N.E. Brigand wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 10:09 pm Returning to the "bloodbath" comment, I think Josh Marshall's take is also valuable: "If Trump didn't mean what everyone heard, maybe he can clear it up by agreeing not to call for any more violence? Maybe he can renounce other times he called for violence if he loses? I'll wait."
I defended Sen. Chuck Schumer's March 2020 remarks at a pro-choice rally in front of the Supreme Court ... Schumer didn't have a history of violent rhetoric [and three more reasons] ... and thus it was reasonable to interpret [his comments] as rhetorical. (Just as one might interpret "bloodbath" as merely rhetorical if not for all the context, starting, I would repeat \, with "that'll be the least of it"* in reference to the auto industry: Trump clearly means something bigger than that.) And in fact, once the Court did overturn Roe v. Wade, the "far right" was "hit" by a wave of pro-choice votes. Nonetheless, Schumer apologized for his rhetoric a few days later.
When has Donald Trump ever apologized for anything?
And to give folks a sense of the dishonesty on the right: this is one of the top replies to Marshall's post. It claims that (then? or former?) Attorney General Loretta Lynch was "actually calling for violence in 2017". And it includes video of Lynch giving a speech intercut with scenes of riots, but Lynch's speech is a call for patience and calm.
*By the way, based on a scan of various pundits' comments, I'm not sure anyone pointed out the "least of it" bit before me.
On the contrary, I want Donald Trump to rise to Chuck Schumer's level. This is a chance for him to finally do the right thing and make it clear that "bloodbath" only was meant in reference to lost jobs in the auto industry, and also to explain what he meant by saying "that'll be the least of it." I think it took Schumer one day to walk back his remarks. So Trump has a few more hours to set that right.Voronwë the Faithful wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 10:26 pm Donald Trump has never apologized for anything in his life. If we sink to his level, he will have won.
If he doesn't, in the face of all of this outrage, then I think "Trump calls for bloodbath if Biden is reelected" is more than fair description of what happened yesterday. We're not sinking to his level. We're setting standards and demanding that he live up to them. Furthermore, because, as I said before, I think the language was there in order to provoke and terrorize, I think the Democratic response should be: "Don't be afraid of him. He's a weak little man screaming into the void. He deserves your scorn not your fear."
Edited to note that I think CNN does all right here: