Why Rudy Davis’ “Francis Schaeffer Cox” Business Cards Cause Others to Want to Dial the Police

On February 19, 2019,  LoneStar1776 published a YouTube video called, Buc-ee’s Is Going To Call Police if You Put More Schaeffer Cox Cards On Their Gas Pumps. In this short 2 minute audio, a woman representing Buc-ee’s in Itaska, Illinois called Rudy Davis to inquire into the origin of LoneStar1776’s Schaeffer Cox business cards which had been left on their gas pumps.

Rudy Davis explained to Buc-cee’s that, “I don’t have any control over that, you realize I do print the business cards and I distribute-, they’re all over the country, but I don’t have any control over what people do with them…even, even if you call the police, I mean I’m just the guy who prints the cards…”.

Rudy Davis is correct that he cannot control where another person leaves these cards. But he incorrectly states his responsibility for the CONTENT of these cards.  In truth, Vista Print is the printer of these cards; not Rudy Davis, – and it was his wife,  Erin Davis, who created the design on Vista Print’s website.  The purpose of these cards is to provide three resources which recipients of the business card can  research, to find out Schaeffer Cox’s version of the events which lead to his incarceration in a federal prison.

Based on the simple fact that the sole phone number on these business cards belongs to Rudy Davis, it is apparent that  these cards are an advertisement for his LoneStar 1776 video channel featuring his prison ministry’s phone calls. Schaeffer Cox is just Davis’ favorite poster child for his roster of self-described American Political Prisoners.  The Buc-cee’s employee called Rudy Davis because his phone number is on the card.

Rudy Davis once again gives Christianity a bad reputation

The caller from Buc-cee’s was under the impression that these cards originated from a Christian church, most likely because Davis had termed  Schaeffer Cox a Christian American Political Prisoner.  When  Davis avoided naming his wife as the creator of the content of these cards, the Buc-cee’s employee wanted to know the identity of the church distributing them.

Although Schaeffer Cox was raised in a Christian family and his father is a pastor, he departed from that path when he entered into the world of sovereign citizen styled militias and purchased illegal weapons and silencers. Rudy Davis is fond of issuing imprecatory prayers commanding destruction and death on anyone who disagrees with his mission of covering over the crimes of the felons he promotes.

Rudy Davis showing off his gun

What are these “resources”?

Regular readers of this blog are probably familiar with FreeSchaefferCox.com, as I had referred to that website in connection with a Schaeffer Cox defamation lawsuit written by attorney Larry Klayman and his nonprofit Freedom Watch, Inc. against BenBella Books and William Fulton.

In another Schaeffer Cox lawsuit filed pro se on February 5, 2018, but terminated on October 5, 2018 when the Plaintiff filed for a voluntary dismissal based on a jurisdiction issue, the defendants named were Terry Dodd, Stitching Trust for Two, Inc., the Estate of Steward Skrill, Maria Rensel, Eberle, Inc., Tami Cali, Ryan Mobly, DMP, Inc. dba Free Schaeffer Cox, Edward Snook dba US Observer, Ron Lee, James E. Leuenberger, and James E. Leuenberger, PC. (Leuenberger is Edward Snook’s attorney, and Ron Lee is a reporter for the US Observer). Those defendants marked in bold represent the two resources, in addition to LoneStar 1776, that are referenced on Rudy Davis’ Schaeffer Cox cards.

In respect to that February 5, 2018 lawsuit,  MadisonRecord.com published an article on March 16, 2018, Alaskan Man Convicted on Conspiracy Charges Sues Individuals Over Money Collected for Legal Defense, written by Noddy A. Fernandez. This article stated that “The plaintiff alleges that ‘there were ongoing efforts from multiple parties to assist’ his legal defense and the defendants intended to take possession of any funds collected by the partnership by fraud.  The plaintiff alleges the defendants used his identity to collect more than $3 million dollars under the false pretense that the money would be used for his legal defense.”

This is awkward, as the go-to resources for background information on Cox are the very same defendants accused of fraud in a Cox lawsuit!  Although Cox dropped his February 5, 2018 lawsuit, he reworked his complaint into a new lawsuit in a different jurisdiction,  naming fewer defendants.

