Sheriffs For Treason

10 Comments

by: ohwilleke

(Wow – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Eight sheriffs from Colorado (one in eight of them) attended the the first convention of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association in Las Vegas, which was sponsored by organizations including the John Birch Society. The group basically argues that county sheriffs have a right and duty to take up arms against the United States government because they claim that the federal government doesn’t have the authority that it has exercised in fact, with court approval, from the very outset of our Republic.

Among those in attendance from Colorado were Weld County Sheriff John Cook, Montezuma County Sheriff Dennis Spruell, Montrose County Sheriff Rick Dunlap, El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa, and El Paso County Commissioner Peggy Littleton.

The Colorado delegates, however, disavowed the use of force against federal agents or simply didn’t go there in public comments one way or the other.

The United States Constitution establishes the supremacy of federal law over state law, places the courts in the position of making binding interpretations of the constitution, and defines treason to include taking up arms against the government of the United States.

To be clear, I am not saying that it is treason merely to propose and discuss a political theory under which treason is legitimate, and maybe even a duty of a local official. Treason is defined on the basis of acts and not words in the United States. But, to be equally clear, the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association is an organization of elected and appointed high government officials sworn to uphold the United States Constitution that argues that Sheriffs have a right to engage in acts of treason, and several of the members of this organization have either come extremely close to crossing that line, or have done so.

The organization clamis that: “The sheriff’s position overrides any federal agents or even the arrogant FBI agents who attempt to assume jurisdiction in our cases.”

Elkhart County, Indiana, Sheriff Brad Rogers, Sheriff Tony DeMeo of Nye County, Nevada, and Sheriff Dave Mattis of Big Horn County, Wyoming recounted instances in which they threatened to arrest federal government officials for doing their jobs in their counties for reasons consistent with this organization’s ideology.

Today’s front page story in the Denver Post was an important source for this post, but except for one quotation which it quotes itself from the online materials of organization in question, none of the material in this post is quoted from the story.

10 thoughts on “Sheriffs For Treason”

Car 31 says:

February 13, 2012 at 5:31 am

If I understand the goal of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, it is that Sherrifs have the ability to refuse federal officers entry into their counties, and by doing so this will solve all of America’s problems.

Seeing El Paso represented, I have to ask, are Maketa and Littleton advocating that there should be no federal presence in their county?

If so, they should open their eyes a little wider since without federal government, El Paso county is a ghost town.

What tools.

Our esteemed Sheriffs and Cmmsr Littleton joined this up and coming organization in Las Vegas with sponsors like the John Birch Society, the Gun Owners of America and the Front Sight Firearms Training Institute and advertisers incuding survivalist businesses, anti-IRS proponents, purveyors of gold-buying secrets and a company that touts info on “How to Turn Your Home into a Fortress.”

Log in to Reply
ClubTwitty says:

February 13, 2012 at 2:57 pm

I saw that article and thought about a diary myself…I’m sure the good taxpayers of these counties–employed and unemployed–appreciate this sue of public resources. I’m surprised Valerio didn’t drive his tank over though.

Log in to Reply
1. ohwilleke says:
  
  February 13, 2012 at 10:33 pm
  
  public spending to pay for the trip. There are troubling aspects for sheriffs going to something like this at the urging of and with they payment by private donors, but it isn’t a matter of misdirected public funds.
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. WestDem says:
    
    February 15, 2012 at 12:04 am
    
    Wouldn’t Amendment 48 $50 limitations kick in?
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. ohwilleke says:
      
      February 15, 2012 at 1:10 am
      
      and there are a couple of exceptions that are potentially applicable:
      
      (e) ADMISSION TO, AND THE COST OF FOOD OR BEVERAGES CONSUMED AT, A RECEPTION, MEAL OR MEETING BY AN ORGANIZATION BEFORE WHOM THE RECIPIENT APPEARS TO SPEAK OR TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS PART OF A SCHEDULED PROGRAM;
      
      (f) REASONABLE EXPENSES PAID BY A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION OR OTHER STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR ATTENDANCE AT A CONVENTION, FACT-FINDING MISSION OR TRIP, OR OTHER MEETING IF THE PERSON IS SCHEDULED TO DELIVER A SPEECH, MAKE A PRESENTATION, PARTICIPATE ON A PANEL, OR REPRESENT THE STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, PROVIDED THAT THE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION RECEIVES LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT (5%) OF ITS FUNDING FROM FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS OR ENTITIES;
      
      Now, I’m certainly not saying that I know that the donations received actually qualify under either category (individual donations as opposed to donations from non-profits, for example, might not qualify), but I’m willing to give the officials (who have surely been briefed on their gift-ban duties) the benefit of the doubt until I hear anything to the contrary. There were many non-profits that co-sponsored the event, the costs of sending fewer than a dozen people to Las Vegas from Colorado for a weekend aren’t huge, and it may be that only part of the expenses incurred by the officials were provided with private funding.
      
      Log in to Reply
      1. WestDem says:
        
        February 15, 2012 at 1:55 am
        
        Too many amendments to accurately keep track of off the top of the head – that is another issue for another day.
        
        The question I have: it is difficult to read the intent of (f) because of all the commas, probably why it is written that way.
        
        But, I doubt that all 8 of the attendees were on a panel or making a speech, so presumably they were there as a guest of a non-profit. So, if Habitat for Humanity paid County Building Official expenses he could go to Vegas for Homebuilders Convention this year?
        
        Log in to Reply
nancycronk says:

February 13, 2012 at 8:36 pm

Yikes.

Log in to Reply
BlueCat says:

February 13, 2012 at 11:36 pm

On the plus side, some very sensible views were expressed by Colorado Sheriffs and staff who emphasized good relations with various federal enforcement branches. On the chilling side, those who claimed they were afraid they’d lose elections in their conservative districts if they failed to attend. Apparently they didn’t have confidence in their constituents ability to understand what was wrong with this picture.

Of course, ultimately, these America hating (in our system we are the federal government via representation, after all) Sheriffs are delusional. In any serious, ultimate show down between their authority and the authority of the government of the United States of America in full control of the United States Armed Forces, any full scale attempt to commit the treason they threaten would leave them crushed in short order, their delusions of plucky survivalist citizens with guns joining them in a successful revolt in the face of American military might quickly exposed as childish fantasy.

TPers may like to dress up as colonial revolutionaries but they don’t have the stones for anything but talk. And bullying, if they think they can get away with it without breaking a nail.

Log in to Reply
Ralphie says:

February 14, 2012 at 12:02 am

He’s already threatened to ticket Forest Service employees who close roads in his County.

“If they start closing roads they are not legally able to close, I will take action,” he said. “It would be a class three misdemeanor for blocking a roadway. Typically speaking, they would be written a ticket.”

http://www.cortezjournal.com/a…

Log in to Reply
Leonard Smalls says:

February 14, 2012 at 10:34 am

they’re doing this to fiercely defend the state’s right to produce medicinal marijuana against Federal interlopers, right?

Log in to Reply