In The News

Did Madonna break federal law in ‘Blowing Up the White House’ threat’- Secret Service investigates

 

Liberal washed up entertainer singer Madonna sought to thrust herself into the public limelight by delivering an illegal domestic terrorist comment about “Blowing up the White House.”  According to Breitbart the Secret Service is investigating her possible criminal rant to see if there are probable indictable offenses to her public comments at the Washington DC Women’s March last weekend.  Should the law and order Trump administration throw the book at her for those hostile remarks?

Federal law is crystal clear about making a threat against the president.  According to 18 USC 871, “it is a Federal crime or offense for anyone to willfully make a true threat to injure or kill the President of the United States.”

Here are the conditions that need to be present in order to find a person like Madonna guilty of the offense:

  • First: That the person uttered words alleged to be the threat against the President;

  • Second: That the person understood and meant the words he used as a true threat; and

  • Third: That the person uttered the words knowingly and willfully.

In addition, the Secret Service investigation may focus on how public figures like Madonna may use willfully and knowingly use their celebrity to incite and inflame demonstrators to become radicalized to domestic terrorist acts. These radicalized followers could very easily make efforts to follow through on felonious terrorist assaults upon the president or the White House.

Madonna made every direct and determined to rile the protest rally to harmful action, which fell on the heels of the domestic terrorist acts of violence that occurred the day of President Trumps inauguration. She targeted her angry and at times outrageous profanity-laced verbal outbursts at the audience with apparent intent to rally around more dangerous riotous actions.

The fact that there were small children and young people amongst the protesters did not dissuade her from trashing the president with vile utterances as only a 58-year-old adolescent would be expected to engage in.  For this the march organizers, should be embarrassed that the singer actually diminished whatever major points they were trying to mobilize the demonstrators to act upon.

Yet, if anger was the goal and vitriol was the tool, then perhaps Madonna could claim ‘mission accomplished.’ After all, the mainstream media carried her outlandish behavior on nearly every network and in every newspaper. Even though her rants were not substantive, it did not seem to matter. So, when she uttered, “I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House,” there was no alarm or outcry from a Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or DNC official.

Despair, born of disappointment for backing a failed presidential candidate appeared to be the primary essence of the multitude and many of the speakers.  The marchers ignored the peaceful constitutional change of administrations that is universally regarded as a unique tradition that is admired worldwide. Instead their collective whining was disappointing because the march organizers chose the avenue of anger and division instead of the pathway to unity.

Unchecked anger and division is not an answer to uniting the nation.  Over a half century ago in the nation’s capital, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. assembled a diverse coalition of marchers that dramatized what he stressed was a “shameful condition.”  He pleaded with its leaders as well as Americas’ citizens to understand and embrace the “fierce urgency of now.”  Rev. King laid out a plan of action and not an angry collection of marginalizing outbursts that only poisons the well of democracy and unity.

The Secret Service has indicated that the final decision to prosecute the singer for what on the surface appears to be vocalizing a call to domestic terrorism will be made by the U.S. Attorney’s office.  What is clear is that, each one of these marchers should consider if profanity and vileness is what defines their idea of the future of America.

If these marchers believe that anarchy is a solution and intimidation is their weapon of choice over civility and intelligent conversation, then they are the losers not President Trump or the voters who abided by the constitutional electoral process.

As for Madonna, indictment, arrest, trial and conviction should be her fate and any of her other fellow anarchists that make open public threats against the President of the United States.  In a law and order society, justice should be firm and it should be constitutionally swift. Imprisonment in a narrow jail cell should be her destination where she will have many years to sing through her prison cell, “Express Yourself.”

To Top