The US Observer is a premier example of  Checkbook Journalism

The US Observer publication is owned by Ed Snook of Grant’s Pass, Oregon. Here is a Justicia.com reference to a complaint which Schaeffer Cox had made regarding Snook.  Ed Snook, for a hefty price, writes “investigative journalist” reports which he publishes in the US Observer to create a one-sided narrative to the liking of his clientele.  These reports are financed by persons who are either accused of crimes or are incarcerated felons, or their supporters.Someone had financed the US Observer to write two articles on The Federal Framing of Schaeffer Cox.

Shown below is Rudy Davis’ recommendation of this article as a “must read”.

From another perspective, let’s consider an interesting November 13, 2010 Bendsource.com article discussing an entirely different party that was in need of laundering their legal narrative, and so they purchased an investigative report from the US Observer.  Written by The Wandering Eye, this article discusses Tami and Kevin Sawyer, who “were high flyers during Bend’s real estate bubble era but were shot down in flames last month when a federal grand jury in Eugene indicted them on 21 criminal counts including wire fraud, bank fraud, money laundering, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and false statements to a financial institution.  They’re also facing civil suits by about 20 former investors in their various business enterprises.”

The Bendsource article continues, “But now a publication called US-Observer is painting the Sawyer’s in a new light- as innocent victims of a vast, sinister conspiracy involving The Bulletin, the FBI, the U. S. Attorney’s Office and, yes, President Barak Obama himself.” The US-Observer article was written by Joseph Snook and Edward Snook, “Investigative Journalists”, and The Wandering Eye notes, “…I need to explain that Edward Snook, who lives in Grants Pass and is the editor of US-Observer, practices checkbook journalismThat means, in his case, that if you’re accused of a crime and you take out your checkbook and write him a check, he’ll write a story “proving” your “innocence.”

And Rudy Davis has no problem with this form of journalism; in fact, you might say that LoneStar1776 is a kindred spirit with the US Observer’s approach to turning the guilty into innocent victims of a vast conspiracy.

A new lawsuit filed by Schaeffer Cox in connection with “Free Schaeffer Cox” fundraising

But let’s see….Francis Schaeffer Cox filed his “reworked” lawsuit in the United States District Court Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division on November 7, 2018 against Eberle Associates, Tami Cali, President/CEO, William D. Griffins, Vice President, and Mike Murray, President Direct Mail Processors, Inc. It has taken awhile, but it looks like Cox was able to make his final installment on the $400 filing fee as of February 5, 2019.

This lawsuit begins, “Plaintiff is the sole principal of Free Schaeffer Cox, because he is in fact the Schaeffer Cox targeted by the fraudulent Free Schaeffer Cox “Project”. The complaint has yet to be served on the defendants; however, as a judgment,  the Plaintiff wants $38,000 for the funds raised on his behalf by the test mailing conducted by the defendants.  In addition Cox desires the entire $3 million dollars raised by the defendants as a result of the direct mail program that was conducted by the defendants on behalf of plaintiff.  And then Cox wants a list of the persons who made donations, and $1 million for the loss of the comfort and society of his supporters.

How many embarrassing legal issues can one discover on a LoneStar1776 “Schaeffer Cox” business card?

Check out all three resources, and you will descend into a deep abyss of sovereign citizen styled militia groups and politics, illegal weapons, threats against government officials, fraud, lies, pseudo Christianity, checkbook journalism,  lawyers that have had  their fair share of Bar complaints…and on and on!  Is it any wonder that a legitimate business would not want these cards distributed on their private property?

UPDATE 2/23/2019:  Bondo77 made an interesting comment today about the fact that there are no Buc-cee’s in Illinois.  The woman caller claimed to be from Itasca, IL.  However, I just checked and there is a gas station called Bucky’s in Itasca, IL. Rudy Davis posted the graphics from the wrong gas station, it would appear.







The Descent into the Nether World of a Twitter ReTweet: From Joe Napoli to Lonestar 1776 to Schaeffer Cox to Larry Klayman

CSTT broadcast 2/2/2019

What is the moral impact upon a civilization’s treasured values,  when opinions which trample underfoot relevant facts and evidence travel unhindered through social media platforms?  Who are the Baggage Handlers that actively pass such opinions on to the next destination?

Over the years it has been a common warning at airports that one should never carry a bag or parcel onto an airplane as a favor for a complete stranger. Who knows what is in that parcel that someone wants to anonymously move along from point A to point B? Twitter is much like a busy airport hub, with short, terse messages being passed on, asking others to send their carry-on luggage (links to websites) to another location.

