Trump is close to inciting Horrific Violence: "Civil War" Tweets

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

So why is it that Tstorm pointing out that what was actually said wasn't that impeachment would cause a civil war but a Civil War like rift isn't being talked about here?

Because no one ever said this was about Trump calling for civil war. It isn't about what he says, it's about what his rabid cult thinks he's asking of them.

We all read the same thing. But some of his armed cult are taking it as marching orders. No matter how many criminal acts are committed in his name, he never thinks about his actions. He never takes responsibility. He just keeps throwing more and more recently lit matches on a tinderbox and thinks if a fire comes from it, he had no part of it.

It's reckless. And that's what we're focusing on. That behavior that seeps into the ears of his most fanatical supporters. Who are so ready to live out their war- like fantasies and are dying for someone to ring the bell. Who hear a comment like Trump said and declared assuredly that a civil war IS coming.

That is the issue.

 

[tstorm823]

Because no one ever said this was about Trump calling for civil war. It isn't about what he says, it's about what his rabid cult thinks he's asking of them.

We all read the same thing. But some of his armed cult are taking it as marching orders. No matter how many criminal acts are committed in his name, he never thinks about his actions. He never takes responsibility. He just keeps throwing more and more recently lit matches on a tinderbox and thinks if a fire comes from it, he had no part of it.

It's reckless. And that's what we're focusing on. That behavior that seeps into the ears of his most fanatical supporters. Who are so ready to live out their war- like fantasies and are dying for someone to ring the bell. Who hear a comment like Trump said and declared assuredly that a civil war IS coming.

That is the issue.

So, is CBS news part of Trump's rabid cult?

 

[Specter Von Baren]

So why is it that Tstorm pointing out that what was actually said wasn't that impeachment would cause a civil war but a Civil War like rift isn't being talked about here?

Because no one ever said this was about Trump calling for civil war. It isn't about what he says, it's about what his rabid cult thinks he's asking of them.

We all read the same thing. But some of his armed cult are taking it as marching orders. No matter how many criminal acts are committed in his name, he never thinks about his actions. He never takes responsibility. He just keeps throwing more and more recently lit matches on a tinderbox and thinks if a fire comes from it, he had no part of it.

It's reckless. And that's what we're focusing on. That behavior that seeps into the ears of his most fanatical supporters. Who are so ready to live out their war- like fantasies and are dying for someone to ring the bell. Who hear a comment like Trump said and declared assuredly that a civil war IS coming.

That is the issue.

But you said, "As usual his cult lapped up his words". And Tstorm says that the news story that Trump was calling for civil war came out hours before the militia made their announcement. So was the militia responding to Trump's tweet or the news report?

Because if it's the latter then I'm sorry but that's not Trump's fault, that's the fault of the news. If the news doesn't want a fucking civil war then they'd say what he actually said and talk about how he's blowing out of proportion how much people care about him or the impeachment of him. If the news doesn't want a civil war then they should talk about how, as the president, his words have power and can cause bad things to happen when used so willy nilly.

If you don't ACTUALLY want a civil war to break out then why would you deliberately misquote him?! Just because Trump does stupid shit doesn't mean you should actively make it worse. I'm not saying don't call him out, by the way, I'm saying that doing it like this is actively making it worse.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

But you said, "As usual his cult lapped up his words". And Tstorm says that the news story that Trump was calling for civil war came out hours before the militia made their announcement. So was the militia responding to Trump's tweet or the news report?

Because if it's the latter then I'm sorry but that's not Trump's fault, that's the fault of the news. If the news doesn't want a fucking civil war then they'd say what he actually said and talk about how he's blowing out of proportion how much people care about him or the impeachment of him. If the news doesn't want a civil war then they should talk about how, as the president, his words have power and can cause bad things to happen when used so willy nilly.

If you don't ACTUALLY want a civil war to break out then why would you deliberately misquote him?! Just because Trump does stupid shit doesn't mean you should actively make it worse. I'm not saying don't call him out, by the way, I'm saying that doing it like this is actively making it worse.

... ok, tstorms said something. Fine.

I just quoted the oath keeper's Twitter account where they referenced Trump's civil war tweet. It was in the first post and it was hyperlinked.

Oath Keepers [https://twitter.com/Oathkeepers/status/1178549790847590400?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1178549790847590400&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawfareblog.com%2Farmed-militias-are-taking-trumps-civil-war-tweets-seriously]
Here's the money quote from that thread. This is the truth. This is where we are. We ARE on the verge of a HOT civil war. Like in 1859. That's where we are. And the Right has ZERO trust or respect for anything the left is doing. We see THEM as illegitimate too. @StewartRhodesOK

That Oath Keeper quoted Trump's words on Twitter that he made on the 29th. The Oath Keeper made the response on the 30th, again quoting Trump directly. He took Trump's words to the next level and definitively said that we are on the verge of a civil war.

