North Bridge
The ATF claimed that its advertisements were so successful that 94% of the estimated number of guns in America had been turned in at Redemption Centers by the deadline. Of course, like many statistics, this one could not possibly be proven to be accurate, a
nd was by many estimates excessively high. But it sounded good, and the estimated percentage of compliance became commonly acknowledged by the mainstream media as proof of success of the new law. The seemingly impressive statistic was cited by the President when he and Director Humless officially commemorated the concluding day of the Redemption Period. They did so with a joint news conference at the historic re-built Old North Bridge, spanning the Concord River, in Concord, Massachusetts, the site of the first battle of the Revolutionary War. The President and Director Humless gave their remarks in front of the Daniel Chester French sculpture of the Minuteman.
“Director Humless, I have asked you to join me here today at this historic location to honor you for your agency’s hard work over these last six months to make America free from gun violence. I couldn’t think of a more appropriate spot to formally end the era of gun violence than to commemorate its end where it began. It was here that guns were used for what we now know was the historic purpose of freeing our people from their domination by the British Empire. That Empire oppressed people on many continents.
“There are some who have objected to the McAlister Hate Speech and Hate Weapons Elimination Act based on what I think are misguided Constitutional law arguments. I know a little bit about Constitutional Law, having taught the subject. I want to assure the American public that if I thought the McAlister Bill was unconstitutional, I would not have signed it into law. The fact that it appears to conflict with some protestors’ interpretations of the Second Amendment doesn’t mean that it actually does. We used to have slavery and people argued that it was Constitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court, as we all know, will hear arguments next week, in an emergency hearing, in a case challenging the constitutionality of the McAlister Act. I am sure that our nation’s highest Court will carefully consider the arguments both for and against the new law. I am just as confident that the Supreme Court will render a Constitutionally correct decision, and hand it down expeditiously. My own view, of course, is that old words from two centuries ago must be carefully weighed in light of today’s public demand to rid our nation of gun violence, which has been caused in large part by hateful speech, which we have also outlawed in the history-making McAlister Act.