Today I am going to play the role of the baggage inspector, and show you what is in just one baggage link which was retweeted by a baggage handler (i.e. defender) of Jason Goodman.

The  Baggage Handler In The Background

There is a man in the background of Jason Goodman’s Crowdsource the Truth, who is both a  typical and an atypical example of a person who uses a Twitter account and the CSTT chat room. Where he differs from many has to do with his presence during two highly publicized incidents:  the CSTT broadcast involving the Port of Charleston dirty bomb incident, and the Las Vegas mass shooting event. This man is Joe Napoli, who describes himself on his Twitter page as Jesus 1st!  Dad, Husband, Executive Recruiter, and he has a motto, Responsible 4 what I say, not 4 what you understand.

Recently on a CSTT broadcast of David Hawkins, I saw that Joe Napoli was in the chatroom.In the midst of this nonsensical live chatter, Napoli declared, “Whoever has read the fake news about Jason and left as a result, please feel free to reach out to me and I’ll TRUTHFULLY defend Jason.  This is ridiculous.”

In all of this chat room over-talk, I am assuming  that Napoli was reacting to a remark made about the YouTube channel Prepper Kitty, which is operated by Dave (Acton) Sweigert.  Sweigert has an ongoing federal RICO lawsuit against Jason Goodman involving the June 14, 2017 Port of Charleston shutdown.

The Port closed for eight hours as a response to a false report from Deep Uranium, a (once) hidden source of broadcast journalist George Webb. By permitting the broadcasting of this unverified report on the Crowdsource the Truth You Tube channel, Jason Goodman then implicated himself in this costly chain reaction, as he encouraged his audience to Twitter a message to the U. S. Coast Guard.  As I understand it, some 8,000 Twitter retweets were sent.

Joe Napoli is mentioned in those RICO court filings. I am not sure I understand who Joe Napoli thinks would have responded to his chatroom comment, because if that someone “has left”, they would not be there to read his message.  And he provides no email address where he can be reached.  But what is clear is that Joe Napoli considers himself to be a truthful defender of Jason Goodman’s actions.

What exactly does that “defense” encompass?  I assume he is ready to  defend Goodman’s actions in the Port of Charleston incident; but does Napoli, who says Jesus is first, also defend Goodman’s use of Tinder to meet young women for sexually explicit conversations?

Like multitudes of Americans, Joe Napoli makes use of a Twitter account to promote websites and videos that represent his political viewpoint and favored social issues, such as anti-child trafficking. With regard to the latter, all decent persons would be against sexual and economic abuse of children. Unfortunately some of the prominent anti-CPS Facebook groups and websites are covers for anti-government groups that encourage senseless violence against government employees.

Like many Twitter users, it may be that Joe Napoli has never explored those links in-depth, and he is just operating as a baggage handler because attention getting headlines prop up his public image as a Christian family man. 

 Let’s descend into the nether world of just one of Joe Napoli’s Twitter links, and see what lies below the surface.

The example I have chosen was a January 11th link which Napoli retweeted. I found this link particularly interesting in that the original Twitter post tagged several persons I have written articles on, such as MrsJAB3, who is one of the hosts of the Victurus Libertas YouTube channel, which supports sovereign citizen/tax protestors, including the fake Alaskan “Judge” Anna Von Reitz. VL has been promoted by Doug Hagmann of the Hagmann Report and also was a platform for Robert David Steele who holds the dubious title, Special Counsel for ITNJ (International Tribunal for Natural Justice), a group which when originally formed, had been influenced by a woman associated with Anna Von Reitz’s sovereign citizen principles of law.

Also tagged is Jon Robberson who first came on the Hagmann Report as the Hollywood Insider, later becoming the Hagmann Report’s producer, who now does similar work for John B. Wells’ Caravan to Midnight.  Another tag is Larry Klayman who was recently a subject of this blog in an article centering around his claim that he operates under a spirit named Jesus.  And then regular readers of my blog will note that I have done several articles on Jason Goodman’s Crowdsource the Truth

Lonestar 1776:  Guardian of Schaeffer Cox’s pretentions of being the Commander-in-Chief of the several States of the United States of America

The video which is featured in this Twitter retweet is from the LoneStar 1776 YouTube channel; again, another subject which Tracking the Leopard Meroz has written about. The owners of this channel, Rudy and Erin Davis, have a prison ministry for self-described American political prisoners, including felons who are involved in the Sovereign Citizen movement.  This particular video on Francis Schaeffer Cox is one of many published on Davis’ LoneStar 1776 channel, which operates in conjunction with his website, yearofjubile.com.

