Glen, et. Al, I am concerned that the present article of impeachment relies on the concept of incitement, which has, I am told, a very specific and narrow definition in federal law. Now I recognize that violation of federal law is not required for impeachment. However, I would hope that, just to be sure, we would add the charges of “reckless disregard” during the Ellipse speech and "dereliction of duty to protect” during the later stages of the riot itself. Neither charge requires the establishment of criminal intent. It is as if he drove down a crowded walking street at high speed and then failed to stop to give aid when he heard a bunch of thumps on his fenders. Sure he was late for a dentist appointment; what difference does that make?
As to intent: When I was a lad, I went to a shrink. The third time that I spilled a cup of coffee on her desk, she opined that I might harbor some resistance to treatment. I claimed I had no such intent. In retrospect, I think she was right. "Intent" just means a "persistence-until quality to behavior." Nick Nick Thompson [email protected] https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ -----Original Message----- From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of u?l? ??? Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 10:03 AM To: FriAM <[email protected]> Subject: [FRIAM] incitement 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 - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
