If you “don’t think that Trump is expressly calling for Cheney’s assassination” then you’re not really paying attention. He means every awful thing that he says, and outrage and concern are necessary and important. If any other candidate had said this,then they’d be out of the race this morning. Trump’s magnetic hatred draws his supporters ever closer, repulsive as it is to the rest of us. It is said that when someone tells you who and what they are, you should believe them. I believe Donald Trump when he says that he will tear down the United States and remake it in an autocratic vision.
Sorry Chris, but the man has already called for Cheney to face a military tribunal. He knows exactly what he's doing when he spouts such violent rhetoric. I sincerely hope Cheney has adequate security.
Okay, I JUST stated I was taking a break from all things political but I had to come here today after trump's words about Liz Cheney. Don't know if I'm late to the game, but I just found out about this term this morning and wanted to post it:
"Stochastic terrorism is a form of political violence instigated by hostile public rhetoric directed at a group or an individual. Unlike incitement to terrorism, stochastic terrorism is accomplished with indirect, vague or coded language, which grants the instigator plausible deniability for any associated violence."
How can any decent person want this man to lead our country? If character matters at all, the choice is clear. We need a coalition of the sane to stop Trump
I was genuinely surprised that you wrote this, just as a factual matter: "(And by the way, I think it is wrong and irresponsible to call Trump “Hitler” and make Nazi comparisons too.)"
I'm sure you have seen that Godwin of "Godwin's law" (paraphrase: never compare any modern figure with Hitler) has said that this rule cannot apply to Trump, because he should be compared to Hitler, or that many serious observers (Kelly, Miley, etc.) including academic experts in the study of fascism (which = someone like Hitler) have argued cogently that Trump is a fascist. I understand it does not have an impact on you, based on your comment that I quoted above. Nor does his association with individual American Nazis. Or his deliberate use of 1930s symbology like "America First" (the pro-Hitler Lindbergh isolationist movement) and the Madison Square Garden rally.
I don't know if you have gone to the Holocaust Museum in DC on your own. The opening gallery about how Hitler came to power is filled with caption labels that match what happened with Trump. When I went there during the Trump administration I thought the curators had done this on purpose, which seemed inappropriate and shocking -- but it turned that's not true at all. These are long-standing labels from years before Trump came to power. If you can read those labels and brush off any comparisons to Hitler or Naziism as glib, uninformed, and inappropriate on their face, I'm thunderstruck. While you may reasonably think that it's an argument that doesn't convince you, at this point I see nothing wrong with someone else making that comparison; it's a legitimate case to make within the realm of civilized discourse that can be agreed or disagreed with. It is nothing like the quasi-not-really-but-then-again-maybe-really threat of assassination that you describe.
I felt the exact same way during a visit to the Nuremberg museum and parade grounds in 2017. The parallels were shocking then! And so much more has come to light in the ensuing years. Absolutely a reasonable comparison and not ratcheting up the rhetoric.
I think it’s, once again, Chris’s misplaced notion of “fairness”. He can’t condemn something Trump said without also condemning something that anti-Trump people have said. And that aside doesn’t add *anything* to the conversation.
What that ignores, as you’ve so rightly mentioned, is that there ARE objective facts involved in a comparison to Hitler and 1930s Germany. We know what Hitler said and did, and either Trump is saying similar things or he is not. Period. It’s not difficult, if you study history. Frankly, that’s not a subject that I would take Chris’s opinion on.
He is a danger. And yet, people vote for him. It's beyond scary. Thanks for giving some context, but I don't doubt he wouldn't want to see a firing squad facing any of those he thinks haven't followed his whims and wishes. 4 more days ... but it won't end. He has allowed his followers to say "the quiet part out loud" -- and it's not pretty. People are showing their true colors of racism and hatred and it's going to take years to get back to some sense of normalcy, if ever.
One thing I think you are missing here Chris. I think part of what Trump is saying is the claim that since Liz Cheney never was a soldier she had no right to send others to war. Aside from the fact that this could apply to many politicians, Republicans as well as Democrats, where in the world does Trumps' real life experiences give him any basis for being President and making war and peace decisions? If anything, by his own criteria, he is less qualified than she is.
