Tweet from Gov. Whitmer's Deputy Digital Director.

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text: Tori Saylor
@tori_saylor
I am the Governor's Deputy Digital Director. I see everything that is said about and to her online.

Every single time the President does this at a rally, the violent rhetoric towards her immediately escalates on social media.

It has to stop. It just has to.

Acyn Torabi
@Acyn
The President mentions the Governor of Michigan, the crowd chants lock her up, and the President says lock them all up

[soothsayer]

1. Jeezus

[mopinko]

2. stochastic terrorism.

[trickyguy]

5. Yes, it's a real thing that directly applies to what we are going through with Trump

as President. He totally fits the picture. I did some more research and

wrote it down. Am handing it out to people who might be interested.

They'd never heard of it. But it's real. AND IT'S HERE IN AMERICA.

Vote him OUT.

[reACTIONary]

7. You might consider posting it..

.. it would be interesting.

[catbyte]

16. Stochastic terrorism:

[trickyguy]

20. Got this from Wikipedia. Stochastic terrorism:

Public speech that can be expected to incite terrorism
without a direct link between the inciter ( Trump) and
the perpetrator ( his cult-like following who are armed).

There's more but you get the idea.

ie: when he tweeted "Liberate Michigan" is a good example.

A very dangerous man.

[wnylib]

21. The idea of not indicting a sitting president

is a policy of the Justice Department, isn't it?

But is there anything in written law or the constitution that prevents it? Seems like a president who incites terrorism against American citizens should have to face charges on it. There have already been violent terrorist plans against Governor Whitman because of Trump's incitement to violence. If one of the militia members had not gotten cold feet and reported the conspiracy, Whitmer might be dead now due to Trump's stochastic terrorist rhetoric.

[reACTIONary]

28. It's a policy, not an explicit constitutional prohibition...

However, it would not be very feasible - and a creative lawyer could make a good case that it is implicitly prohibited by the constitution.

[wnylib]

30. How can it be "implicitly" prohibited?

[reACTIONary]

35. Through judicial interpretation...

.... For instance, the constitution does not explicitly grant a woman's right to an abortion, but judicial interpretation has established that right as being implicitly granted.

Since the constitution provides explicitly for the removal of the president for criminal conduct, and since it makes him (currently a him) the head of the justice department, some might argue for implicit immunity while in office.

However, President Grant WAS arrested - and by an African American. So there is that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._West_(policeman)#:~:text=William%20Henry%20West%20(September%201842,Grant%20in%201872.

[wnylib]

43. I understood the idea of judicial

interpretation when I asked the question. What I wondered was what part of the constitution would lend itself to the interpretation that a sitting president cannot be indicted. You answered that with a plausible interpretation of impeachment as a defense against criminal indictment in a court, and arrest. His position as head of the Justice Department gives him a political advantage against federal criminal charges since he appoints the AG, as we see with Barr.

But would that extend to non federal charges, e.g. criminal charges brought by one or more ststes? NY was able to issue a ruling about his NY based charities. And he also was ruled against for his Trump University fraud. True, that ruling did not involve arrest and and removal from office for actions that might have got someone else criminal fraud charges and some prison time.

Since impeachment is a political process rather than a criminal court process, there needs to be the possibility of criminal charges, at least for felonies, or else the concept of even the president not being above the law is meaningless.

What if the president is in the process of committing a serious crime that is so injurious to citizens or to national security that it requires immediate action - more immediate than the lengthy process of impeachment? If he is surrounded by political toadies and accomplices, how can he be stopped? Do we need an amendment that specifies what types of crimes require such urgent action that the president can be immediately charged? Something written well enough to prevent political abuse of the amendment.

Meantime, if he relies on judicial interpretation based on the option of impeachment to protect him, it is especially convenient that he will soon have a 6 to 3 conservative majority on the SC.

So, after losing the election and knowing he faces criminal charges once Biden is in office, he can skip the country between Nov 3 and Jan 20 to evade state charges and prosecution, since a federal pardon from Pence would not apply to state charges. Or, does he expect to appeal state charges all the way to the SC and get a favorable ruling from the addition of his conservative appointees?

[reACTIONary]

45. Good questions! And yes, that SCOTUS appointment ...

... does seem rather convenient.

[reACTIONary]

36. Through judicial interpretation...

.... For instance, the constitution does not explicitly grant a woman's right to an abortion, but judicial interpretation has established that right as being implicitly granted.

Since the constitution provides explicitly for the removal of the president for criminal conduct, and since it makes him (currently a him) the head of the justice department, some might argue for implicit immunity while in office.

