Their words are hot, but coordination is lacking.
Donald Trump’s arraignment today at a federal courthouse in Miami will mark a new phase in the incitement campaigns that Trump has waged for most of his political career. Since his indictment on charges related to the unlawful retention and storage of classified documents at his Florida resort, Trump and his allies have attacked the prosecutor, his wife, the Justice Department, President Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton, among others. The language they are using is filled with words of war, elevating concerns among terrorism experts and security planners that Trump’s supporters pose the same threat of violence that they did before the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol.
Yet although the threat has not disappeared, it has evolved. Highly organized violence like the January 6 riot now appears less likely. The urgent question is what dangerous individuals might do on their own and whether authorities are prepared to stop them.
Incitement to violence is not an on/off switch, and the mere use of words doesn’t necessarily lead to violence. Ideally, political leaders of any persuasion would avoid belligerent language, because they should know its potential consequences. But worrying about whether the base is emboldened is not the correct metric; the thing to watch is whether the number of supporters who are inclined to violence is growing.
Their words are hot, but coordination appears to be lacking. Law-enforcement monitoring of websites and potential planning in Florida is not pointing to any specific or credible threat. The atmosphere is obviously intense, but Trump does not have the resources he once had.
