Very good Laz.
I DO agree with the attorney in the article.
http://www.stripes.com/news/us/could-donald-trump-be-held-legally-responsible-for-inciting-violence-at-his-rallies-1.398819
“Curious where the line was drawn in the case of Donald Trump, we spoke by phone with Hermann Walz, a practicing attorney in New York who is an adjunct professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and who served as a prosecutor in both Queens and Brooklyn.
In Walz’s estimation, Trump is in safe territory. “Short of Donald Trump saying something like, ‘Get that guy and punch him in the face,’ or something like that, I don’t see that he would have any real liability,” Walz said. “Otherwise, he would have to create the atmosphere and give the intention, without actually saying it, that it’s okay to beat these people up here in front of me.” In the latter example, Walz means something like separating out the protesters in one area and then suggesting that the people in that area should be considered possibly violent.
While the former example sounds a lot like his comments about the guy with the tomato, Walz thinks that Trump would have been in the clear had someone been attacked in that instance, too. “I don’t know that Donald Trump is liable for somebody else taking independent action” like knocking out someone holding a tomato. People are still responsible for their own behavior. And if the heckler were in the act of throwing the tomato, Walz thinks that stopping him is defensible regardless of what Trump says. You are likely to be given some leniency if you prevent a crime from happening. This is likely why Trump often frames his support for protester violence in the idea that his supporters are being defensive against violence, not offensive.”
Yessir, cannot disagree. But further along than legal culpability is moral cupability. Trump needs to back off of the harsher rhetoric in 1) and 2) if he wishes to avoid moral culpability.
That said, *no matter* what he said, justification of action of violence against him or his supporters is, as I commented in the original article, the worst type of blame-the-victim crap.