However, President Grant WAS arrested - and by an African American. So there is that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._West_(policeman)

[reACTIONary]

29. Thanks! nt

[certainot]

39. limbaugh is a genius at it and in MI, Mich State 11 and UM 7 support 18 limbaugh stations

by broadcasting sports on them

with few if any exceptions all the blowhards on those stations made excuses for lead in the water and now attack democrats. they always follow limbaugh's lead and support anyone's right to carry assault weapons in public and always make excuses for trump and racism. limbaugh and likely all the rest called covid a hoax and a dem plot to attack trump and push socialism and communist.

a few weeks ago limbaugh claimed that BLM protestors in portland "executed a trump supporter" and "cheered and danced". frightened nutjobs like glen beck on those shows are 'predicting' a civil war and they have all spent years lying about dems getting millions of 'illegal aliens' to vote.

and why wouldn't the kremlin be calling rw shows around the country and getting their emails read on those shows - reaching millions - the GOP friendly think tanks have ben doing it for decades.....

we can discuss the legalities and fat chances of legal and legislative action (like a new fairness doctrine) but democrats/progressive groups are missing a huge opportunity to end this shit instead of letting 1500 coordinated radio stations incite violence across the country this election and post election period and then hamstring bidden harris like we let them do to obama

those stations have been deciding who is too liberal for the supreme court for 30 fucking years and in michigan 2 universities, like the 85 others (supporting 260+ limbaugh stations), use their athletes to excuse racism and call BLM unamerican communist terrorists, deny global warming, and stimulate attacks on whitmer. all those stations have been politicizing mast wearing and screaming for reopening, and at the same time blaming democratic politicians in every state for destroying the economy - and these motherfucking republicans can't even supply widely available N95 masks for for under $10 at the hardware store

getting unis like that to announce they will start looking for apolitical alternatives will send advertisers on ALL rw radio stations to the exits and the advertising industry will have to break up the monopoly

[Bev54]

14. Yes and it is just about time to say to hell with any memo

He needs to be locked up for the safety of others.

[gristy]

18. wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_wolf_(terrorism)#Stochastic_terrorism

Stochastic terrorism

The first mention of the term "stochastic terrorism" appears to be in a 2002 article written by Gordon Woo entitled "Quantitative Terrorism Risk Assessment" in the Journal of Risk Finance.[30] The term is used to suggest that a quantifiable relationship may exist between seemingly random acts of terror and their intended goal of "perpetuating a reign of fear" via a manipulation of mass media and its capacity for "instant global news communication". For example, careful timing and placement of just a few moderately explosive devices could have the same intended effect as numerous random attacks or the use of more powerful explosives if they were shrewdly devised to elicit the maximum response from media organizations. Thus, it was theorized by Dr Woo that "the absolute number of attacks within a year, i.e. the rhythm of terror, might ultimately be determined as much by publicity goals and the political anniversary calendar as by the size of the terrorist ranks".

A derivation of Dr Woo's stochastic terrorism model was proffered by an anonymous blogger posting on Daily Kos in 2011 to describe public speech that can be expected to incite terrorism without a direct organizational link between the inciter and the perpetrator.[31][32] The term "stochastic" is used in this instance to describe the random, probabilistic nature of its effect: whether or not an attack actually takes place. And, although the actual perpetrator of a planned attack and its timing is not under the control of the stochastic terrorist, their actions nevertheless serve to increase the probability that a terrorist attack will occur.[33] The stochastic terrorist in this context does not direct the actions of any particular individual or members of a group. Rather, the stochastic terrorist gives voice to a specific ideology via mass media with the aim of optimizing its dissemination.[33]

It is by dint of this ideology that the stochastic terrorist is alleged to randomly incite individuals predisposed to acts of violence. And it is because the stochastic terrorist does not target and incite individual perpetrators of terror with their message that the perpetrator may be labeled a lone wolf by law enforcement while the inciter avoids legal culpability.[33][34] The term has mostly been applied to domestic American incidents of violence.[citation needed]

In their 2017 book Age of Lone Wolf Terrorism,[33] criminologist Mark S. Hamm and sociologist Ramón Spaaij discuss stochastic terrorism as a form of "indirect enabling" of terrorists. They write that "stochastic terrorism is the method of international recruitment used by ISIS", and they refer to Anwar al-Awlaki and Alex Jones as stochastic terrorists.[33]:157

Hamm and Spaaij discuss two instances of violence. In the 2010 Oakland freeway shootout, Byron Williams was said to be en route to offices of the American Civil Liberties Union and the Tides Foundation, planning to commit mass murder, "indirectly enabled by the conspiracy theories" of Glenn Beck and Alex Jones. As a left-wing example, they cite the 2012 shooting incident at the headquarters of the Family Research Council.[33]

The stochastic terrorism model is a stochastic process, a random, model of those terror attacks intended by the random nature of their timing and targets to excite a generalized fear.[35] Nonetheless, lone wolf terrorists are "indirectly enabled by the conspiracy theories"[33] circulated in the mass media, especially by high status political or religious leaders.

