The line between political hyperbole, a sort of 'excited utterance', and an actual threat or incitement to act is very often a fine one...and one that is determined by the eyes of other 'Beholders'. The First Amendment does not protect actual threats. The Freedom of the Press Clause in the First Amendment isn't a blanket get-out-of-jail card. If you rob a bank, you aren't getting out of jail because you're a 'journalist'.
While I think your posts were declasse' and gauche, I tend to think that they were a form of political hyperbole made in the emotional heat of the 2016 election; however, do not allow your words to ever become a modern-day version of King Henry II's exasperated utterance about the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas à Becket. 'Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?'may have been meant as an actual incitement to violence or just political hyperbole.
While Henry II was protected by the Divine Right of Kings, his life and reign, nevertheless, never recovered. If your election night statements were merely political hyperbole, your free speech rights will save you from prosecution - what impact it will have on your careers is another matter indeed. On the other hand, if your 'assassination talk' was not hyperbole and an actual desire or determination to murder the man, who was duly-elected to serve as your President, then neither your First Amendment rights of free speech or freedom of the press will afford you a luxury others have not been afforded.
In a spirit of goodwill and to help to shield you from your own exuberance, I compiled just a few examples for your edification:
18 U.S.C. § 871;
Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969), for avowing during a political debate at small public gathering that if inducted into Army (which he vowed would never occur) and made to carry a rifle 'the first man I want to get in my sights is L. B. J.!'
United States v. Stickrath, 242 F. 151 (1917), for saying 'President Wilson ought to be killed. It is a wonder some one has not done it already. If I had an opportunity, I would do it myself!'
Clark v. United States, 250 F. 449 (C. A. 5th Cir. 1918), for declaring 'Wilson is a wooden-headed son of a bitch. I wish Wilson was in hell, and if I had the power I would put him there!'
United States v. Apel, 44 F. Supp. 592 (1942), for displaying posters urging passersby to 'hang [President] Roosevelt.'
United States v. Glover, 846 F2d 339 (CA6 Ky 1988);
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
Fortunately, the Court has moved far away from the ideas that gave us the Alien & Sedition Act of 1798, part of which criminalised criticisms of the Federal government, President, and other officials that were deemed to be 'false' - 'falsity' being in the eye of the government, and the Sedition Act of 1918, which resulted in all sorts of atrocities and persecutions.
Instead of writing about presidential assassinations, use your talents to explain how an early form of government mandated 'political correctness' led to the imprisonment of people like Eugene V. Debs (10 years for 'undermining the government's conscription efforts'); Robert Goldstein (United States v. "The Spirit of '76", The Unluckiest Man in Movie History, How Progressives Killed Robert Goldstein Through Censorship, Police State Tactics, Unconstitutional Laws, & Railroading All The Way Into A Cattlecar On The Road To A Nazi Concentration Camp); antiwar protesters; Suffragettes, who were institutionalised along with homosexuals; Mollie Steimer (15 years for printing and distributing pamphlets denouncing America's opposition to the Bolshevik Revolution); William Edenborn, a naturalised American of German descent, was arrested and accused of violating President Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act for speech (at his dining room table) about World War I and the American military's effort, which was reported by a family guest and deemed 'disloyal' by the government); Marie Equi, a doctor, a lesbian, birth control and abortion advocate, radical labour reformer, feminist, and antiwar activist. Even after the United States entered the war in 1917, she continued to protest. A speech that she gave at the IWW hall caught the attention of the Federal government. After a cursory and perfunctory 'investigation', the government declared that Dr Equi was 'a dangerous threat to national security'. She was convicted of sedition and imprisoned. There are, literally, tens of thousands of cases like these, which we should take as warnings because governments around the world, including ours, have been regressing to their natural state. The individual becomes unimportant. Everything and everyone for the State!
Under the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, Wilson's administration shut down newspapers and magazines at an astounding pace. Indeed, any criticism of the government, even in your own home, could earn you a prison sentence. One man was brought to trial for explaining in his own home why he didn't want to buy Liberty Bonds.
The Wilson administration sanctioned what could be called an American fascisti, the American Protective League. The APL – a quarter million strong at its height, with offices in 600 cities – carried government-issued badges while beating up dissidents and protesters and conducting warrantless searches and interrogations. Even after the war, Wilson refused to release the last of America's political prisoners, leaving it to subsequent Republican administrations to free the anti-war Socialist Eugene V. Debs and others.
Study and educate your readers about the Committee on Public Information; the American Protective League (whose sole mission was to spy on fellow citizens and turn in “seditious” persons or draft dodgers); the infamous Palmer Raids; the 100,000 government-trained men, who gave 4 Minute speeches ('The Four Minute Men') to all that would listen...and, sister, that means you whether you like it or not! In 1917-18 alone, some 7,555,190 speeches were delivered in 5,200 communities, the War Industries Board, and too many indignities and shocks to the conscience to list.
Wilson harshly suppressed dissent and resistance among citizens and the press. At Wilson’s urging, a Sedition Act (not unlike the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 ) forbade Americans from criticizing their own government in a time of war. Citizens could not “utter, print, write or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the government or the military.
The Postmaster General was given the authority to revoke the mailing privileges of those who disobeyed. About 75 periodicals were were shut down by the government in this way and many others were given warnings.
In the fashion of a police state, the Department of Justice arrested tens of thousands of individuals without just cause. One was not safe even within the walls of one’s own home to criticize the Wilson administration. A letter to federal attorneys and marshals said that citizens had nothing to fear as long as they “Obey the law; keep your mouth shut.”
In fact, the Justice Department created the precursor to the Gestapo called the American Protective League. Its job was to spy on fellow citizens and turn in “seditious” persons or draft dodgers. In September of 1918 in NYC, the APL rounded up about 50,000 people. This doesn’t even include the infamous Palmer Raids (named after Wilson’s attorney general) that occurred after the war.
In 1915, in his address to Congress, Wilson declared, “The gravest threats against our national peace and safety have been uttered within our own borders. There are citizens of the United States, I blush to admit, born under other flags…who have poured the poison of disloyalty into the very arteries of our national life; who have sought to bring the authority and good name of our Government into contempt, to destroy our industries wherever they thought it effective for their vindictive purposes….”
All in all it is estimated that about 175,000 Americans were arrested for failing to demonstrate their patriotism in one way or another.
Yes, we turned many a corner with Watt and Brandenburg, but prosecutions are still very much happening. And, claims of 'jokes' and 'political hyperbole' aren't always enough to keep the speaker out of prison.
- Fox News, 29 September 2009
- Dallas News, 29 April 2010
- Associated Press, 29 June 2007.
- WHAS-TV, 6 December 2010
- WKYT, 19 February 2010
- New York Press, 11 November 2003
- Associated Press, 29 June 2007
- The Guardian, Associated Press, 1 November 2010
Do not let your 'It's about time for a presidential assassination!' become 'Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?'
You are both, supposedly, educated individuals. Sadly, you have sunk to the same level as these thugs...
Stay classy, people.
No comments:
Post a Comment