Ryan Routh's confession letter shows how Democrats have stirred up violence against Trump
By: Daniel McCarthy Published (New York Post)
Ya think?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
By Daniel McCarthyPublished Sep. 23, 2024, 7:38 p.m. ET A courtroom sketch of would-be Trump assassin Ryan Routh in federal court in West Palm Beach, Florida, on Sept. 23, 2024. REUTERS/Lothar Speer
The man who intended to murder Donald Trump on Sept. 18 has explained in his own words why he wanted to do it.
The words aren't only his, though — they're also the slogans and cliches of Trump's Democratic opponents, virtually verbatim.
Ryan Routh left a letter with a friend, months ago, to apologize in case his assassination attempt failed.
What's been released so far makes Routh's political motives clear — he saw Trump as dangerously unfit for the presidency and a threat to peace.
Routh was especially incensed that Trump terminated Barack Obama's deal with Iran:
Trump, he wrote, "Ended relations with Iran like a child and now the Middle East has unraveled."
America's president, according to the would-be killer, "must at bare minimum embody the moral fabric that is America and be kind, caring, and selfless and always stand for humanity."
If this all sounds familiar, it's because Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and Trump's legion of Democratic and ex-Republican detractors have supplied the premises for stopping the former president by any means possible.
After all, if democracy really is at stake in November, voters themselves must be suicidal even to consider voting for Trump.
To save democracy in such an emergency might well seem to call for extreme measures of a sort that no politician would dare endorse — but that a true believer might be prepared to hazard.
Harris, Biden and other Democratic leaders are quick to lament political violence; they have a responsibility to do more, however, by acknowledging that whatever their differences with Trump, his election does not mean the end of constitutional government.
President Trump was not a tyrant, he isn't poised to become one if re-elected — and, most importantly, killing him is nothing like justifiable tyrannicide.
If Democrats could bring themselves to say this, they would do wonders for the emotional health of some of their own supporters — and might just save lives, including but not only Trump's.
The chilling thing about Routh's letter is that it's not a mindless, stream-of-consciousness rant: It's an assassin's manifesto written in the bland language of ordinary anti-Trump discourse.
Like Routh in his letter, in the 2020 presidential campaign Joe Biden and New York Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand both described Trump as a menace to America's "moral fabric."
"One of the worst things about President Trump … is he's torn apart the moral fabric of who we are," Gillibrand said in one Democratic debate, while Biden accused Trump of shredding "America's invisible moral fabric."
Routh's "kind, caring, and selfless" description of a good president — one he presumably wouldn't murder — sounds generic, yet closely tracks Kamala Harris' endorsement of Biden four years ago as "kind and endlessly caring" and possessed of "selfless courage."
Those words are obviously not incitements to violence: They simply testify to how little original thinking was taking place in Routh's head.
In the empty space between his ears there was a great echo chamber, reverberating with whatever he heard from Democrats and the anti-Trump hype machine.
Routh wasn't just soaking up the syllables of anti-Trump rhetoric, he was internalizing a mindset that presents Trump as an enemy of humanity itself, not only immature but malevolent.
Democrats have created an extraordinary climate of fear around Trump, and if they don't weigh their words more carefully, more violence will follow from the likes of Ryan Routh.
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off-topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) you are replying to preserve the continuity of this seed. Posting debunked lies will be subject to deletion
No Fascism References, Memes, Source Dissing.
You can not prohibit functions built into NT or disallow normal commenting.
Tags
Who is online
152 visitors
Why? Because he was subjected constantly to the "Threat to Democracy" bullshit and thought he should "save it". Words have meaning.
The former 'president' convicted felon rapist traitor has brought this all on himself, not the Democrats, him and him alone bears the blame.
[✘]
Save what how?
Read the article. He thought he needed to off Trump to save Democracy.
You mean the truth?
Far from it
Perhaps Trump should not have boasted how he planned to become a dictator then.
Note: anything Trump said does not excuse or justify Routh's actions. But Trump's statements about becoming a dictator is in direct conflict with democracy and the Constitution and does not need any democrat justification.
The truth and nothing but the truth.
Lol. That only makes sense if someone is willfully ignorant of the context of what Trump said.
Please explain the context of Trump stating he would be a dictator, that allows it to fit withing a democracy and legal within the Constitution.
I eagerly await your reply (not holding my breath).
IT only took 32 seconds, you'd be okay.
He's talking about issuing executive orders on day 1. That's it. Perfectly legal.
Hard to believe that,,,,,,,,misinterpretation (to put it nicely) is still floating around.
Apparently you are not listening to what he says, he specifically says " dictator ". So I'll ask you again.