Deliberately misquoting someone would be a situation where I said Trump told us squirrels secretly powered the Pentagon and needs your money to do so. He said no such thing, and that's made up bull.

If you looked at the first post, I linked directly to his Twitter where he said it. I plainly stated several times that it was his members that was calling for civil war, and would act on his behest if so called.

If you can show me where I said Trump was calling for a civil war, I would be so inclined to read it. But from what I reread, I stated that Trump is not careful with his words and his fanatic followers are chomping at the bit to be let loose.

I'm afraid I'm the misquoted one here.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

But you said, "As usual his cult lapped up his words". And Tstorm says that the news story that Trump was calling for civil war came out hours before the militia made their announcement. So was the militia responding to Trump's tweet or the news report?

Because if it's the latter then I'm sorry but that's not Trump's fault, that's the fault of the news. If the news doesn't want a fucking civil war then they'd say what he actually said and talk about how he's blowing out of proportion how much people care about him or the impeachment of him. If the news doesn't want a civil war then they should talk about how, as the president, his words have power and can cause bad things to happen when used so willy nilly.

If you don't ACTUALLY want a civil war to break out then why would you deliberately misquote him?! Just because Trump does stupid shit doesn't mean you should actively make it worse. I'm not saying don't call him out, by the way, I'm saying that doing it like this is actively making it worse.

... ok, tstorms said something. Fine.

I just quoted the oath keeper's Twitter account where they referenced Trump's civil war tweet. It was in the first post and it was hyperlinked.

Oath Keepers [https://twitter.com/Oathkeepers/status/1178549790847590400?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1178549790847590400&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawfareblog.com%2Farmed-militias-are-taking-trumps-civil-war-tweets-seriously]
Here's the money quote from that thread. This is the truth. This is where we are. We ARE on the verge of a HOT civil war. Like in 1859. That's where we are. And the Right has ZERO trust or respect for anything the left is doing. We see THEM as illegitimate too. @StewartRhodesOK

That Oath Keeper quoted Trump's words on Twitter that he made on the 29th. The Oath Keeper made the response on the 30th, again quoting Trump directly. He took Trump's words to the next level and definitively said that we are on the verge of a civil war.

But doesn't this person go on to say this?

"And I stand by my statements. What I said wasn?t ?calling for civil war? or inciting one, as many on the left are now claiming. But it was a warning that they are pushing us towards one by their refusal to accept the results of the 2016 election and their attempt to overturn it"

I'm not seeing anything in this particular tweet chain that calls for an actual uprising or deliberate incitement of a civil war. The tweet from the person "AlkireMike" seemed to have actually called for it though but since it's apparently been deleted I can't look at it, but I'll assume for now that this is true.

Deliberately misquoting someone would be a situation where I said Trump told us squirrels secretly powered the Pentagon and needs your money to do so. He said no such thing, and that's made up bull.

If you looked at the first post, I linked directly to his Twitter where he said it. I plainly stated several times that it was his members that was calling for civil war, and would act on his behest if so called.

If you can show me where I said Trump was calling for a civil war, I would be so inclined to read it. But from what I reread, I stated that Trump is not careful with his words and his fanatic followers are chomping at the bit to be let loose.

I'm afraid I'm the misquoted one here.

So ok, we have people that say they support Trump saying they are ready to go to war (AlkireMike) or saying things that indicate that they are willing to do it if Trump is impeached (OathKeepers). Both look bad to me but again, why did the news coverage say that Trump was saying that a civil war would occur when he didn't say that? He clearly said something that has caused people to say they are ready to go to war, I'd argue that's why Presidents shouldn't be on twitter and should actual have some, you know, dignity and composure, which Trump doesn't have, but he did not in fact call for civil war. His stupidity however is causing some people to call for it, which is bad, but the reasons for one or the other are different.

 

[tstorm823]

I just quoted the oath keeper's Twitter account where they referenced Trump's civil war tweet. It was in the first post and it was hyperlinked.

