[FRIAM] incitement

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

How Trump’s language shifted in the weeks leading up to the Capitol riot – 2 linguists explain
https://theconversation.com/how-trumps-language-shifted-in-the-weeks-leading-up-to-the-capitol-riot-2-linguists-explain-152483

There's plenty to doubt, there. But it follows along our previous conversations about ambiguity (both [in]formal) and binding. Personally, I don't believe Trump purposefully incited the riot. He'd have to be a literal genius to *purposefully* use language like this with the intent/objectives attributed to him. What does it mean, though, to *accidentally* incite a riot? Where does _mens rea_ fall for incitement? It seems most plausible that Trump is simply pre-adapted to riot-incitement by his years of practiced marketing bullsh¡t and the trendly positive feedback he gets from that marketing bullsh¡t. He did incite a *rally*. He loves when his groupies get together to fawn over him. But did he incite them to riot? I don't think so. Laughable as the idea is, were I a Senator, I'd probably vote to acquit.

-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