Last week, Trump issued the following statement:
“The latest pleading from Special Counsel Robert Durham provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia. … In a stronger period of time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death.”
A story in Salon (here) says, “Donald Trump is literally threatening Hillary Clinton and her campaign staff with death.” That’s not quite true. He’s merely contending a crime was committed that deserves the death penalty. What probably is true is that “Trump’s followers are listening closely” when he says things like that.
On Jan. 6, 2021, just before the Capitol riot, he gave a speech that (as summarized by Wikipedia here) “inflamed the crowd,” and while it “did not overtly call on his supporters to use violence or enter the Capitol,” it “was filled with violent imagery.” (Read the actual speech here.)
Exactly one week later, he was impeached for “incitement of insurrection,” with all Democrats and 10 Republicans voting for the articles of impeachment. A month later, a law professor told BBC News he “wasn’t sure” if Trump could be charged with a crime, calling it “an agonizingly close call” (story here).
And on February 18, 2022, a judge refused to dismiss lawsuits against Trump after “concluding there was reason to believe that some of it fell outside the category of protected speech” (story here).
All of this — the impeachment, the question of criminal culpability, the lawsuits — suggests Trump’s Jan. 6 speech may have crossed a line. Certainly, those passing judgment are considering the results: Immediately after the rally, his supporters stormed the Capitol, and hundreds of them committed crimes to which they later pleaded guilty and drew, in some cases, jail or prison sentences.
Trump’s more usual M.O. is wrap his violent rhetoric in pseudo-legal language; for example, instead of saying someone should be killed, he says they should get the death penalty. This gives him cover in case one of his supporters acts on the suggestion. He also avoids being specific about who should be killed; he didn’t say Hillary Clinton should be killed, but rather referred to unnamed “operatives” and “the Hillary Clinton campaign.” Cover again, should his words instigate violent actions by others.
Trump is too cowardly to kill Hillary Clinton Campaign operatives, shoot migrants at the border, or punch protesters in the mouth himself. He frames it as something he wishes would happen, and usually doesn’t warn listeners, “Don’t go out and do it.” If someone does, his defense will be, “I didn’t tell them to do it.” Which, literally, is true. But even if he doesn’t quite instigate violence, and only goes right up to that line without crossing it, he sure isn’t discouraging violence.
And that’s where Trump’s actual guilt lies, regardless of what ultimately happens to him in the courts. Democracy is fragile, there’s tension and often anger just below the surface of our politics, and Trump is the inciter yelling “fire!” in a crowded theater.
There’s nothing innocent about it, but the First Amendment and prosecutors’ reluctance to go after a politician with a following allow him to get away with it.
Responsible citizens don’t vote for this, or have anything to do a party that enables and supports it.