Oath Keepers [https://twitter.com/Oathkeepers/status/1178549790847590400?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1178549790847590400&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawfareblog.com%2Farmed-militias-are-taking-trumps-civil-war-tweets-seriously]
Here's the money quote from that thread. This is the truth. This is where we are. We ARE on the verge of a HOT civil war. Like in 1859. That's where we are. And the Right has ZERO trust or respect for anything the left is doing. We see THEM as illegitimate too. @StewartRhodesOK

That Oath Keeper quoted Trump's words on Twitter that he made on the 29th. The Oath Keeper made the response on the 30th, again quoting Trump directly. He took Trump's words to the next level and definitively said that we are on the verge of a civil war.

Deliberately misquoting someone would be a situation where I said Trump told us squirrels secretly powered the Pentagon and needs your money to do so. He said no such thing, and that's made up bull.

If you looked at the first post, I linked directly to his Twitter where he said it. I plainly stated several times that it was his members that was calling for civil war, and would act on his behest if so called.

If you can show me where I said Trump was calling for a civil war, I would be so inclined to read it. But from what I reread, I stated that Trump is not careful with his words and his fanatic followers are chomping at the bit to be let loose.

I'm afraid I'm the misquoted one here.

Nobody misquoted you. You are not the problem. The news is the problem.

You did quote the Oath Keepers, but you also quoted CBS news. [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-civil-war-tweet-civil-war-2-is-trending-on-twitter-after-trump-suggested-what-might-occur-if-removed-from-office/]

"Donald Trump said in a tweet that if he is removed from office, a "civil war" might erupt in the United States."

You could have quoted The New York Times [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/opinion/trump-civil-war.html].

"More to the point, the president of the United States of America was able ? without any consequence ? to suggest there would be a domestic war that could result in deaths if he were subject to rules and laws ? such as the whistle-blower statutes."

You could have quoted Vox [https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/30/20891128/trump-tweets-schiff-treason-civil-war]

"escalating his inappropriate conduct by threatening the country with a civil war."

You could have quoted Harvard Law Professor, John Coates [https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/463675-harvard-law-professor-trump-civil-war-tweet-impeachable] tweeting 3 hours before the Oath Keepers.

"This tweet is itself an independent basis for impeachment - a sitting president threatening civil war if Congress exercises its constitutionally authorized power."

You could have quoted the Washington Post [https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/09/30/after-trump-invokes-civil-war-people-twitter-mockingly-rush-sign-up/]"

"On Sunday, he was at it again, rage-tweeting about the House?s impeachment inquiry and raising the specter of a Civil War."

Or any of the slew of tweets WaPo linked with people making jokes about a second Civil War, and then eventually twitter got #CivilWar2 trending, and I promise it's not Trump supporters saying "orange is the color of treason."

The point I'm trying to make is that the set of people treating that tweet as a call for a civil war is a few extremists on the right and most of the professional left-wing media, and the comments from the left started first. Basically every time there's something like this, it follows the pattern:

1) Trump: [literally anything]
2) Media: By saying [literally anything], Trump is giving people permission to be violent White Supremacists!
3) Violent white supremacists: Oh look, we have permission now.
4) Media: See, we told you!

And it at least deserves the question: would the 3rd step ever happen if the 2nd step didn't?

 

[CaitSeith]

You are kinda ignoring the countless times that far right and other radical conservatives groups have threatened with armed violence in the past, even before Trump. Heck! They have actually made armed occupation in hopes that the government retaliated violently. They don't need media criticizing Trump to feel justified. Blaming media is just a red herring that solves nothing.

And it at least deserves the question: would the 3rd step ever happen if the 2nd step didn't?

Yes, it would happen.

 

[tstorm823]

You are kinda ignoring the countless times that far right and other radical conservatives groups have threatened with armed violence in the past, even before Trump. Heck! They have actually made armed occupation in hopes that the government retaliated violently. They don't need media criticizing Trump to feel justified. Blaming media is just a red herring that solves nothing.

And it at least deserves the question: would the 3rd step ever happen if the 2nd step didn't?

Yes, it would happen.

Like, we're agreeing in a major way. These people would exist with or without Donald Trump or the media. They would act with or without Donald Trump or the media. They may not need to media to feel justified to themselves, but they do need the media to give them a mainstream platform, and they absolutely take advantage of the media's hysteria to tie themselves to the authority of the President.

Trump didn't say "hey, Oath Keepers, wanna have a civil war on Saturday?" He quoted someone referring to the historical event of the Civil War, and somehow that became major news outlets publicizing the Oath Keepers.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

But doesn't this person go on to say this?