I had respected your effort towards even handedness, but this feels like an intentional contortion. Just the tiny bit you snipped makes it clear that he is saying thats it is easy to be a war hawk when you are not the person on the front lines and never have been. He is saying if she was on the front and the 'enemies' were all aiming at her (which is what it feels like even though they are aiming at everyone on your side) she would rethink her hawkishness.
To bring the word assassination into this makes me think you are trying to get your old cnn job back.
I agree with Chris. A leader has THE responsibility to be clear, and consider ramifications. Given Trump’s firehose of sewage, his followers hear the sound bites, not the potential underlying alternative. It really is not difficult to preface his comment “it would not be so easy to be pro military action if you were on the battlefield”. However, the bone spur ex president doesn’t have solid ground to stand on.
Also, one should consider the litany of innuendo used by Trump. What in his entire public presence suggests he should be given such grace? The first step would be to say “ I misspoke”. But, that would be weak, right. Yet, not rising to the weakness of avoiding a debate.
Given you high bar for clarity, should I expect to find other comments from you complaining about the many Dem comments calling for punch a republican, reap the whirlwind, eliminate trump, etc?
Are you certain he did not say battlefield? Did you watch the entire clip or relying on only the snip Chris presented? Of course the snip includes WAR hawk. War / battlefield - the topic was clear even by your standards.
To be clear, for all your complaints that trump is encouraging violence, the fact is that no Dems are being shot at.
I think likely Trump didn’t think about his choice of words at all beforehand. That’s a problem and a sure sign the man is not cut out for office. His choice of words and influence matter and anyone who doesn’t see his big mouth and lack of care as proof he is unqualified for the job is either a hateful person or just not that smart. Even my heavily conservative father whose opinions sometimes frustrate me to no end can see Trump is a danger because he just doesn’t think, ever, and is driven by petty jealousy and negativity. A losing combination for the US if he is let into office again.
No I think Chris like many others think he is looking at Trump objectively. The problem is by the time it dawns on all of them - it will be too late. As they are all being had too. Sorry Chris
Chris, COMPLETELY and TOTALLY agree with you! Words have meaning. And, honestly, someone could take those words about seeing Liz Cheney the absolute wrong way and "think" that Trump was "telling them to do that to Liz". I just, I read that this morning and was completely flabbergasted. That mixed with Trump saying the reason why he went to NM yesterday was because it will help his demographics with Latino and Hispanic voters.. It's just a very very dangerous world we live in. SMH
I don’t care what Trump “really” meant with his statements, it’s indefensible and disgraceful. Period. Anyone else who said these words would be filleted up and down, rightly so. Trump gets a pass. Give me a break. His supporters “know” what he is saying and watch out America.
This commentary was WRONG and the perfect example of the effect of repeating something, regardless how wrong or false it is. Those comments incite violence, and we always have to consider the lowest denominator, who will listen and MISINTERPRET our words. That comment should have been CONDEMNED from the get go, CHRIS, BY NOT CONDEMNING THE COMMENT YOU ARE JUSTIFYING AND VALIDATING IT.
I really don't see where this doesn't mean exactly what it says..........maybe I am obtuse, but English is my native tongue.........that's what it looks like to me.....
And yet, god forbid, someone takes action, he will profess shock and surprise and deny saying this. OMG he is not fit to serve and how people can look past all his deep personal flaws and psychological issues is one of life's great mysteries. Wake up people!!!
"he’s not really suggesting someone should shoot Cheney." Of course he is. That's how Trump's people take it because they believe that's what Trump intended. This is another Trump "explanation, apology and lament." Nuts! Trump said it. And Trump's people know what der Fuhrer meant.
If you “don’t think that Trump is expressly calling for Cheney’s assassination” then you’re not really paying attention. He means every awful thing that he says, and outrage and concern are necessary and important. If any other candidate had said this,then they’d be out of the race this morning. Trump’s magnetic hatred draws his supporters ever closer, repulsive as it is to the rest of us. It is said that when someone tells you who and what they are, you should believe them. I believe Donald Trump when he says that he will tear down the United States and remake it in an autocratic vision.
Please vote.
I agree 💯%!
Sorry Chris, but the man has already called for Cheney to face a military tribunal. He knows exactly what he's doing when he spouts such violent rhetoric. I sincerely hope Cheney has adequate security.
And what if some unhinged follower of his hears this and decides to act on it, then what?
Forget about policy. This election is about good vs evil.
Okay, I JUST stated I was taking a break from all things political but I had to come here today after trump's words about Liz Cheney. Don't know if I'm late to the game, but I just found out about this term this morning and wanted to post it:
"Stochastic terrorism is a form of political violence instigated by hostile public rhetoric directed at a group or an individual. Unlike incitement to terrorism, stochastic terrorism is accomplished with indirect, vague or coded language, which grants the instigator plausible deniability for any associated violence."
How can any decent person want this man to lead our country? If character matters at all, the choice is clear. We need a coalition of the sane to stop Trump
I was genuinely surprised that you wrote this, just as a factual matter: "(And by the way, I think it is wrong and irresponsible to call Trump “Hitler” and make Nazi comparisons too.)"
I'm sure you have seen that Godwin of "Godwin's law" (paraphrase: never compare any modern figure with Hitler) has said that this rule cannot apply to Trump, because he should be compared to Hitler, or that many serious observers (Kelly, Miley, etc.) including academic experts in the study of fascism (which = someone like Hitler) have argued cogently that Trump is a fascist. I understand it does not have an impact on you, based on your comment that I quoted above. Nor does his association with individual American Nazis. Or his deliberate use of 1930s symbology like "America First" (the pro-Hitler Lindbergh isolationist movement) and the Madison Square Garden rally.
I don't know if you have gone to the Holocaust Museum in DC on your own. The opening gallery about how Hitler came to power is filled with caption labels that match what happened with Trump. When I went there during the Trump administration I thought the curators had done this on purpose, which seemed inappropriate and shocking -- but it turned that's not true at all. These are long-standing labels from years before Trump came to power. If you can read those labels and brush off any comparisons to Hitler or Naziism as glib, uninformed, and inappropriate on their face, I'm thunderstruck. While you may reasonably think that it's an argument that doesn't convince you, at this point I see nothing wrong with someone else making that comparison; it's a legitimate case to make within the realm of civilized discourse that can be agreed or disagreed with. It is nothing like the quasi-not-really-but-then-again-maybe-really threat of assassination that you describe.
I felt the exact same way during a visit to the Nuremberg museum and parade grounds in 2017. The parallels were shocking then! And so much more has come to light in the ensuing years. Absolutely a reasonable comparison and not ratcheting up the rhetoric.
I think it’s, once again, Chris’s misplaced notion of “fairness”. He can’t condemn something Trump said without also condemning something that anti-Trump people have said. And that aside doesn’t add *anything* to the conversation.
What that ignores, as you’ve so rightly mentioned, is that there ARE objective facts involved in a comparison to Hitler and 1930s Germany. We know what Hitler said and did, and either Trump is saying similar things or he is not. Period. It’s not difficult, if you study history. Frankly, that’s not a subject that I would take Chris’s opinion on.
Thank you, Esther for your excellent post! I hope everyone reads it! 📖
He is a danger. And yet, people vote for him. It's beyond scary. Thanks for giving some context, but I don't doubt he wouldn't want to see a firing squad facing any of those he thinks haven't followed his whims and wishes. 4 more days ... but it won't end. He has allowed his followers to say "the quiet part out loud" -- and it's not pretty. People are showing their true colors of racism and hatred and it's going to take years to get back to some sense of normalcy, if ever.
One thing I think you are missing here Chris. I think part of what Trump is saying is the claim that since Liz Cheney never was a soldier she had no right to send others to war. Aside from the fact that this could apply to many politicians, Republicans as well as Democrats, where in the world does Trumps' real life experiences give him any basis for being President and making war and peace decisions? If anything, by his own criteria, he is less qualified than she is.
