In my role as a journalist advocating for those affected by the January 6 events and other politically marginalized individuals, I’ve gained invaluable insights into our nation’s historical foundations through conversations with various patriots. Recently, I had the privilege of discussing these themes with David Moerschel, who illuminated how history tends to echo itself, often providing crucial insights into our present circumstances.
The charges of sedition leveled against the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys have been met with skepticism from the outset, with many legal experts suggesting that “the First Amendment might present significant challenges for prosecutors attempting to establish a case for seditious conspiracy.” (The Conversation, Jan 14, 2022)
Former President Trump took steps to commute the sentences of those tried for sedition and has expressed intentions to delve deeper into these cases.
As the trials of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys progressed, it became increasingly evident that the evidence supporting sedition was lacking. Historically, sedition laws have often been utilized to suppress political adversaries for over three centuries.
Sedition Laws: A Tool Against Oath Keepers and Proud Boys
David Moerschel, who faced conviction for sedition, experienced personal fallout, losing a promising job in the medical field and spending two years in custody. His experience serves as a poignant example of how accusations of sedition can be weaponized.
Support David’s fight for justice and help him regain his footing. Donate HERE. (www.givesendgo.com/davidlegalfund)
During our conversation, David recounted Benjamin Franklin’s warnings from over 300 years ago about the critical nature of free speech to liberty, alongside cautions regarding how tyrannical leaders might wield sedition accusations to suppress dissent.
John Adams: A Case Study in Tyranny
John Adams exemplified such tyrannical leadership, as he disregarded Franklin’s warnings and enacted the Sedition Act of 1798. Shortly after its introduction, Adams charged Benjamin Franklin Bache—Franklin’s grandson—with sedition, marking the beginning of a wave of arrests targeting individuals who dared to criticize him.
The Oath Keeper Trial: Lack of Evidence for Sedition
David provided a detailed analysis of the Oath Keeper trial, highlighting how the government’s own witnesses effectively negated the existence of a seditious conspiracy. The legal requirements for proving sedition include two key elements: first, a conspiracy to commit a crime; and second, the use of force. Government testimonies failed to support either claim (refer to Trial 2 Transcript, pages 1666, 3887, 3921, 3922).
In fact, the proceedings revealed a comical twist. Here’s a snippet from the trial involving a defense attorney questioning an Oath Keeper who had entered a plea agreement:
Q: This document you signed as part of your plea agreement states you, in fact, used force, correct?
A: Yes.
Q: But you did not use any force against anyone, did you?
A: Well, I meant I didn’t use force against any specific individuals.
Q: So, merely being present is considered using force? (Trial 2 Transcript, pg 3895)
It’s almost absurd to consider that mere presence at a protest could be construed as a forceful overthrow of government. If it weren’t so serious, it would be a source of humor! This sets a precarious precedent where anyone attending a rally to exercise their First Amendment rights could be charged with sedition.
The Real Crime? Exaggerated Speech
If the Oath Keepers had no conspiratorial plan and did not employ force, what then was their true crime? David posits that the politically charged, hyperbolic rhetoric resonating throughout the country post-2020 election was their actual offense. However, the Constitution robustly protects freedom of speech. Even the Associated Press acknowledged that “anti-government sentiments or general calls to ‘action’ against perceived ‘tyrants’ do not meet the threshold for seditious conspiracy.”
The government’s treatment of the Oath Keepers illustrates a clear attempt to stifle free expression:
1. Pretrial: David was barred from using computers or the internet, with even his children’s devices confiscated. Only his wife’s smartphone was permitted, while David was limited to a flip phone.
2. In Prison: All of David’s communications—phone calls and emails—were monitored, a level of scrutiny far from the norm.
3. At the Halfway House: David faced restrictions on social media use and had his phone frequently searched.
4. Probation: If subjected to probation, he would endure additional monitoring of computers, networks, social media, and emails.
5. Even post-commutation, David continues to face infringements on his free speech, with X/Twitter suspending his accounts multiple times, alongside those of other prominent figures like Stewart Rhodes and Joseph Biggs.
This indicates that the allegations of sedition against the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys fundamentally represent an assault on free speech.
Can President Trump Follow in Jefferson’s Footsteps?
Thomas Jefferson stood as a staunch advocate for free speech and those unfairly targeted by the oppressive hand of John Adams. Jefferson famously pardoned all individuals prosecuted under Adams’ Sedition Act, asserting his belief that such law was as invalid as if Congress had mandated worship of a golden idol. (Letter to Abigail Adams, July 22, 1804)
Biden as Adams: Will Trump Be Our Jefferson?
We now call upon Trump to pardon the remaining accused, echoing Jefferson’s legacy against the tyrannical actions of President Biden. On January 20, Trump commuted their sentences with a commitment to review their cases for potential pardons. You can play a role in this effort! Visit www.PardonThe14.com to request a postcard to the White House, simply requiring your name and address.
We’re at it again! Our motto has remained unchanged: No Patriot Left Behind! Help us spread the word and urge President Trump to pardon the 14! Watch this brief video for your marching orders: https://t.co/cfW00aqBJ1
— MAGA Mouse (@MAGAMouse1621) April 9, 2025
Support David in his quest for justice and his fight for a pardon.
For further details about David’s case, visit www.Davidisinnocent.com.
