Maybe the beer talking here, but the retreat to "we abhor violence" approach might be a loser.
Jefferson's observation that a little violence from time to time is necessatry for liberty, while not a call to violence, is an adnmission that violance can have good purpose.
Why let the other side have a monopoly on ratcheting up the violence? Mutually assured destruction works becuse the good guys signal they are willing to throw nukes. Why is that not used at the political level?
Said another way, fealty to “rule of law” must have a limit. At an extreme, the holocaust followed the rule of law.
The left has been using rule of law to perpetrate the Russin Hoax, Mueller, and now impeachment. Rule of law, lawfare, whatever, if that is the limit of force, then we lose. That’s obvious. Courts, Congress, passive ... your talk is lofty but you lose.
Spealking metaphorically here, we aren’t even brandishing at this point. Our position is that there is no reason to take the gun out of the holster, no matter what.
We just witnessed a bloodless coup d’etat. Why not a bloodless secession?