Schaeffer Cox once held himself out as the leader of the Alaska Peacemaker Militia,  the Secretary of Defense for the Alaska Assembly Post, and the Commander-in-Chief of the several States of the United States of America.  Unfortunately for Cox, when he was in his mid-twenties,  he entered into the self-delusional world of Sovereign Citizens and their peculiar “legal” reasonings and grandiose fake titles. After combining those ideas with forming a militia group, why am I not surprised that Cox soon found himself becoming acquainted with a couple of undercover FBI informants?

Much of Cox’s story can be found on the internet, but trying to understand what is true and what is fable is another matter. It is a major undertaking to wade through court transcripts, in order to gain insight into the evidence and legal arguments on which Cox was convicted and sentenced.

Schaeffer Cox had been arrested in Alaska by the FBI in 2011, and was found guilty by a jury on several counts, including conspiracy to possess unregistered silencers and destructive devices, possession of unregistered silencers and destructive devices, possession of an unregistered silencer, possession of an unregistered machine gun, illegal possession of a machine gun, making of a silencer, carrying firearms during a crime of violence, possession of unregistered destructive devices, and conspiracy to murder an Officer of the United States, and solicitation to murder an Officer of the United States.

It needs to be noted that because of a Ninth Circuit appeal, Cox’s conviction for conspiracy to murder an Officer of the United States was affirmed, but his conviction for solicitation to murder an Officer of the United States was reversed.    Schaeffer Cox submitted a Petition for Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States, which was denied, and the time for appealing his other convictions has passed.  Thus at this point in time, it seems as if the only avenue left for Cox’s supporters is their submission of a  petition to President Trump, asking for a pardon.

The Great Gulf of  Separation between a Retweeter and those others who desire a genuine understanding of a situation.

Joe Napoli asserts that he is responsible for what he says, and not for “what you understand”, so obviously there will have to be a parting of the ways at this point.

From here on out, I am going to leave Joe Napoli behind, to stand guard over his defense of Jason Goodman, while I guide my readers on a tour of the depths of that nether world of Twitter where a person cannot be held responsible for “saying nothing”, while yet promoting links to dangerous philosophical reasonings which negatively impact others.

The Forgotten American” Twitter account @YellowVests USA, which Napoli retweeted, links to a LoneStar 1776 video concerning Schaeffer Cox’s release from a solitary confinement cell.  We are going to continue further into this subject to discuss a civil defamation complaint filed by Larry Klayman on behalf of Schaeffer Cox,  as part of his pro bono legal work which is connected to his civil rights nonprofit,  Freedom Watch.

As we continue, one  question should be pondered: Do these so-called supporters of Schaeffer Cox actually care about the man himself, or is his controversial and complex situation being exploited to provide an image of fighting against injustice as a cover for a hidden agenda?

This post was published by Schaeffer Cox on his website on September 18, 2018.


Schaeffer Cox v. Benbella Books and William Fulton

On December 20, 2018, a Civil Action Complaint was submitted by Larry Klayman, Esq. to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, titled, Francis Schaeffer Cox, 16179006 U. S. Penitentiary CMU v. Benbella Books, Inc. and William Fulton, In Witness Protection.  [ Document 1, can be linked here:  Cox v Fulton Federal Suit 12 20 2018]

This federal civil complaint of defamation arose from the September 19, 2017 publication of a book about the Schaeffer Cox case, written by one of the undercover FBI informants involved in his arrest. (It can be purchased at amazon.com).

Although Bill Fulton’s book arrived in bookstores on 9/19/2017, one could preorder a copy from the publisher.  LoneStar1776’s Rudy Davis who stays in regular contact with Schaeffer Cox, was apparently aware of the contents of this book on August 29, 2017, for on that date, Rudy Davis uploaded a video titled, Special Announcement:  There is a war raging for the truth”.  At the .16 mark, Davis said, “…there is a battle raging right now about freedom for Schaeffer Cox.  There’s a book that just recently came out that’s full of slander and libel and I wouldn’t be surprised if Les Zerbe or Schaeffer Cox sues Jeanne Devon and Bill Fulton for slander and libel.”