Absolutely true!!
I had respected your effort towards even handedness, but this feels like an intentional contortion. Just the tiny bit you snipped makes it clear that he is saying thats it is easy to be a war hawk when you are not the person on the front lines and never have been. He is saying if she was on the front and the 'enemies' were all aiming at her (which is what it feels like even though they are aiming at everyone on your side) she would rethink her hawkishness.
To bring the word assassination into this makes me think you are trying to get your old cnn job back.
I agree with Chris. A leader has THE responsibility to be clear, and consider ramifications. Given Trump’s firehose of sewage, his followers hear the sound bites, not the potential underlying alternative. It really is not difficult to preface his comment “it would not be so easy to be pro military action if you were on the battlefield”. However, the bone spur ex president doesn’t have solid ground to stand on.
Also, one should consider the litany of innuendo used by Trump. What in his entire public presence suggests he should be given such grace? The first step would be to say “ I misspoke”. But, that would be weak, right. Yet, not rising to the weakness of avoiding a debate.
He was very clear.
Given you high bar for clarity, should I expect to find other comments from you complaining about the many Dem comments calling for punch a republican, reap the whirlwind, eliminate trump, etc?
Are you certain he did not say battlefield? Did you watch the entire clip or relying on only the snip Chris presented? Of course the snip includes WAR hawk. War / battlefield - the topic was clear even by your standards.
To be clear, for all your complaints that trump is encouraging violence, the fact is that no Dems are being shot at.
I think likely Trump didn’t think about his choice of words at all beforehand. That’s a problem and a sure sign the man is not cut out for office. His choice of words and influence matter and anyone who doesn’t see his big mouth and lack of care as proof he is unqualified for the job is either a hateful person or just not that smart. Even my heavily conservative father whose opinions sometimes frustrate me to no end can see Trump is a danger because he just doesn’t think, ever, and is driven by petty jealousy and negativity. A losing combination for the US if he is let into office again.
No I think Chris like many others think he is looking at Trump objectively. The problem is by the time it dawns on all of them - it will be too late. As they are all being had too. Sorry Chris
Chris, COMPLETELY and TOTALLY agree with you! Words have meaning. And, honestly, someone could take those words about seeing Liz Cheney the absolute wrong way and "think" that Trump was "telling them to do that to Liz". I just, I read that this morning and was completely flabbergasted. That mixed with Trump saying the reason why he went to NM yesterday was because it will help his demographics with Latino and Hispanic voters.. It's just a very very dangerous world we live in. SMH
And after the beautiful picture this morning I was so hopeful, but then I should have known. "Red sky at morning, voters take warning!"
I don’t care what Trump “really” meant with his statements, it’s indefensible and disgraceful. Period. Anyone else who said these words would be filleted up and down, rightly so. Trump gets a pass. Give me a break. His supporters “know” what he is saying and watch out America.
This commentary was WRONG and the perfect example of the effect of repeating something, regardless how wrong or false it is. Those comments incite violence, and we always have to consider the lowest denominator, who will listen and MISINTERPRET our words. That comment should have been CONDEMNED from the get go, CHRIS, BY NOT CONDEMNING THE COMMENT YOU ARE JUSTIFYING AND VALIDATING IT.
Don´t get numb by the barrage of crap.
CONDEMN ALL KIND OF VIOLENCE.
Amen!
Decency is not an element of Trump’s character.
I really don't see where this doesn't mean exactly what it says..........maybe I am obtuse, but English is my native tongue.........that's what it looks like to me.....
You’re not obtuse, you’re right.
And yet, god forbid, someone takes action, he will profess shock and surprise and deny saying this. OMG he is not fit to serve and how people can look past all his deep personal flaws and psychological issues is one of life's great mysteries. Wake up people!!!
"he’s not really suggesting someone should shoot Cheney." Of course he is. That's how Trump's people take it because they believe that's what Trump intended. This is another Trump "explanation, apology and lament." Nuts! Trump said it. And Trump's people know what der Fuhrer meant.