Here we go again! This time, Hillary Clinton and her friends in the mainstream media are hysterically accusing Donald Trump of making a “threat” against her during a speech in North Carolina. Trump was talking about the fact that, if Clinton wins the election, she would pick Supreme Court justices and other federal judges who would eventually gut the Second Amendment. He said no one could stop her except perhaps “Second Amendment people.” He was obviously talking about people who believe deeply in the Second Amendment coming out in droves to vote against her in November. And if that doesn’t work and she gets elected anyway, then members of the U.S. Senate who value the Second Amendment could reject her nominees.
I listened to Trump’s speech and never even considered interpreting his statement as some kind of veiled threat of violence against Clinton. But as soon as Clinton’s campaign got hold of it, they twisted his words into a violent threat and feigned shock over it, and the media soon eagerly jumped on the bandwagon. A media feeding frenzy then ensued. Some in the media even wondered aloud of the Secret Service was going to interview Trump over his statement. Oh brother! Give me a break! Trump’s statement doesn’t qualify as a threat. Trump’s remarks were, at worst, vague. They were certainly not explicitly threatening.
As I’ve said time and again, true threats are unambiguous. Vague statements cannot legally be considered threats because they could have multiple meanings, some of which are not threatening. How can one possibly prove a person meant A when they swear they meant B? You can never be sure what a person really means when they make a vague statement. A real threat includes an explicit expression of intent to harm another person. For example, they must say they plan to kill you or beat you up in no uncertain terms. A true threat is abundantly obvious to anyone who hears or reads it.
The following is an example of something that is not a threat but wrongly interpreted that way. After a customer service representative raised her voice at me during a recent phone dispute over a bill that I owed, I told her that “a smart person doesn’t raise their voice at me.” She took that as a threat but I pointed out the fact that it was not, as I did not say why a smart person doesn’t raise their voice at me. Nor I did I make any kind of explicit statement of intent to harm her. She was obviously trying to read something into nothing, just like Hillary Clinton and her media flunkies are doing now in regard to Donald Trump’s benign remarks.