Posted on 07/16/2024 10:13:29 AM PDT by Tench_Coxe
President Joe Biden will reportedly continue to frame former President Donald Trump as a threat to democracy following the assassination attempt that nearly killed the former president.
(snip)
Biden, who will return to the campaign trail for the first time post-assassination attempt, plans to renew attacks on Trump as a “threat to democracy,” the New York Times reported:
And even as Mr. Biden focuses on the economy, his administration has made clear that it will continue to frame Mr. Trump as a threat to democracy and the civil liberties of Black and Latino Americans. But after a would-be assassin’s bullet grazed Mr. Trump’s ear at a rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday, Mr. Biden will be treading newly perilous ground.
Although the gunman had no known strongly held political beliefs, some Republicans have accused Mr. Biden’s rhetoric of contributing to the violence. Mr. Biden defended his descriptions of his rival on Friday, and Democrats have balked at the criticism from allies of a former president who warned there would be a “bloodbath” if he lost the election in November.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Translated: "you ultra MAGA republicans who are a danger to 'our democracy'™ need to shut up and take it cool your rhetoric."
Try using a raucous parrot voice. “Awk! Threat to democracy! Threat to democracy! [whistle]”
What else do they have? They can’t run on his record.
1. Speech: A public figure or group disseminates violent, inflammatory rhetoric via mass-media, directed at people or groups of people, sometimes suggesting or legitimizing the use of violence. This speech tends to be protected due to the use of ambiguous coded language, dog whistles, jokes, hints, and other subtext in statements that fall short of a criminal threshold for causation. Other themes identified include black and white good vs. evil narratives as well as painting an enemy as a mortal threat, which have been compared to the radicalization techniques used by terrorist groups. These attacks are often repeated and amplified inside a media echo chamber.
2. Speaker(s): Typically the speaker is an influential political or media figure, who is referred to as the "stochastic terrorist" for his or her alleged indirect culpability for the attack. The instigator(s) or "stochastic terrorist(s)" may or may not knowingly use this technique to attack and intimidate enemies, nonetheless, the effect remains the same. The public figure can plausibly disclaim any subsequent attack, as their words were not an explicit call for violence, and because of the lack of a direct organizational link between the instigator and perpetrator of the attack. The public figure cannot be prosecuted for his or her statements so long as they do not meet the legal definition of incitement. This is the key distinction between stochastic terrorism and other forms of terrorism. In the U.S., the 1969 Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio held that violent, inflammatory speech cannot be criminalized unless it is intended to, and likely to, result in imminent lawless action. However, speech can be quite dangerous even if legal.
3. Inspiration: An individual or group, without any ties to known terrorist groups, hears the speech and becomes motivated to commit violence against the target of the speech, believing it will further a political or ideological goal.
4. Attack: An attacker commits an act of terrorism that could include physical violence, threats, or other acts meant to harm, instill fear, intimidate. The victims may receive or fear physical attacks, (online) harassment, and death threats. This can have a chilling effect, as many victims do not have the resources for adequate security.
5. Probability: While difficult to predict each individual act of violence due to the disconnected chain of causality, the speech makes threats and terror attacks more likely. These attacks observed as a collection have a statistically valid relationship, even if individual attacks are too random (stochastic) to predict precisely.
I keep reading the word "grazed" or "nicked". I've also read Trump lost 25% of his ear. That is not grazed. Wonder which it was?
He says it like that's a bad thing...
Claiming Trump is a threat to democracy is enough to get a brainwashed kid to take Trump out , as he would think he’s saving the country. This crap has to stop , but we know the RATS are cornered and will do anything to stop Trump.
Jill
Point well taken.
It was obvious from the first time Dementia Joe bleated to lower the temperature that he meant us, not him.
That claim has lost its punch.
Bottom line is that conservatives/Trump supporters should be taking last Saturday as the day Donald Trump WAS assassinated. Period.
The fact he didn't die, so we can just go back to playing checkers...says more about us (and how we've dealt with the evil that's declared war on us for decades) than anything else.
The cabal behind the curtain that are responsible, since they seemingly have been able to set all the other rules, have now added assassination as a rule of engagement.
So does this action do something, ANYTHING to finally get US to start "returning fire", or do we continue to allow others to define us, to make our lives(like Trump's) WORTHY OF EXTERMINATION...because THAT is the narrative the man behind the curtain has ordered their democratic party puppets and their media bots to push out to the masses.
As such, that is the message MANY of their gruel-fed bots will believe, and sooner or later, ACT ON.
Engage your enemy...or die a sitting duck.
“What does the yellow light mean?”
I like it, mockery is the best weapon of all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.