Posted on Mar 18, 2021
MA Governor: ‘Lessons to Be Learned’ After Year of COVID
3.3K
14
3
8
8
0
This is going to be the focus of my dissertation....What lessons learned and innovation were emergency managers and first responders able to incorporate into action plans based on the first 12 months of a global pandemic?
MA Governor: ‘Lessons to Be Learned’ After Year of COVID
Posted from govtech.comPosted in these groups: 
Emergency Management
3E9X1: Emergency Management
Emergency Medicine
Coronavirus COVID19Virginia ARNG
Emergency Management 3E9X1: Emergency Management Emergency Medicine Coronavirus COVID19Virginia ARNG
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
4
4
0
I think that's a great idea. Much to be learned. You might want to look at some of the Red Cross responses as well.
(4)
(0)
2
2
0
Resolution to prosecute Donald Trump and other public officials for being accessories to a pandemic
WHEREAS Trump was briefed at least by January 30, 2020 that Covid-19 was very contagious and deadly similar to smallpox and the plague,
WHEREAS Trump told Americans 22 times the Corona virus would go away,
WHEREAS in September 2020 Trump pressured the CDC to downplay the threat of Covid-19 and the CDC director Dr. Robert Redfield did not resign,
WHEREAS Trump in February 2020 accused Democrats of “politicizing” the corona virus during a campaign rally claiming that the outbreak is “their new hoax,” accusing the press of being in “hysteria mode”, and downplaying the severity by comparing the number of fatalities during an average flu season,
WHEREAS Trump received a vaccination against Covid and he kept it a secret,
WHEREAS the former US Commander and Chief, Trump had the duty to protect US persons from all enemies (aka deadly threats), and one such enemy was Covid-19, a deadly and extremely contagious disease which even if the victim does not die, it can allegedly result at times in serious negative outcomes to a person’s long term health,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED we demand Trump and other US public officials be prosecuted by the US Court of jurisdiction and/or the international Criminal Court for gross negligence and reckless disregard for human life and health due to making false and unscientific statements about Covid-19.
Being an ethical coward is not honorable. Too many US citizens are too stupid and do not understand what the duty of a president or other public officials is. Or too many are lacking in assertiveness to stand up and do their duty to insure justice is done, notwithstanding no law has been written making it a crime of accessory to a pandemic.
This issue of being an accessory to a pandemic (second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter) is a new incident such that our law makers never thought they needed to make a law to punish people who spread lies that are unscientific and or refute the advice of peer reviewed medical science.
To try and break thru your ignorance, this crime is similar to a president knowing an enemy attack is highly likely after being warned by the CIA or DoD. And the president makes public statements saying the CIA and DoD are wrong. As a result, the US military leaders are pressured not to deploy defensive military forces away for a US city, the target of the enemies planned attack.
Secondly, as the enemy began attacking the city and so far at least 130,000 are killed and more wounded, yet the president refuses to give the order to defend the city or warn the US person in the city.
WHEREAS Trump was briefed at least by January 30, 2020 that Covid-19 was very contagious and deadly similar to smallpox and the plague,
WHEREAS Trump told Americans 22 times the Corona virus would go away,
WHEREAS in September 2020 Trump pressured the CDC to downplay the threat of Covid-19 and the CDC director Dr. Robert Redfield did not resign,
WHEREAS Trump in February 2020 accused Democrats of “politicizing” the corona virus during a campaign rally claiming that the outbreak is “their new hoax,” accusing the press of being in “hysteria mode”, and downplaying the severity by comparing the number of fatalities during an average flu season,
WHEREAS Trump received a vaccination against Covid and he kept it a secret,
WHEREAS the former US Commander and Chief, Trump had the duty to protect US persons from all enemies (aka deadly threats), and one such enemy was Covid-19, a deadly and extremely contagious disease which even if the victim does not die, it can allegedly result at times in serious negative outcomes to a person’s long term health,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED we demand Trump and other US public officials be prosecuted by the US Court of jurisdiction and/or the international Criminal Court for gross negligence and reckless disregard for human life and health due to making false and unscientific statements about Covid-19.
Being an ethical coward is not honorable. Too many US citizens are too stupid and do not understand what the duty of a president or other public officials is. Or too many are lacking in assertiveness to stand up and do their duty to insure justice is done, notwithstanding no law has been written making it a crime of accessory to a pandemic.
This issue of being an accessory to a pandemic (second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter) is a new incident such that our law makers never thought they needed to make a law to punish people who spread lies that are unscientific and or refute the advice of peer reviewed medical science.
To try and break thru your ignorance, this crime is similar to a president knowing an enemy attack is highly likely after being warned by the CIA or DoD. And the president makes public statements saying the CIA and DoD are wrong. As a result, the US military leaders are pressured not to deploy defensive military forces away for a US city, the target of the enemies planned attack.
Secondly, as the enemy began attacking the city and so far at least 130,000 are killed and more wounded, yet the president refuses to give the order to defend the city or warn the US person in the city.
(2)
(0)
CW3 Dick McManus
The oldest and simplest justification for government is as protector: protecting citizens from violence.
As English philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote in his book Leviathan, he describes a world of unrelenting insecurity without a government to provide the safety of law and order, protecting citizens from each other and from foreign foes. The idea of government as protector requires taxes to fund, train and equip an army and a police force; to build courts and jails; and to elect or appoint the officials to pass and implement the laws citizens must not break.
