Actually, heâs asking a valid question. After Pizzagate and other incidents (attacking journalists, etc.) triggered by incitement of the gullible by RWNJs including the head NJ, I wouldnât want to ignore this.
I wonder when it can be turned to charges.
Of course his safety is threatened. Many MAGA people arenât wired like they rest of us. They have lost any connection with reality. When Trump tells them to seek retribution they are eager to please.
If I were Baldwin or Michael Cohen, I wouldnât want to walk around NYC without security. Even though NYC is probably the safest place for them, there are still plenty of MAGA loonies around.
I love this. Heâs probably asking tongue-in-cheek to jab Donnie but itâs valid. Where does the POTUS get off threatening businesses and citizens of the country heâs been elected to serve? Donnie doesnât seem to understand the nature of his job.
I would say they arenât âwiredâ at allâŚthe synapses donât seem to spark in the same wayâŚ
Thatâs just it, Trump is rarely direct about these threats (especially on Twitter). Heâll mask any threats in a passive aggressive tone, because itâs the best way to claim 1st amendment protection.
Not sure that Trump could have made his plea / request to the crazies any more plain & blunt.
⌠although some may need to have the meaning of the word âretributionâ spelled out in words of one syllable.
Perfect words. Perfect tone. Perfect platform.
And thatâs how intimidation works. Once people start asking Baldwinâs question in their heads, most of the time they end up self-censoring their actions, or avoiding publicity so that they donât show up again on the Capoâs radar. Itâs only necessary that the violence happens once in a while.
Itâs clear enough to his followers.
âWill no one rid me of this turbulent priest?â
And he nicely places âhit jobâ and âretributionâ as the buzz words next to each other.
Itâs pretty clear communication.
And for all his inability to do so many simple things, he is gifted in this area.
There is a progression to thisâŚand itâs not pretty. Because most people here have not grown up in a dictatorship this is all parlor-talk.
It is not.
It can be turned to impeachment at any time.
I doubt that impeachment would be a wise strategy at this moment; but it is absolutely certain that a president should not do this, and anyone willing to do this should not be president.
You donât have to be a criminal to be unfit for presidency.
My thoughts exactly. Trumpâs Presidential Oath of Office requires him to âpreserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States,â including the First Amendment. He has done nothing but attempt to undermine it. Even if the Democrats donât impeach Trump for this, they should begin harping on it.
Itâs not a threat, itâs incitement. Which is usually the step after a threat. Our first amendment jurisprudence isnât really prepared for this because so few people carry out the discussions for a criminal conspiracy in public.
A lot of people have been asking themselves that question lately, Alec. Youâre not the only one concerned about that.
The kindest woman I have ever known (I helped her son to come to this country) lived under a dictatorship for the first 21 years of her life. The kind of dictatorship where a trip to a bodega might involve a government stooge.
She has far too much taste to tell me directly what she thinks of shallow people who take our rights for granted.
But Iâve overheard her.
Pretty certain that calling for âretributionâ is.