What Was President Trump Told?

-

 WHAT WAS HE TOLD?

1. The government monitors radical communication.

2. Including all types of public and private communications.

3. They can get wiretap warrants based on probable cause, (showing a crime is being planned).

4. Governmental intelligence gatherers knew who the leaders of the Capitol invasion were.

5. They had an obligation to advise the White House of the danger of a violent takeover.

6. Did intelligence people advise the White House of dangerous plans?

7. Was the president told? 

8. Was the warning in writing? The warnings to the white house should be matched with the time of each presidential statement.

9. What words were used to warn the president?  

10. His knowledge of what was possible is a crucial part of deciding whether he incited the takeover.   

11. A possible example = The President knows the crowd plans to take over the Capitol, then he gives a speech repeatedly yelling the word, “Fight, fight, fight!” That is the crime of incitement. 

12. If necessary, subpoenas can be issued for any people in the chain of information.

13. A prosecutor with a top-secret clearance can examine the evidence.

14. A judge can make it public.    



WHEN WAS PRESIDENT TRUMP TOLD?

Timing is very important when deciding if there was incitement by the president.

1. When was he first told about the danger?

2. How early was he told about the danger?

3. Did he do anything about the information he received?

4. What did he do?

5. Who are the witnesses?

6. With five people dead and our government Capitol ransacked, every citizen has a right to know the answers to these questions.


Jim Brosnahan was a Federal Prosecutor for five years. He prosecuted Casper Weinberger the Secretary of Defense in 1992.

Copyright 2021 James J Brosnahan

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The American Establishment Wants to Stop Voter Theft

-
       The business community and the legal community have had enough of the public vote theft. There is a full-page advertisement in the  New York Times  today listing approximately 100 major American corporations and almost all of the large law firms (including Morrison Foerster LLP) in the United States, in opposition to the public voter theft being enacted in several states.      Senator McConnell has overplayed his hand and is now in political trouble. It is often the American establishment that has to step forward and save our democratic form of government. Forty-seven states have pending or enacted statutes with the aim of reducing the vote. Those statutes eviscerate our democratic form of government. The immediate and widespread reaction of citizens was to stop doing business with any company that tolerated voter reduction or theft, and so it should be.      A bill pending in the congress now would establish a bipartisa...
Read more

Senator McConnell Has Inverted the Process of Democratic Discussion by Telling His Base of American Business to Stay Out of Politics

-
  Senator McConnell’s lecturing of American business to stay out of politics was hastily followed by his statement he was not talking about contributions . That lecture represented a reversal of normal political dialogue. In a democracy it is the voters who tell the office holders what they need and what they want. It is not the office holders who instruct the voters as to what they’re allowed to do. Under the First Amendment as declared by the US Supreme Court on several occasions, corporations have a right to express political opinions. Efforts to reduce the vote is among the most important subjects for public discussion. There’s something more important about what McConnell did. He took an axe to the republican base. For a number of years the republican hierarchy has been trying to manage a joining of American business with right-wing groups, some of them with extreme positions. It has been effective at times. But the recent praise by Senator Johnson of Wisconsin, lavished o...
Read more

John F. Kennedy's Speech on Religion - September 12, 1960

-
On Sept. 12, 1960, presidential candidate John F. Kennedy gave a major speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, a group of Protestant ministers, on the issue of his religion. At the time, many Protestants questioned whether Kennedy's Roman Catholic faith would allow him to make important national decisions as president independent of the church. Kennedy addressed those concerns before a skeptical audience of Protestant clergy. The following is a transcript of Kennedy's speech: Kennedy: Rev. Meza, Rev. Reck, I'm grateful for your generous invitation to speak my views. While the so-called religious issue is necessarily and properly the chief topic here tonight, I want to emphasize from the outset that we have far more critical issues to face in the 1960 election: the spread of Communist influence, until it now festers 90 miles off the coast of Florida; the humiliating treatment of our president and vice president by those who no longer respect our power; the hun...
Read more