In my appellant’s reply brief filed in the Tennessee Court of Appeals at Nashville, I have alleged federal crimes perpetrated by these high-ranking state officials.
Are they above the law? Probably, but I will to press the issue and find out.
In their brief of defendants-appellees, these high-ranking state officials argued that the government has no duty to correct the fraudulent version of the Tennessee Constitution held out to the citizens of this state on the General Assembly website.
That fraudulent version of the Tennessee Constitution, strips all Tennesseans of the right to seek redress of grievance by address (orally), our most powerful constitutionally protected right.
It is my strong opinion that in so doing, they are conspiring to injure and oppress a First Amendment right which is a federal crime.
The following is an excerpt from my appellant’s reply brief
HERE’S AN EXCERPT
Appellant objects to Appellee Brief and having to rebut false arguments, and prove false statements false, especially false statements made with intent to diminish Appellant’s rights, and the rights of all citizens.
Appellant protests further unlawful conduct and federal crimes perpetrated by counsel(s) for Appellees. Most disconcerting is that by putting their names to Brief of Defendants-Appellees filed in this case, HERBERT H. SLATERY III, ANDRÉE S. BLUMSTEIN, and JANET M. KEINFELTER, have now evidenced themselves committing federal crime in violation of 18 U.S. Code, § 241.
These counsel(s) for Appellee’s have put their name to a document that oppresses the right of the people protected in the Constitution of the United States, Amendment I, right to petition for redress of grievances. Not only by making argument to oppress Appellant’s right of petition but by oppressing the right of all Tennesseans, by making false statements to support false arguments, that the General Assembly does not have a duty to present a correct version of the Tennessee Constitution to the citizens and people of the state of Tennessee.
Appellees *** have also made false statement in their brief with the intent to diminish the rights of Appellant as a citizen of the state of Tennessee.
Pursuant to 18 U.S. Code, § 241, Appellant alleges federal crime perpetrated under color of law by counsel(s) for Appellee’s. 18 U.S. Code, § 241 states; “If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, … the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
Since it is an incontrovertible fact that counsel(s) for Appellees have made false statements to this court, and argued that the General Assembly has no duty to present a correct version of the Tennessee Constitution, counsel(s) for Appellees have conspired with each other and/or with the Appellee’s to injure and oppress the free exercise of the right to petition for redress of grievances protected in the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. In so doing, they have committed a federal crime in addition to violating their oaths of office, and they are in treason to the constitution of this state and the United States. Since it is an incontrovertible fact that counsel(s) for Appellees have made false statements to this court that Appellant is a citizen of Goodlettsville, Tenn., counsel(s) for Appellees have conspired with each other and/or with the Appellee’s to injure and oppress, Appellant’s constitutionally protected rights.
It is now the duty of the members of this Court, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, to make known to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, the commission of felony by counsel(s). Respectfully, to not do so is misprision of felony in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 4.
END OF EXCERPT
It is ridiculous that I have to argue in court, that the General Assembly should correct an admitted false version of the Tennessee Constitution, with the last phrase of Article I, § 23 unlawfully altered.
It is ridiculous that these high-ranking officials argue against making such correction and oppress our 1A and § 23 right.
What should have happened, is that when I brought this to the attention of U.S. Congressman John Rose, and every member of the Tennessee General Assembly, and Chancellor Moskal, Davidson Cty, Chancery Court, and the Office of Attorney General, the response should have been one of mild embarrassment, and; “Oh no! You’re right! We’ll get that corrected right away.”
Instead, I have to spend hour upon hour writing briefs rebutting false argument, and significant money out of my own pocket to defend the rights of the people.
John A Gentry, CPA, is a constitution-minded Republican campaigning as an independent for the state senate, district 18 (Sumner & Trousdale counties)