The Incremental Death of the Bill of Rights

V. P. Hughes

The ongoing political saga of the Deep State vs. duly elected President Donald J. Trump reveals many acts of unconstitutional behavior in its efforts to undo the 2016 presidential election before the upcoming election of 2020. Aside from the terminally dishonest, most people bewail what has been and continues to be done by the Washington establishment. The odd thing is that many on the Left admit that what they are doing is, in fact, unconstitutional but they excuse their actions with the claim that they are “necessary.” But rest assured, there is absolutely no validity in that argument. Yet, after three plus years of ugly and lawless actions by those who are supposed to protect and defend this nation and her citizens, we are at the point at which the illegality and unconstitutionality of what has and is being done—as well as that planned for the future—is understood and acknowledged—but pretty much ignored! Yet, amazing as it sounds, most Americans have become inured to the situation! It is reminiscent of Josef Stalin’s comment that one killing is a murder while a million is a statistic. One can get used to anything, no matter how horrific, if it continues happening without any meaningful consequences. That is seen most clearly in the highly visible criminality of the Clintons. It is common knowledge that then “President” Bill Clinton raped a number of women and committed perjury. It is also very well known that he and his partner in infamy are surrounded by the bodies of those who became “inconvenient.” Everybody KNOWS this—but nothing is ever done about it. Indeed, most Americans have accepted this ghastly situation with the understandable belief that there is nothing that can be done about it and, besides, it really doesn’t matter!

Now, that is untrue! We would have had the Wicked Witch of Washington as president today had it not been for the fact that the Deep State got cocky in the belief that she—and it—could not lose the 2016 election! They did! And all that has come after is an attempt to undo that misjudgment on their part! It should also be a “wake-up call” to decent Americans that the Deep State won’t make that mistake again, as made clear by the ongoing campaign against President Trump noted earlier.

But meanwhile, the continued undoing of our God-given and constitutionally guaranteed rights goes on apace. Most Americans know what’s going on in California and Virginia—to name but two stricken States—but meanwhile, smaller—if no less important—constitutional assaults continue to take place. There is an old saying about attacks on people’s liberties; that is, if you attack his liberties, you are also attacking my liberties. Remember, it doesn’t matter where in the boat the hole is located, if it isn’t plugged the boat will sink! But let us look at one such assault as a means of understanding the eventual result of this campaign of lawlessness especially as it is carried on by those who are supposed to represent the law! This is necessary because, as was pointed out by Stalin, mass criminality tends to produce a sort of general malaise rather than a robust desire to root out the acts and punish those who commit them. Therefore, to bring this matter into better focus, let us look at the case of The United States vs. Matthew Hale.

Mr. Hale became a target of the Deep State because he is a white man who is not ashamed of his race but openly defends it. Though he has never advocated violence in that defense, he doesn’t hide his views either and, as a result, he has often been harassed and even physically attacked. Of course, in those instances, he received no assistance from American law-enforcement but, instead, he became their especial target After a great deal of the type of government plotting we’ve seen in the Trump coup d’etat, eventually Hale was arrested on the charge of attempting to purchase the services of an assassin to murder a federal judge. In a trial that had more in common with the Dreyfus affair than American jurisprudence, he was convicted and sentenced to forty years in prison. But Matthew Hale was guilty of nothing more reprehensible than holding politically incorrect views in our current culture of “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Hale’s trial—the transcript of which is available at freematthale.org—was so dishonest as to make that transcript unbelieveable! He was arrested as he showed up for the appeal of a copyright case that had previously been decided in his favor but overturned by a higher court. Interestingly enough, the Judge who had found in his favor, Joan Lefkow, was the supposed target of the alleged assassination, a claim that isn’t even remotely rational! The lawyer who was hired to represent Hale—Thomas Durkin—was suggested by a fellow inmate in the local jail where he was being held. But the man was not only incompetent but was known to the Judge who presided over the trial, James T. Moody; indeed Moody mentioned at the opening of the trial that Durkin had appeared before him previously. Moody was located in Indiana, but was brought into Illinois for this particular trial. The details of the trial itself are so odd and irrational as to make the conviction null and void in any American courtroom:

1. Agents of the government employed one Tony Evola, as an informant. They paid this unscrupulous individual $72,000 of our tax money to tape conversations with Hale over a two year period hoping to obtain “evidence” that could be used to put him away. Yet, on those same tapes, not once did Hale ever ask the informant to kill anybody or to obtain the services of any third party to do so. In fact, several times Hale refused Evola’s offer—the crime of “entrapment”—to engage in illegal acts. Nearly the last taped statement had Hale say to the informant: “I know the law Brother and I’m just not interested in breaking it.”