Please explain the context of Trump stating he would be a dictator, that allows it to fit withing a democracy and legal within the Constitution.
You can't misinterpret something when you are directly quoting. He specifically used the word "dictator".
"Routh wasn't just soaking up the syllables of anti-Trump rhetoric, he was internalizing a mindset that presents Trump as an enemy of humanity itself, not only immature but malevolent."
The former 'president' convicted felon rapist traitor is immature and malevolent and more.
"Democrats have created an extraordinary climate of fear around Trump, and if they don't weigh their words more carefully, more violence will follow from the likes of Ryan Routh."
It is the former 'president' convicted felon rapist traitor who has created this extraordinary climate of fear around legal immigrants any and all non-white immigrants.
If the former 'president' convicted felon and rapist and traitor and vp pick vance don't stop with the threats and hatred and fear of all immigrants legal or not and all those who dare to repeat his own words against him more violence will follow......
Pointing out racism isn't racism.
America's president, according to the would-be killer, "must at bare minimum embody the moral fabric that is America and be kind, caring, and selfless and always stand for humanity."
How radical!!
President Trump was not a tyrant, he isn't poised to become one if re-elected — and, most importantly, killing him is nothing like justifiable tyrannicide.
If Democrats could bring themselves to say this, they would do wonders for the emotional health of some of their own supporters — and might just save lives, including but not only Trump's.
According to Trump’s lawyers, as POTUS he would be justified in using SEAL Team6 to assassinate his opponents so long as he has a majority in Congress to obediently support him. Not tyrannical at all!
Source please?
google is your friend
It depends on if you’re willing to believe your lying ears.
No surprise. A Supreme Court justice, members of Congress and President Trump have all been targeted by gunmen echoing Democratic party leaders.
Usually assassins are influenced by something they heard or read. John Wilkes Booth was inspired by anti-Lincoln rhetoric, the MLK killer , James Earl Ray was inspired by the anti-civil rights rhetoric of the day. A woman who attempted to kill President Ford was inspired by what she was reading and hearing about him. If just saying something bad about a politician in itself caused assassination Obama would be dead now, and so would Nancy Pelosi and Bill and Hillary Clinton.
I dont know whether or not Trump could ever succeed in ending or even harming democracy in America. But why the hell should we take the chance? We already know he is a traitor, and traitors dont have a lot of compunctions about what they are willing to do.
I thought that Squeaky Fromme wanted to bring attention to the trees by putting fear into the government through killing its symbol, President Ford. Sara Moore had some infatuation with Patty Hearst and radical leftist politics.
I want to throw something out there just for thought that i read last night before i went to sleep. lets see what others think.
From what we know and has been reported , this guy wanted to kill trump, planned to kill trump and set up to kill trump. and he even admitted to all of that .
The charges he faces are , Attempting to kill a presidential candidate / former president .
here is where i think it gets interesting .
The guy never had a line of sight on the intended target , and HE never fired a shot . He never got to make an attempt .
We all know that even conspiring to kill someone is illegal , simply look at people that attempt to hire hitmen to kill someone and are caught .
IMHO , i think the authorities have brought the wrong charge , and instead of charging with attempt , they have a better case of proving conspiring . Simply put , they overcharged the guy .
its easy to prove he conspired , even if it was simply with himself , than it is to prove he attempted , one is a slam dunk with what they have , the other is arguable since what happened as i stated above he didnt have line of sight and he didnt fire his weapon , he had intent , capability , but never the opportunity to follow through and take a shot .
You need two people for any conspiracy crime,
I found this on the requirements for attempted murder:
First, the defendant did something that was a substantial step toward killing [ name of intended victim ];
Second, when the defendant took that substantial step, the defendant intended to kill [ name of intended victim ]; and
Third, the attempted killing occurred at [ specify place of federal jurisdiction ].
A “substantial step” is conduct that strongly corroborated the defendant’s intent to commit the crime. To constitute a substantial step, a defendant’s act or actions must unequivocally demonstrate that the crime will take place unless interrupted by independent circumstances. Mere preparation is not a substantial step toward committing the crime.
I think staking the course out and putting himself in a position to kill trump if not discovered constitutes the required substantial step.
I see what your saying , but i will respectfully disagree about needing more than one person to be needed to conspire to commit a crime .
I think you can also see the very gray area i am pointing out as well, it will fall down to a judge , and if it comes to it what instructions are given to a jury .
as for this nutter butter , who knows what voices he heard in his head , he can always claim it wasnt him , it was felicia that said those things
I remember this coming up during the Trump/Russia thing. Here's the legal definition:
Yeah, it's definitely a question for the jury whether his actions went far enough towards killing Trump to constitute an attempt. I think it does.
100%, well put.