[sakabatou]

19. Yup

[BlancheSplanchnik]

31. That's what I thought too

Another way of saying Evil Asshole!!!

[mopinko]

33. been said here many times.

and is the biggest fear we all have right now.

impeachable.

[hibbing]

3. Kick n/t

[Lonestarblue]

4. Inciting violence against an elected official. Trump is a terrorist!

[BarbD]

10. Isn't inciting violence a crime?

[wnylib]

23. Yes. But not an easy one to prove.

[malaise]

6. Lock him the fuck up

That is all

[patphil]

8. Trump needs to realize that he is vulnerable to state charges in Michigan.

He can't be pardoned for this, and if he isn't reelected, he could face prosecution.

Lock him up!

[NoRoadUntravelled]

22. That could be why he's mentioning leaving the country if he loses.

There's no way he's going to stick around to be prosecuted.

[wnylib]

25. Why can't he be charged now?

Isn't it just a DOJ policy not to indict a sitting president?

Is there any written law or part of the constitution that prevents a president from being indicted? If not, then MI and NY should go after him immediately after he loses the election, before he can leave the country.

(Can't do it before the election without the action being perceived as a political move.)

[NoRoadUntravelled]

26. I don't know enough about the law to say but it sounds like a good plan to me.

nt

[roamer65]

32. I expect AG Dana Nessel to go after him when he's out of office.

She is as tough as nails.

[sarcasmo]

9. Cause & Effect

[Hip2bSquare]

11. We must remove this trash

This revolting POS must be removed and the rest of the trash gop who just stands by and doesn't utter a peep.

Gov Whitmer's strength is amazing. I hope the world sees that she is what true American patriotism really is!

I stand with Gretchen!

[warmfeet]

12. I wish us all well.

Fight. We have much to fight for, and hopefully, this physical fight will not be necessary. But if it is ............

[peggysue2]

13. He keeps this up?

He's going to get Whitmer killed. Too many of his supporters are loaded up with guns and looking for an excuse to act violently. It's totally irresponsible!

[Cha]

15. Rt.. Fucking Coward Bully trump needs

an exponential Dose of his own Medicine.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

17. I'm mortified by our ignorance that the whole world observes.

We had better crush them at the polls. Or just give up on America the Beautiful.

[NoRoadUntravelled]

24. You are so right. It seems like this is our last chance.

Now or never.

[orangecrush]

27. It isn't going to stop

Until he is dragged out of the white house by the secret service after losing the election, or gets article 25ed.

[zentrum]

34. Soul of a killer.

[SMC22307]

37. The Democratic Party needs to make a bigger deal of this: Donald Trump equals violence.

The Lincoln Project. Someone. Television ads so more seniors will see, not not just online ads. Also mention that just one (?) Republican governor called Whitmer to offer support. (Maybe more have but when I left off after this first broke it was the governor of Massachusetts who reached out to her...)

[Turin_C3PO]

38. It won't stop until Trump is gone.

We must vote this thug out of office.

[orwell]

40. No problem...

...if anything ever happened to her or her family Don the Killa Con would just blame Antifa. Barr would back him up. Then they would charge Biden with inciting violence and try to take him out with federal marshals.

Life is a lot simpler when you are totally disconnected from reality...

[TheCowsCameHome]

41. Every republican elected official that remains silent is complicit as well.

I fear someone is going to be badly injured, or worse.

[dalton99a]

42. The terrorist must be stopped and brought to justice

[Nitram]

44. Damn straight. This needs to be repeated and amplified ad nauseam.

[Blue Owl]

46. K&R for exposure

[Mr. Ected]

47. After 4 years of this shit, we're just waiting for the beatings to end

Then we can limp to the judiciary and begin to seek redress for our grievances.

He shouldn't be protected just because a bunch of idiots voted for him for President. He should do the time that he would have Whitmer, or Clinton, or Biden, or Obama do. Difference is, he committed the offenses. They are simply the victims of Russian disinformation distributed by American right wing felons.