Why are you playing this "what about x" game? The comparison is apples to oranges, and yet here we are.
Here are all references to the word "fight" in that speech (Full transcript is here: https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-01-13/tra...):
* And Rudy, you did a great job. He’s got guts. You know what? He’s got guts, unlike a lot of people in the Republican Party. He’s got guts. He fights, he fights.
* For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans. And that’s what they are. There’s so many weak Republicans. And we have great ones. Jim Jordan and some of these guys, they’re out there fighting. The House guys are fighting. But it’s, it’s incredible.
* And you have to get your people to fight. And if they don’t fight, we have to primary the hell out of the ones that don’t fight. You primary them. We’re going to. We’re going to let you know who they are. I can already tell you, frankly.
* Republicans are, Republicans are constantly fighting like a boxer with his hands tied behind his back. It’s like a boxer. And we want to be so nice. We want to be so respectful of everybody, including bad people. And we’re going to have to fight much harder.
* But we’ve done it quickly and we were going to sit home and watch a big victory and everybody had us down for a victory. It was going to be great and now we’re out here fighting. I said to somebody, I was going to take a few days and relax after our big electoral victory. 10 o’clock it was over. But I was going to take a few days.
* The American people do not believe the corrupt, fake news anymore. They have ruined their reputation. But you know, it used to be that they’d argue with me. I’d fight. So I’d fight, they’d fight, I’d fight, they’d fight. Pop pop. You’d believe me, you’d believe them. Somebody comes out. You know, they had their point of view, I had my point of view, but you’d have an argument.
* Now what they do is they go silent. It’s called suppression and that’s what happens in a communist country. That’s what they do, they suppress. You don’t fight with them anymore. Unless it’s a bad story. They have a little bad story about me, they make it 10 times worse and it’s a major headline.
* But our fight against the big donors, big media, big tech, and others is just getting started. This is the greatest in history. There’s never been a movement like that.
* And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.
So which of those is a "straight call to violence"?
And just so it's not forgotten, he also said this during the same speech:
* I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What would it mean to get newspaper ads in another nation which asserted that their presidency was being stolen?
He mentioned being peaceful once, but then suggested that the nation was being stolen from them and that they should be patriots and fight back.
It's not a straw man. You explicit said "... if not straight calls to violence by using words like "fight."". I listed out every instance of him using that word as well as it's conjugations.
I'll ask again, which of those instances do you claim is so egregious?
> That speech was written and was trying to accomplish a goal. Ignoring that public speaking is intended to influence people is like pretending that his words didn't matter at all.
Every speech is intended to influence people. That's literally the point of public speaking.
He also repeatedly mentions that the audience should see if their elected officials are "fighting for them" and, if not, choose different ones the next chance they get.
> He mentioned being peaceful once, but then suggested that the nation was being stolen from them and that they should be patriots and fight back.
Again, where does he say that "fighting back" involves anything that resembles violence?
The phrase, "fight back" is one of the most clichéd expressions in politics. Every politician says it during every election cycle.*
He used a lot of euphemisms, and I think there is some evidence there that he knew the message he was sending to the crowd.
Patriot: a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.
Fight: take part in a violent struggle involving the exchange of physical blows or the use of weapons.
Steal: take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.
You called out using that term as the strongest indicator of his intent to incite yet you continue to refuse to pick out a specific example of it.
> Connecting patriotism and fighting alongside the election being stolen from them had a message that more action than usual was necessary. That was the underlying message.
None of that is inciting violence. There are millions of Americans that believe there were actions during the recent election that were fraudulent. There’s nothing violent about voicing such concerns.
It’s been done in just about every election since the dawn of Democracy. Nancy Pelosi herself is on the record, on video, rejecting the outcome of a Presidential election. And she has just as much right to voice her concerns as Trump or anyone else.
> He used a lot of euphemisms, and I think there is some evidence there that he knew the message he was sending to the crowd.
That’s totally subjective and totally conjecture. If that’s going to be the standard for banishing someone from the internet then the kangaroo court of the Facebook Oversight Board is perfectly fitting.
He scheduled the speech nearby so that they would march on the Capitol building (it's literally in his speech). Others have spent time detailing this out[0]. Again, he picked many words and phrases that he used to convey to the crowd that this was a time for _action_. If he wasn't aware that crowd was going to react to his words with action, then that'd make him pretty dense.
I think I've exhaustively gotten the point across that using the term "fight" in a speech isn't the problem. If you want to whack it again, go for it.
0: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2021/ann...
Here are a few (not even all of them):
- "... these people are not going to take it any longer, they’re not going to take it any longer."
- "... to see our election victory stolen by bold and radical left Democrats. ... We will never concede. It doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. ... We will not take it anymore, and that is what this is all about. .. We’re just not going to let that happen."
- "We want to be so respectful of everybody, including bad people. And we’re going to have to fight much harder."
- "... Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness."
- "Well, I would say yes, it does, because the Constitution says you have to protect our country, and you have to protect our Constitution, and you can’t vote on fraud, and fraud breaks up everything, doesn’t it? When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules."
- "Looking out at all of the amazing patriots here today, I have never been more confident in our nation’s future."
- "But I said something is wrong here, something is really wrong, can’t have happened, and we fight. We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore."
The crowd was literally chanting "fight for Trump" during the speech before they went and...surprise... fought for Trump.
Then after, he tweeted a video and some text:
- "... Stay peaceful!"
- "No violence!"
- "We had an election that was stolen from us. ... We have to have peace. ... I know how you feel."
- "These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!"
So yeah, he called for peace after rallying the crowd to fight for him. At the same time, he was saying that it was justified and that he feels the same way as the folks rioting.
Let me put it one other way: if he didn’t organize people and then make that speech, do you think there would have been a riot at all?
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-trump-say-peacefully...
The Ruling Mostly true.
The president did say that the crowd was going to march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol. After the attack, Trump said he does not condone violence.
> However, it does not necessarily mean the president did not incite violence with the rest of his speech or in his rhetoric prior to January 6.
So it's hard to look seriously at those "he incited violence" given his YEARS of similar public gatherings and never having incited violence previously.
Key is that he never called for violence, he called for peaceful protests and he condemned the violence.
I mean... it doesn't get any simpler than that.