NoSenseEtAl

downvoted for "something similar to the efforts of the US to have English as the #1 state language in the US", it is as similar as apple and truck.

@Schwern you should learn the definition of hindsight. If none of this happened nobody would consider Trump's speech dangerous. So he bears zero responsibility. People that decided to break in, and maybe the officers that shot them bear the responsibility(depending on if shootings were justified).

@Schwern you are missing the point... maybe, surely my joke style is bad but I was joking in reference to Occupy Wall Street, what I meant by occupy is literal physical presence in the congress, not generic protesting in front of it.... But my point still remains: if nothing happened nobody reasonable would say: gee Trump tried to start the insurrection but his fanboys were too dumb and or too scared to do it...

@Caleth when you start claiming 100% of group X are Y it is time to pause...

@Caleth obviously some of the people thought he was inciting them... So what? People hear what they want to hear. Question is not if somebody crazy or biased interpreted his words to mean X. Question is if a reasonable person sitting there in the crowd after his speech would think: I think Donald told us to storm the government buildings... answer is no.

@Caleth I do not like Trump, but it is funny that you assume that. Simple fact is that Trump did not call for insurrection. If anybody else said the same words he did people could accuse that guy of being a sore loser, or something, but nobody would really think that president X tried to overthrow the government with his speech. If he did people would be quoting him, instead of using vague claims about context and "what he really meant"

@Caleth again does not matter...you can argue(poorly but that is my point) that if you are potential protester and you know you will get bailed out you are more likely to break the law... Nobody is gonna fact check that claim, since it is impossible, nobody is gonna measure the effect since it is impossible... But if your target audience dislikes Kamala that is not a problem, they are happy to beleive you.

@user3067860 in retrospect it seems so, but without the Occupy Congress event happening that speech would be pretty boring generic political nonsense... Imagine 10 people that initiated the break in missed their flight and none of this happened... Not even media that dislikes him would say that Trump tried a coup but failed, because they would sound ridiculous...

@Caleth does not matter... argument can be made: "Kamala knew when she encouraged the protesters that some of them will be violent and kill somebody..." See how easy is to stretch logic to fit whatever someone want?

@Caleth you are missing the point...point was not that Kamala was paying people to kill people, but that if you are loose enough in your "logical" investigation you can get almost any conclusion you want.

@NuclearHoagie read the answer again, if that does not help consider this tactic: go through other answers and see which of them are explicitly mentioning parts of trump speech that are obviously bad without the bias (it must be bad since Trump said it... ) I'll wait here...

I know this site does not like Trump, but I really see no way how this question can be answered. "Provoked" can mean he looked at them or it could mean he said to police office: "I am gonna grab your gun and kill you"