Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes states that Trump‘s statements will be investigated to determine whether they may be in violation of state law, reports Forbes.
– I have asked my chief of staff to look at the statement, and analyze whether it qualifies as a death threat under Arizona law, Mayes says to a local TV channel.
The background is that in a conversation with former Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson at a meeting in Glendale, Arizona on Thursday, Trump lashed out at former Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney.
– Radical war hawk
Trump called Cheney a “radical war hawk”, a term equivalent to “war mongering”. According to Trump, Cheney always wanted to start new wars.
– Let’s place her with a rifle so she’s standing there with nine gun barrels shooting at her, Trump said.
– Let’s see what she thinks about it. You know, when guns are pointed at her face, he continued.
The statement was in some media interpreted like Trump proposing to put Cheney in front of one firing squad and execute her. It is rejected by Trump’s campaign staff, who instead link the statement to Cheney’s foreign policy.
– Trump is one hundred percent right that warmongers like Liz Cheney are very quick to start wars and send Americans to fight in them, instead of going into battle themselves, says Trump’s spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt.
– Disqualified
Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris commented on Trump’s statement during a visit to Madison, Wisconsin. Harris told reporters that Trump “has stepped up his violent rhetoric” when he “suggests in detail that guns should be aimed at former congresswoman Liz Cheney.”
According to Harris, Trump has thereby disqualified himself as suitable to lead the country.
– This must be disqualifying. Any person who wants to be president of the United States, and who uses that kind of violent rhetoric, is obviously disqualified, and unqualified, to be president, Harris said, according to The New York Times.
Examines vocabulary
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes says that it is not yet clear whether Trump’s statement is covered by freedom of speech or whether it can be considered a threat in violation of the law.
– That is the question, whether the comment crossed the line. It is very worrying. It’s the kind of thing that stirs people up and makes our situation in Arizona and other states more dangerous, says Mayes.
Cheney himself responded to Trump’s gun statement on Friday:
– This is how dictators destroy free nations. They threaten those who speak against them with death, she said.
– We cannot leave the responsibility for the country and our freedom to a petty, vengeful, vicious and unstable man who wants to become a tyrant, she added.
Trump repeated the criticism
At a rally in Michigan on Friday, Trump again criticized Cheney. Calling her a “disaster”, he said:
– If you were ever to place her on the battlefield, she would be the first to cower. She would not have fought. She would have freaked out so quickly, said Trump, who continued:
– And if you give her a gun, let her fight herself. If you ever do that, she’s not going to do very well, Trump said, according to The New York Times’ transcript of the rally.
Dispute over the interpretation
Among those who apparently interpreted Trump’s statement Thursday as a suggestion to execute Cheney is a spokesperson for Kamala Harris. Spokesman Ian Sams claimed Trump was talking about “sending a prominent Republican to the firing squad.”
At the same time, other Trump critics have concluded that this interpretation is probably not correct. Analyst Jonah Goldberg first claimed on the television channel CNN that Trump had talked about an execution, but acknowledged later to have been wrong.
Previously, Cheney was considered a rising star among the Republicans, but she was kicked out of the leadership and lost her seat in Congress after strongly criticizing Trump. The background was that Trump refused to accept the election results in 2020.
Cheney pushed for Trump’s impeachment, and last month the former congresswoman said she will vote for Kamala Harris.
t
#Investigation #Trump #statement #pointing #guns #Liz #Cheney
**Interview with Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes on Trump’s Controversial Remarks**
**Host:** Welcome, Attorney General Kris Mayes. Thank you for joining us today.
**Kris Mayes:** Thank you for having me.
**Host:** Let’s dive right in. Recently, former President Donald Trump made a rather alarming statement about Liz Cheney during an event in Arizona. He suggested using a rifle against her in a highly provocative manner. Can you share your perspective on this?
**Kris Mayes:** Yes, it’s concerning. Trump’s comments have raised significant questions about whether they could be considered a death threat under Arizona law. My chief of staff is currently examining the statement to determine if it crosses the legal line.
**Host:** Many are interpreting his words as a serious threat. How does the law differentiate between free speech and a credible threat?
**Kris Mayes:** That’s the key question we need to address. While we protect free speech, there are limits when it comes to incitement to violence or threats. Context matters significantly—what’s said, who it’s directed at, and how it might be perceived by the public. We must ensure that public figures are held accountable for their rhetoric, especially when it can incite violence.
**Host:** Trump referred to Cheney as a “radical war hawk” and suggested putting her in front of guns. How do you interpret his choice of words?
**Kris Mayes:** His language is troubling. Describing someone in such a militaristic context can incite division and potentially violence. Cheney’s response about how “dictators destroy free nations” highlights the seriousness of these words. It’s vital that we foster a political environment where all voices can be heard without the fear of violence.
**Host:** Kamala Harris also commented on this incident, stating that it disqualifies Trump from being a presidential candidate. Do you agree with her assessment?
**Kris Mayes:** I can understand her standpoint. When a potential leader uses violent imagery, it raises alarms about their ability to lead responsibly. Our leaders should inspire unity, not division or fear. It’s crucial for any candidate to demonstrate that they can engage in reasoned discourse rather than resorting to threats.
**Host:** As the conversation continues, what steps do you think should be taken to address this growing violence in political rhetoric?
**Kris Mayes:** We need to emphasize accountability and promote civil discourse. This situation should serve as a wake-up call for all political representatives about the impacts of their language. Additionally, if necessary, legal channels must be pursued to ensure that threats are treated seriously.
**Host:** Thank you, Attorney General Mayes, for sharing your insights today. It’s a crucial time for our political discourse, and your perspective adds an important layer to the discussion.
**Kris Mayes:** Thank you for having me. Let’s hope for a more respectful and peaceful political environment moving forward.