The Lonestar 1776 channel also uploaded a September 14, 2017 video called “William White Critiques Bill Fulton’s book.”  It seems that William White is some kind of neo-Nazi styled felon, in the same federal prison as Cox.  The next day another video was uploaded by Rudy Davis called “Bill Fulton is a Turd by William A. White #13888-084 at Marion Prison”.  And then on September 18, 2017, Davis complains in a video, “Amazon Refuses My Book Review of the Turd Bill Fulton Book.”

How many sovereign citizens does it take to screw in one lightbulb?

So if inmate William White was able to review Bill Fulton’s book, I have to assume that Schaeffer Cox had a copy in his possession around that time also. Cox’s prison ministry advocate, Rudy Davis, lives in Forney, Texas, right around the corner from Benbella Books, Inc., the Dallas, Texas publisher of William Fulton’s book.  One would think that a light bulb would have been turned on in Rudy’s mind to pass on the defamation laws of Texas to Schaeffer Cox so that he could respond in a timely manner with any libel claims he had.


Why not?  Isn’t Larry Klayman one of the best Civil Rights attorneys in the United States and isn’t he doing this work pro bono using his nonprofit Freedom Watch, Inc.?   The question is whether Klayman has a workable strategy to overcome Texas’ defamation laws which have a one year statute of limitations. In addition, the Texas Defamation Mitigation Act  requires a person to FIRST request a retraction of the libelous statements from the publisher/author BEFORE filing a lawsuit.

One wonders why Cox did not first write a letter to the publisher, itemizing what he felt were defamatory statements.  All those video rants by Rudy Davis were of none effect when it came to helping his prisoner pen pal, Schaeffer Cox. Did ANY of Cox’s so-called friends and supporters encourage him to act in a timely manner in accordance with Texas law, after Bill Fulton’s book was published?  I am just asking…wondering who Cox’s real friends are, if he has any.

Attorney Larry Klayman, despite the fact that this lawsuit was filed late when it came to these Texas statute of limitation requirements, is asking for relief and judgment against the defendants amounting to $85,000,000, with punitive damages of $100,000,000!  And he wants attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs of this action.

Benbella Books’ Motion to Dismiss

The clock started ticking on September 19, 2017, and Larry Klayman filed Cox’s lawsuit on December 20, 2018,- three months past the one year time limit.

Document 10 was filed in federal court on February 1, 2019, by Benbella Books, Inc. as a Defendant’s Motion To DismissPursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12 (B) (6) and can be read at this link:  [ cox v fulton].

One of the interesting statements made by the defendants in Document 10, on page one, is that, “Plaintiff, a convicted criminal, does not have the right to pursue civil claims against Defendant for the purpose of undermining the validity of his criminal conviction.”  This is further argued on page 12 under D.  Plaintiff’s Defamation and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Claims Fail Because They Implicate the Validity of His Criminal Conviction.

On page 21 of Document 10, the Defendant provides some interesting insight into the structure of Schaeffer Cox’s complaint, saying, “Plaintiff, who alleges that he was convicted ‘for simply believing in the original meaning of the Second Amendment,’ and that his conviction ‘will set a sweeping new precedent allowing for the wholesale round up of those who have not committed any crimes,’ seeks to relitigate his criminal trial in a civil forum.…Moreover, Plaintiff has no damages for emotional distress other than those which ‘necessarily result from his confinement and criminal conviction.  It was Plaintiff’s illegal conduct, which resulted in his conviction…”

One of the assertions of the defense is that because the plaintiff failed to file his complaint within the defamation statute of limitations time bar, that an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim was presented, in the hopes that it might override the defamation statute of limitations period. That seems to be a reasonable answer as to how attorney Klayman was strategizing to overcome this obstacle.  Most attorneys would have told Cox, “Sorry, you’re too late”.

There is much to be learned in contrasting Document 1 with Document 10.  If you are a non-attorney layperson reader of lawsuits, observe the elements that are used to present a political/religious styled scenario to set the scene for an “emotional distress” complaint.  In the end, it will be up to the Judge, and possibly a jury, to examine the arguments of both sides.  We are but outsider observers trying to gain understanding of a complex story.

Inconvenient Truths Glossed Over

The link retweeted by Joe Napoli was touting the innocence of Schaeffer Cox.  But when one pursues the facts of this story, what stands out is that his guilt has been repackaged as innocence.