@Suppressed
Obviously, I said comedy sarcastically. Nobody I know or have read thought what she did was 'humorous'. Griffin being a threat to the President is not the primary point. What she communicated to the world was a threat to the President.
Was Trump communicating to the world a threat to CNN?
How do you differentiate?
I mean, come on...wouldn't any rational person want to know what the hell she was thinking and why she did that?
I admit that I don't understand any appeal at all for her "humor," including why she would be a part of the New Year celebrations. So I can't explain why people watched her on New Year's Eve, paid to attend her shows, or found any humor or message in this piece.
Even if just basic curiosity, I think a lot of people want to know what she 'intended' her message to be.
Agreed. But I know there are TOSsers who would get joy at seeing a similar image of BHO, yet not have any intention of doing anything themselves about it. I.e., something can be a fantasy while not meant to threaten someone.
"Artistic" antics are one thing, but if she meant to threaten, the message would have been more direct, I think.
It was dangerous and grotesque.
Yes, free speech can be dangerous. Is that how you meant that? If not, how?
It was certainly grotesque.
Nobody, nobody at all, much less the President of the United States, would put up with that without reporting it to the authorities. If someone sent you a video of your bloody head being held up, what would you do? Wouldn't you want to find out why someone sent that to you? And, what they meant by it?
Interesting you should say that. Decades ago, someone once left an envelope in front of my house, with a photo of me cut in two at the neck. Yeah, it was disturbing, but mostly I wondered what kind of disturbed mind would do such a cowardly and bizarre thing. No, I didn't report it to the authorities.
Maybe I'm somewhat less aroused by such actions, having had a stack of my newspapers set alight on my publisher's wooden porch while he slept upstairs. There was no threatening, only action.
To me, threatening someone implies you are trying to get their behavior and imply or directly state a violent consequence if they fail to do it. And in neither the Griffin nor Trump cases is this met...
18 U.S. Code § 875 - Interstate communications(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any demand or request for a ransom or reward for the release of any kidnapped person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(d) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
