The notion that Americans should dial down their incendiary rhetoric is undeniable, but that message cannot be delivered credibly by the person who literally sent a mob to the US Capitol, and then sat back and cheered the thugs who assaulted cops for three hours.

The plea to ease up on hate speech cannot be made by the guy who invented a patois of political violence, who prods supporters to assault hecklers, threatens to shoot undocumented immigrants and looters, jeers the husband of a rival who was assaulted with a hammer, and refers to opposition as “vermin.”

And the idea that the toxic talk has gone too far sounds hollow coming from a demagogue who thinks Hillary Clinton’s fate might best be settled by “Second Amendment people,” that Liz Cheney should be sent before a military tribunal, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mark Milley, should be executed.

This is the political atmosphere that Donald Trump has nurtured, so when he whines about how “the rhetoric of Biden and Harris” has inspired two troubled people (both likely Republicans) to shoot at him with assault rifles, it can be dismissed as one of the most pitiful attempts at gaslighting from a deranged felon who has made a career of it.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I agree with you. However, if one wanted to make the argument - I suppose you could say they’re using in the second sense as defined by Websters:

    2a

    skill in the effective use of speech

    b

    a type or mode of language or speech

    TFW “mode of speech” is “lies like a cheap rug”

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Using the second definition, I’d still clarify as “false rhetoric” or something. Maybe that’s just me shrug