Trump’s call for Hillary’s assassination is assassination by any other name

The way things are going, Donald Trump was right when he said, “”I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”

How else to explain much of the reaction to what came out of his mouth Tuesday, when, in essence, he green lighted his gun supporters to take out Hillary Clinton and her Supreme Court nominee(s)?

Here’s what he said and there is no getting around his message: “Hillary wants to abolish—essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, if she gets to pick, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know,” Trump said. “But I tell you what, that will be a horrible day, if Hillary gets to put her judges in, right now we’re tied.”

That is no laughing matter, folks. Nor, as Trump and his campaign camp claim, merely a call for all his gun-loving, gun-toting supporters to go out and vote for him on Election Day. “Unification,” they called it.

Look carefully at his words, “if she gets to pick her judges.” That’s no call to vote, because to pick judges, Hillary would be the elected president. Even if you take a longer view of what he said, that’s an incitement to either take her out as a candidate or as president of the United States.

Leave it to Trump’s foot-in-mouth spokesperson Katrina Pierson to tell us what her boss meant. According to PoliticusUSA, “Donald Trump’s spokesperson, Katrina Pierson, went on CNN and clarified that Trump meant that Hillary Clinton will only get shot if he loses the election. Somehow, this explanation is even worse than Trump’s initial threat.”

“CNN’s The Lead With Jake Tapper,” PoliticusUSA reported, “Pierson said that Trump wasn’t talking about wanting Hillary Clinton to be shot, but that she would be shot if she won, ‘Well, that’s actually not what he was talking about. Because he was saying what could happen, as you said, what could happen. He doesn’t want that to happen. And in order to stop that, people that support their Second Amendment rights need to come together and get out there and stop Hillary Clinton from winning in November.’”

So if The Donald loses the election, it’s curtains for Hillary?

ThinkProgress noted, “In a piece published in Rolling Stone, law professor David Cohen argues that Trump is engaging in what’s known as ‘stochastic terrorism’ — an academic term that refers to the act of using suggestive language to inspire radicals to carry out violent acts. In this scenario, a lone wolf terrorist wouldn’t be explicitly instructed to commit their crimes, but they would be encouraged by rhetoric that appears to normalize that type of activity.”

Regardless of what anyone thinks of Hillary Clinton, this is a bone-chilling first in American presidential politics.

Yet, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) is still standing by Trump, calling what The Donald said a joke gone bad, adding, “You should never say something like that.” Really?

Then there is the bombastic Rudy Giuliani who yesterday, in defense of Trump, insisted on ABC’s Good Morning America, “With a crowd like that, if that’s what they thought he meant, they’d have gone wild.”

“’We know Donald Trump is not particularly indirect,’ he said, adding that if Trump meant to suggest the use of force against Clinton ‘he’d say something like that.’”

Uh-huh

“He was talking about how they have the power to keep her out of office, that’s what he was talking about,” said Giuliani.

The Huffington Post reported that Trump himself weighed in Tuesday night on Fox News, claiming he did suggest any harm but the uproar his words caused was good for him: “I have to say, in terms of politics, there is few things, and I happen to think that if [the media] did even bring this up, I think it’s a good thing for me,” he told Sean Hannity.

“Because it’s going to tell people more about me with respect to the Second Amendment . . . because Hillary Clinton wants to essentially abolish the Second Amendment.”

Again, Trump showed he doesn’t know the US Constitution. While Hillary has not called for abolishing the Second Amendment, even if she did, she couldn’t abolish it. It takes a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress to propose an amendment or a repeal of one, which then requires ratification by the votes of three-fourths of the states.

The RNC and corporate media have created a monster and just like Dr. Frankenstein’s monster, he’s out of control. The RNC has the power to declare its monster is mentally unbalanced and remove him from the ticket before some armed nutcase acts on his words.

Bev Conover is the editor and publisher of Intrepid Report. Email her at editor@intrepidreport.com.