While we all now recognize that the Alt-Right/Republican leaning media is as sensationalistic, skewed and bullshiiite in their 'reporting' to push their own 'narrative' as much as the MSM does - the fact is that Lynch is an ideological Marxist, and by their very nature - stoking conflict, engendering 'payback' and using subtlety to suggest violence to those ears who know the keywords if their 'system' does not give them what they demand is what they are attempting to achieve.
Her words here are no different than the mass movements in the past that resulted in bloodletting upheaval.
That WND extrapolated that to mean she openly called for blood and death on the streets is an extrapolation too far - and is simply doing exactly what the Left does in accusing their opponents and political enemies of.
I think that is a fair analysis.
You know, I do find this interesting as well: Progressives have frequently accused conservatives of employing "dog whistles", meaning the use of descriptive language as a thinly-veiled appeal to a secretly shared (and bigoted) set of beliefs on the Right.
I believe the truth is that by making such baseless charges, Leftists project their own tendency to camouflage their own true and hidden agenda, namely to permanently alter the relationship between the individual and the state. By devaluing the former in favor of the latter, and doing so in the service of a collectivist ideology foreign to America's foundational principles, the Left hopes to effectively neuter our Constitution without having to amend it, circumventing the law while pretending to respect it.
A common tactic in the service of the Progressive agenda is the use of the "accusation privilege" (e.g.: racist, sexist, classist, homophobe, heteronormative, etc.,
ad nauseum). The applied terminology in this effort is the product of academic corruption, specifically the rejection of an empirical search for knowledge in favor of the fervent promotion of a collectivist catechism of Designated Oppressors and Accredited Victims, wherein groups of people are (falsely) held to differing behavioral standards and judged as either innocent or guilty, and each only by association. Such an ideology naturally flies in the face of the entire history of Western culture, legal theory and philosophy, which is why those foundations had to be denigrated, denied validity, and ultimately destroyed.
For his part, what Saul Alinsky recognized was that for the Left to win, it would have to hide its true aims (power, money, and control) while using a set of tactics to demoralize the opposition and put them eternally on the defensive. As all the while, the Left would pursue its "long march through the institutions", gradually taking over the levers of power, education, and communications from within, effectively hollowing out and demoralizing the traditionalist (pro-individual, pro-liberty) opposition.
And that is the real "dog whistle" whose echo we have been listening to for over 100 years.