Letter to Senator Kelly

 This is the text of a letter I forwarded to Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona.

​Dear Senator:

I would like to ask for an answer to a question that has been simmering in my mind for some time.  But before I pose that question, and for full disclosure, let me say, I am a retired secondary educator who just happened to teach US History and Government for over 30 years.  I have a small understanding of our country’s history and ongoings in Washington.  I am a lifelong registered Republican who supported Nikki Haley.  I did not vote for President Trump for various reasons. AND, I like your politics, to the point of seriously considering jumping ship and registering as a Democrat because the MAGA Republicans do not represent my interests.

With the President now being able to sign an Executive Order to eliminate birthright citizenship because HIS interpretation of the 14th Amendment doesn’t align with what has been accepted for over 150 years…I have my own interpretation of a portion in the Third Clause of the same amendment.

I am quite confident you are aware of the Third Clause of the 14th Amendment.  To emphasize my concern, I have taken the liberty to include the text of the Third Clause of said Amendment, with the portion of the clause that has my attention in bold type.

 “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

As I understand the evidence and proceedings of the “January 6th” Committee, I am convinced there was enough evidence to charge the President with Seditious Conspiracy.  I am acutely aware this charge is difficult to prove.  Some would have preferred to charge the President with “Insurrection”, but that would be even more difficult of a verdict to ascertain. 
 
From the New Oxford dictionary…

insurrection | ˌinsəˈrekSHən | noun; a violent uprising against an authority or government:

Surprisingly, the thesaurus for the New Oxford dictionary lists the following words related to “insurrection”.

rebellion, revolt, uprising, mutiny, revolution, insurgence, insurgency, rising, rioting, riot, sedition; civil disobedience, civil disorder, unrest, anarchy, fighting in the streets; coup; French coup d'état

And the definition of sedition, or, sedition conspiracy as offered by the New Oxford dictionary would be:

seditious | səˈdiSHəs | adjective; inciting or causing people to rebel against the authority of a state
 
That being said, it is highly probable Seditious Conspiracy would be between two or more planning to interrupt the process of government, but failing to act.  In essence, the difference between the two is, seditious conspiracy is “the talk” while insurrection is “the walk or action” if you will.
  
While the President’s speech on the Ellipse on January 6th , 2021 certainly stoked the fire of the attack on the Capitol, it was nothing more than inciting the people to commit to the attack.  In the President’s words, 

“…We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore…”

In my view, that statement was a call to arms to his supporters, but, as we know, the President was never found guilty of any wrong doing.  However, many of his supporters, about 1600, were.  Some of those found guilty were members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.  They were convicted of seditious conspiracy and not insurrection…which makes me wonder about the prosecution of these people. 

On day one of his second term in office, President Trump commuted the sentences of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.  It is clear to me many “rioters” were attacking the Capitol building in an attempt to interfere with the government action of canvassing the Electoral College votes, a duty of the Vice President in his role as President of the Senate. 

Many members of the both chambers were in danger, maybe yourself included, at the hands of the rioters (insurrectionists).  The January 6th Committee uncovered evidence indicating Vice President Pence’ life was threatened as well as Nancy Pelosi’s life.  All of this action during this attack on the Capitol and the members of both chambers of Congress reeks of more than seditious conspiracy…but, I understand how difficult it would be to prove it…but there were convictions regarding that illegal activity.

And here Senator, is my concern.  If the President granted commuted sentences to those who were convicted of seditious conspiracy, has he not given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof?  And, if this assumption is accurate, is this not grounds for impeachment?

I realize SCOTUS has ruled any action taken by the President in an official capacity of the office is legal (and I disagree with that opinion) but, in my view, this is a clear violation of the 14th Amendment, Clause Three.  The President’s action may not be a high crime or misdemeanor, but it certainly aided enemies of the state, whom I might add the President called patriots.

These so-called patriots attempted to interfere with governmental procedure outlined in the Constitution of the United States.  These so-called patriots destroyed governmental property and threatened the lives of elected federal officials.  And yet, the President commuted their sentences.

As for me, I know spending years behind prison bars would not be my cup of tea.  It would present physical and mental hardship to me beyond description.  I am of the opinion, for most all people, the same may apply.  With that being said, in my thoughts, the President has given aid or comfort to those who were convicted of Seditious Conspiracy and is thereby not qualified to hold the office of the President of the United States.

Why hasn’t this been brought before Congress?  I know the argument the GOP would bring up…”the Dems just want to get rid of Trump so they can open the border again”, or, “the Dems have DJT syndrome”.  But if someone in a place of authority doesn’t bring up what I believe are substantial allegations, then the Constitution of the United States has been invalidated.  Our country will no longer stand for what many of us believe…the same things the founding fathers believed.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”
 
Very Truly Yours, 
 
 
Jamie Simms