2. Hale’s attorney would not permit him to be present during the entire process of jury selection, something that is his right as the defendant. Hale’s attorney also refused to visit his “client” during his pre-trial incarceration to speak with and advise him though the facility was across the street from the attorney’s office. This was made known to Hale by Durkin’s associate, Patrick Blegen. Unfortunately for Hale, this was the least of Durkin’s violations of his client’s rights:

3. Hale had provided his attorney with a list of over one hundred character witnesses but none were called to testify. Since much of the “evidence” presented to the jury involved negative judgments of Hale’s character, such character witnesses were crucial to overcome what were essentially opinions, not evidence. Parenthetically, such testimony was designed to validate the government’s claim that Hale would have planned such a crime, a “validation” that would hardly have been necessary if the evidence claimed by the government had been worthy of belief. More important, however, Durkin would not permit Hale to testify in his own defense, stating, “he wasn’t prepared to do that!” The right of a defendant to testify in his own defense is one of the most basic rights at trial! But if this were not enough, during summations, Hale’s attorney told the jury that they ought to find his client guilty on “moral grounds” whatever the evidence concerning the crime actually charged! Hale’s case should have been throw out if for no other reason than the failure of the “defense” attorney to provide a decent defense for his client!

4. But it goes on! After the trial, the jury foreman admitted that he had disobeyed the Judge’s order not to read anything about Hale or the case or listen to the media but that after having being accepted as one of the jurors, he went home and followed the media coverage, in effect, disregarding the Judge’s orders and disqualifying himself. A defendant must be protected from the irrational speculations that may be aroused by media coverage, That is what the jury selection process is supposed to prevent! This person should never have been permitted to sit on Hale’s jury much less have been the jury foreman.

5. As for the actions of Judge Moody: that jurist permitted prosecutor M. David Weisman, at the time of summation to tell the jury that “the government had evidence that the defendant had a member of his organization kill two people and shoot lots of others!” Not only was this an egregious lie but, far more important, the prosecutor was not legally permitted to make such a statement in summation. The only matter he could present to the jury was the evidence adduced at trial. Speculations upon other actions by the defendant could not be raised because the defense would have no opportunity to refute them. Of course, Judge Moody did not declare a mistrial as he should have done at that point.

6. Matthew Hale’s trial was both tainted and prejudiced, being more fitting as an old-time Soviet purge than American jurisprudence. The jury foreman, an admitted homosexual, professed to fearing “retribution” by Hale’s “supporters” even though there was nothing to justify his supposed fears. This man—and who knows how many others on the jury—went into their “deliberations” prepared to find Hale guilty, not based upon evidence of wrongdoing—because there was none—but because they hated his views on cultural issues. Since Hale’s views were not the“crime” being prosecuted—though, in fact, they were!—they should not have influenced the verdict. In other words, Matthew Hale was found guilty of “hate thoughts” and “hate speech” but without the commission of any “hate crime!” The knowledge that being politically incorrect can send a man to prison should cause Americans great concern today.

With the guilty verdict Matthew Hale was given a 40 year sentence based upon the sentencing guidelines for terrorists though he was not tried as a terrorist. As of today, Matthew Hale has spent over 16 years in solitary confinement at a federal “supermax” prison. At one time, he was sent to Terre Haute prison in Indiana and while there was falsely charged with some violation of prison rules. Hale was again placed in solitary confinement for seven months. He has since been returned to the original institution and remains in solitary confinement to this day. It is not unreasonable to believe that, because Hale continues to work actively against the injustices he has suffered, he was sent to Terre Haute prison to be “eliminated.” Terre Haute is one of the ten worst prisons in the United States and during his first month there in solitary confinement, he lost twenty pounds. Had that “treatment” continued, doubtless there would be no need for any court to bring his case before the American people.

The case of Matthew Hale is the case of the Deep State against Donald Trump and the American people in microcosm. What has happened to Hale might very well happen to any one of us who think—never mind speak or act—in ways forbidden by our present politically correct establishment. The only difference is that Hale was open and known for his beliefs while not being “important” enough that his persecution would bring down the wrath of the general public and those parts of the media that still have some honesty and decency. But the day is not far off when a well known name will not protect anyone from the pitiless clutches of the Deep State! It is time for decent people to re-read Orwell’s 1984 and respond while it is still fiction.

Posted in: News