"And I stand by my statements. What I said wasn?t ?calling for civil war? or inciting one, as many on the left are now claiming. But it was a warning that they are pushing us towards one by their refusal to accept the results of the 2016 election and their attempt to overturn it"

I'm not seeing anything in this particular tweet chain that calls for an actual uprising or deliberate incitement of a civil war. The tweet from the person "AlkireMike" seemed to have actually called for it though but since it's apparently been deleted I can't look at it, but I'll assume for now that this is true.

And the same person previously said this [https://twitter.com/Oathkeepers/status/1177806803385507840?s=20] on September 27.

Damn straight. As Article 1, Section 8 states, the militia (that's us) can be called forth "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions." We currently face all three needs. All he has to do is call us up. We WILL answer the call.
@StewartRhodesOK

To minds like that, Trump's words are a virtual "On your marks...".

As to why he tweeted the latter posts, do you remember high school bullies? This is akin to taunting a weaker kid with hope much they can bench press, all the karate classes they take, and the second that weaker kid steps out of line, they are going to pound them.

... and then they get caught by the teachers. And they go on saying that they never said they were going to do it, or that the teacher never saw what the weaker kid did to deserve it. How they are only getting the weaker kid's side and not listening to them.

We still live in a culture that has active shooters as a major problem. If police took his words as a manifesto and raiding his home to find many guns? Yeah, he'd go away for a long time.

And that's just the fear of an active shooter. Outright calling for a civil war is sedition [https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/sedition.html]

This is literally the definition they use:

Suppose that over the course of a few months, a small band of armed militants has coordinated strategies to distribute firearms and take over the nation's capital by force through a website on the clandestine "deep web." All indications show that the group is dead serious in its intentions, but they're thwarted by an FBI investigation that leads to arrests. While sharing information and discussing ideas -- even distasteful ones -- is generally protected as free speech, the FBI believes this crosses the line. The alleged ringleaders of the plot are charged with "seditious conspiracy" (simply referred to as "sedition") a federal crime related to treason and other anti-government offenses.

Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it. The following provides an overview of this particular crime against the government, with historical references.

We're dealing with people who truth and proper due process only goes one way: theirs. People surely protested when Trump was elected. But no one said how ready they were for Obama to call us action to repel the unjust ruling.

We got upset, we showed that we were, and we're accepted him getting into office.

These people speak out of both sides of their mouth. Similarly stating that they are being pushed to the breaking point that the left can't accept the just and legal election of Trump, and saying that the just and legal impeachment of Trump will be anything but that and they will ride on anyone at a moment's notice.

But no. It's "the left who's forcing these actions".

That is the mindset of the zealot. They alone know virtue. They alone are honest. And they just strike down the infidel.

Hmm... suddenly sounds strangely familiar.

So ok, we have people that say they support Trump saying they are ready to go to war (AlkireMike) or saying things that indicate that they are willing to do it if Trump is impeached (OathKeepers). Both look bad to me but again, why did the news coverage say that Trump was saying that a civil war would occur when he didn't say that? He clearly said something that has caused people to say they are ready to go to war, I'd argue that's why Presidents shouldn't be on twitter and should actual have some, you know, dignity and composure, which Trump doesn't have, but he did not in fact call for civil war. His stupidity however is causing some people to call for it, which is bad, but the reasons for one or the other are different.

You tell me. I haven't read the news coverage of which you speak.

The articles I linked to mentioned the quote and how the militias are taking it. Which is what this thread is about.

But ok. Even though I haven't seen those articles, if they exist, they exist. They would be very, very bad. No question.

However, there need to be something about personal responsibility.

We talk about right-wing militias as they are a naturally occurring violate substance that was just spawned while the earth was cooling. We have to tip-toe around them to make sure we don't rile them up because of course it will be our fault if we deign to offend.

Or, they could be like the left and just deal with a situation they think sucks without resulting to violence or threats of violence. I think that's a fine option, if I'm honest.

 

[CaitSeith]

they do need the media to give them a mainstream platform

No. Twitter is enough for that and for publicly tying themselves to Trump's words. And this isn't the first time Trump has insinuated that something like a civil war would happen if things didn't go his way and the far-right groups filled the blanks with "because we'll make it happen".

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Honestly, whole damn country's gone batshit stupid, and Congress' failure to take any sensible action in the face of the great recession all but condemned us to another great depression in a couple years' time. With the mass media practically bull-baiting civil war and laughing all the way to the bank, I perceive Trump's commentary less a threat and more an accurate and honest reading of the tea leaves. The only thing with which I disagree, is the notion impeachment would have any impact on that as the damage is long done. I've been in "keep bug-out bags ready" mode for a couple years, and how anyone else isn't completely eludes me.