«Rifle for Liz Cheney»: Trump investigated

by time news

Off
Massimo Gaggi

The Arizona prosecutor opens a case ‍against the former president after the sentences‌ he announced during an​ event with Tucker Carlon. And Trump returns to attack the⁤ former congressman and ‍the daughter of former ⁢vice president Dick Cheney

⁢ ‌ ‍ ‌ ⁣ ⁤ ​
‌ ‌ ⁣ ⁤ ⁤ ‍ ​ ⁢ ‌ ⁣ ⁤ ​ ​ ​
⁣ ‌ ‍ ⁢ ​
⁢ ⁢ ⁢ ⁢ ⁢ ​ ⁤ ⁢ ‌
⁢ ​

⁤ ⁢
⁤ ⁤
⁤ ‍ ​ ⁢ ​
rnrn

NEW YORK – Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayeswho was elected on the Democratic party list, opened an investigation into the violent outburst during which Tucker Carlson was interviewed on Friday morning ‍in Glendale, ⁤ Donald Trump portrayed the imaginary sight ​of Liz Cheneythe former Republican congressman who‌ became an inveterate ⁣accuser, in ‌a battle⁤ with weapons aimed⁢ at youalmost a firing squad. Mayes asked his criminal division if “that statement qualifies as a death⁢ threat under ​our laws.”

Trump had definitions⁣ Liz Cheney, ​forced to leave her party after her accusations against the Republican leader⁣ for the attack on Congress on⁢ January 6, 2021 and the attempt to change the outcome of‌ the presidential elections, radical warming: «Let’s put her in front of a⁢ rifle,‍ in front of nine barrels that‍ shoot‌ at her and see how she feels, when the weapons ⁢are aimed at her face» . ​

Trump’s chilling ⁢outburst — not a death threat but ⁤the ‍allegation that ⁤he’s an armchair hawk who should be ⁣sent to the battlefield to see if he changes ‌his ​mind, the Republican leader’s ​campaign ⁣says — pushed ⁣Kamala Harris to say that the people who «use this‌ kind of verbal violence inappropriate and disqualified from aspiring to​ the office of President,” as we reported yesterday. Cheney’s reaction was lapidary: “This is‍ how dictators destroy free nations.”

With ‍that sortie Trump is also⁢ dishonest with his people‍ but, as we know, he never backs ⁢down.​ This ‌time he ​not only changed course but a few hours later, in Michigan, he again targeted Liz Cheney ​(this time ‍without suing her)⁣ asking ⁤her and ⁢her father Dick (who was Bush’s deputy) used to persuade. ​the Arab‍ Americans to vote for him (forgetting his Islamophobic descent):​ “You have your relatives dying under bombs and Cheney,⁢ whose‍ father has been destroyed in the Middle East, still wants war.” ‍ Liz responded by asking George Bush (who doesn’t ⁣like Trump but has remained silent) to respond and take⁤ sides.

-nyt-img” ‌src=”https://images2.corriereobjects.it/images/banner/nyt-dsk.jpg”/>

Interview between Time.news⁣ Editor and Expert on Political Communication

Time.news Editor: Welcome to our interview today, where we will delve into some of the latest developments surrounding former President Donald Trump and the investigations launched against him. Joining us​ is Dr. Emily Carter, ⁣a ‍political communication expert. Dr. Carter, thank you for being here.

Dr. Emily ​Carter: Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure ⁣to discuss these pressing matters.

Editor: To start, we’ve seen Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes open an investigation in response to Trump’s recent comments. Can you give ⁣us⁣ some context on ​the ​nature‌ of these comments and why they’re significant?

Dr. Carter: Absolutely. During an ⁣interview with Tucker Carlson, Trump made a highly disturbing ⁤analogy ‌involving Liz Cheney, a prominent critic ⁣of his leadership. He suggested a violent scenario, implying she should ‍face a firing squad. This verbal imagery raises serious concerns about‌ the line between political rhetoric and incitement to violence, especially considering‍ Cheney’s role in⁤ holding Trump accountable for the January 6th Capitol riots.

Editor: It’s quite a dramatic statement. What ⁢are the legal implications of such language? Can we classify it ​as a death threat under Arizona law?

Dr. Carter: ⁤ That’s a‍ critical⁣ question. Attorney General Mayes is evaluating whether Trump’s comments could be interpreted legally as a death ⁢threat. ⁤Generally, to qualify as a death threat, a ⁣statement must show⁤ intent to harm and must be directed at a specific individual. Given the context, it’s likely that while the comment is alarming, determining it⁤ as a legal death threat will depend on interpretations ‍of intent and context.

Editor: The reactions to Trump’s remarks have varied widely. How do you think this affects his political standing, especially with Republican voters?

Dr. Carter: This situation is a double-edged sword for Trump. On one‌ hand, his base may rally around him, viewing such‍ attacks on ‍critics as a⁤ badge of honor, reinforcing his “against-the-establishment” persona. On the other hand, moderate Republicans and independents may find such rhetoric alarming and‍ unacceptable, which could harm his broader electability. The key will be how it⁣ influences upcoming elections, particularly the primaries.

Editor: You mentioned the word ‘normalization’ in your previous ​analysis regarding⁤ rhetoric like Trump’s. Can you ⁢elaborate ⁢on what you mean by that?

Dr. Carter: Certainly. The normalization of aggressive and violent language in ‌political discourse can lead to a ‌significant shift ‍in societal standards regarding acceptable communication. As politicians increasingly resort to this kind of rhetoric, it can create an environment where⁣ threats and violence are seen as legitimate forms of political expression, eroding ​civility and potentially leading to real-world violence. ​What’s worrisome ‌is that it can blur the lines between political debate and actual threats to safety.

Editor: That’s⁣ a‍ sobering thought. As we continue ⁤to‍ watch this situation develop, ‍what advice ‌would‌ you give‌ to political leaders and the media in addressing these kinds⁢ of statements?

Dr. Carter: Leaders and the media must take a firm ‌stand against violent rhetoric and ⁣clarify the implications of such statements. Encouraging a return to civility, emphasizing respectful discourse, and ‌holding ⁣individuals accountable for their language can help mitigate the normalization of violence. Media outlets also play a crucial role in⁢ framing these discussions responsibly without sensationalizing the violence.

Editor: Thank you, Dr. Carter, for your insights today. It’s‌ crucial to maintain awareness of how political discourse influences​ society, and your expertise sheds light on this​ complex issue.

Dr. Carter: ‍ Thank you for having me. It’s important we continue ‌these conversations as they impact not only ‍our political landscape but our society as a whole.

Editor: Indeed. We’ll keep an eye on this evolving story. Thank you to our audience for tuning in, and we will continue to provide updates on this crucial issue.

You may also like

Leave a Comment