The concept of government as provider comes next: government as provider of goods and services that citizens cannot provide individually for themselves. The future of government builds on these foundations of protecting and providing. Government will continue to protect citizens from violence and from the worst vicissitudes of life. Government will continue to provide public goods, at a level necessary to ensure a globally competitive economy and a well-functioning society
Lying to the public and the press
The president’s duty to faithfully execute his office plays a critical role in the constitutional scheme. Going beyond requiring the president to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” Const., Art. II, Sec. 3, Cl. 5, the Clause 8 constitutional duty to “faithfully execute” the presidential office limits the president’s discretion in how to perform his official functions.
“Faithfully” was contemporaneously defined, in part, as: “Honestly, without fraud, trick, or ambiguity.” One component recurrently included in the “faithful execution” provisions of “statutes and other legal documents” was that the official be “honest.” As the authors summarized: “The oath or command of faithful execution to an office holder came to convey an affirmative duty to act … honestly … in the best interest of the public.” (Emphasis added.)
Accordingly, the language, history, purpose and widespread contemporaneous usage of “faithfully execute” one’s office show that the constitutional duty to “faithfully execute the office of the President” includes a duty to act honestly. Since the duty of “faithful execution” applies unconditionally to the office of the president, it applies to performing all the president’s official functions. Since communicating to the public is one of the president’s official functions, the honesty duty likewise applies to virtually all such communications.
Trump’s “repeatedly making false statements asserting that the presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud” were not to defend the national interest. To the contrary, his statements attacked the central pillar of American democracy: implementing the results of fair elections. Trump’s dishonesty was not to serve the national interest, but his personal and political self-interest in overturning the election’s results.
Furthermore, Trump had to have known that a pandemic would cause an economic recession or new Great Depression and therein it would reduce his odds of being reelected.
Far from the First Amendment giving any president the right to speak dishonestly to the American people, the Constitution itself imposes on the president a unique duty of honesty in carrying out his official functions. By repeatedly and falsely asserting to the American people that there had been widespread fraud and Covid-19 was not as dangerous as medical scientists were saying, Trump violated his constitutional duty of honesty.
Too many citizens do not understand what is meant by the duty of a president or other public officials to “faithfully execute.” Too many unassertive citizens lack the ethical courage in order to do their duty to insure justice is done, notwithstanding no law has been written making it a crime of accessory to a pandemic.
This crime of being an accessory to a pandemic (second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter) is a new incident such that our law makers never thought they needed to make a law to punish people who spread unscientific lies or refuting the advice of peer reviewed medical science.
As English philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote in his book Leviathan, he describes a world of unrelenting insecurity without a government to provide the safety of law and order, protecting citizens from each other and from foreign foes. The idea of government as protector requires taxes to fund, train and equip an army and a police force; to build courts and jails; and to elect or appoint the officials to pass and implement the laws citizens must not break.
The concept of government as provider comes next: government as provider of goods and services that citizens cannot provide individually for themselves. The future of government builds on these foundations of protecting and providing. Government will continue to protect citizens from violence and from the worst vicissitudes of life. Government will continue to provide public goods, at a level necessary to ensure a globally competitive economy and a well-functioning society
Lying to the public and the press
The president’s duty to faithfully execute his office plays a critical role in the constitutional scheme. Going beyond requiring the president to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” Const., Art. II, Sec. 3, Cl. 5, the Clause 8 constitutional duty to “faithfully execute” the presidential office limits the president’s discretion in how to perform his official functions.
“Faithfully” was contemporaneously defined, in part, as: “Honestly, without fraud, trick, or ambiguity.” One component recurrently included in the “faithful execution” provisions of “statutes and other legal documents” was that the official be “honest.” As the authors summarized: “The oath or command of faithful execution to an office holder came to convey an affirmative duty to act … honestly … in the best interest of the public.” (Emphasis added.)
Accordingly, the language, history, purpose and widespread contemporaneous usage of “faithfully execute” one’s office show that the constitutional duty to “faithfully execute the office of the President” includes a duty to act honestly. Since the duty of “faithful execution” applies unconditionally to the office of the president, it applies to performing all the president’s official functions. Since communicating to the public is one of the president’s official functions, the honesty duty likewise applies to virtually all such communications.
Trump’s “repeatedly making false statements asserting that the presidential election results were the product of widespread fraud” were not to defend the national interest. To the contrary, his statements attacked the central pillar of American democracy: implementing the results of fair elections. Trump’s dishonesty was not to serve the national interest, but his personal and political self-interest in overturning the election’s results.
Furthermore, Trump had to have known that a pandemic would cause an economic recession or new Great Depression and therein it would reduce his odds of being reelected.
Far from the First Amendment giving any president the right to speak dishonestly to the American people, the Constitution itself imposes on the president a unique duty of honesty in carrying out his official functions. By repeatedly and falsely asserting to the American people that there had been widespread fraud and Covid-19 was not as dangerous as medical scientists were saying, Trump violated his constitutional duty of honesty.
Too many citizens do not understand what is meant by the duty of a president or other public officials to “faithfully execute.” Too many unassertive citizens lack the ethical courage in order to do their duty to insure justice is done, notwithstanding no law has been written making it a crime of accessory to a pandemic.
This crime of being an accessory to a pandemic (second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter) is a new incident such that our law makers never thought they needed to make a law to punish people who spread unscientific lies or refuting the advice of peer reviewed medical science.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google