‘The Five’: Political violence on both sides?

[0:00] Well, you are looking there at shocking new photos of suspected shooter Cole Allen [0:04] taken in his hotel room just moments before he attacked the White House Correspondents' Dinner. [0:10] The shooting marked the third attempted assassination plot targeting President Trump in just two years. [0:16] And despite fresh calls to cool the rhetoric that puts a target on Trump's back, [0:21] some on the left are digging in. [0:23] Governor J.B. Pritzker, when reacting to the DOJ indicting Comey, [0:27] somehow finding a way to accuse Trump of inciting violence. [0:32] This president is guilty of inciting violence, and now he's using the First Amendment. [0:39] He's going after people for exercising their First Amendment rights and claiming that they're the ones [0:43] who are attacking people. This whole administration seems full of people who are just following [0:48] whatever this demented president tells them to do. [0:52] Others on the left are deflecting, insisting that political violence is not a Democrat problem, [0:59] even though Republicans have been the target of numerous attacks. Watch. [1:03] No one's legitimizing violence in any world. I have very little patience for this. [1:09] Has the president faced three threats in the last year, last couple of years? Absolutely. [1:14] Is that abominable? Absolutely. [1:15] The problem with political violence and extremism is evident on both sides. [1:21] The Democrats are blamed all for their rhetoric. When what I hear over and over again [1:25] is Democrats saying, please tone it down, please tone down the rhetoric. That's not what we stand [1:30] for. And we have seen, frankly, from the other side, from Trump and others, elevated rhetoric. Now, [1:36] you don't want to get a he said, she said place, but it's really infuriating. [1:40] But Vice President J.D. Vance is pushing back, [1:42] telling Will Cain that rage-fuel Democrats need to take a long look in the mirror. [1:47] If you're engaged in that kind of rhetoric, you need to check yourself. If you're part of the left [1:54] wing in this country, you got to look yourself in the mirror and say, why is it that so many of the [1:58] people who are firing guns at their political opponents agree with my perspective and listen [2:03] to the same sources of information that I listen to? Maybe that suggests the left has got to tone [2:09] down the rhetoric a little bit. Yeah, Jesse, it's incredible how lopsided it is. I don't know the [2:15] rose-colored glasses that they're using. Well, the glasses are worn by two Democrat [2:20] press flags for Democrat presidents. Where would they get this idea, Emily, that Trump is such a [2:27] threat that he needs to be taken out? Where would they get the idea that he's such a unique danger, [2:33] a genocidal dictator like Hitler, who at any day could just kill everybody in sight? Where would [2:40] they get the idea that he's mentally deranged and that the cabinet and perhaps the military might [2:45] have to do something about that? That he's already putting immigrants, innocent ones, [2:51] in concentration camps and killing innocent fishermen? Where would they get the idea that [2:55] he was a Russian traitor, a sexist, white supremacist, who his slogan means really go back [3:03] to when women and blacks couldn't vote? This isn't coming from the dark underbelly of the internet. [3:08] This is coming from the mainstream media in the New York Times, on network TV, on network late night [3:17] television. You go online and this is what they say. And they can't stop saying it because they can't [3:25] dial it back. It's who they are. Everything they're saying defines everything about them. If you strip out [3:34] the hate, they have nothing. There's no policy. There's no agenda. They can't have an executive [3:41] say, you know, guys, maybe don't book the guy that calls Trump Hitler. Maybe you don't have him on [3:46] again. You know, the rundown where you're calling him a genocidal maniac, conducting illegal wars and [3:54] raping and pillaging people. Maybe you don't use that tonight. No one's telling them that because hate [4:00] is profitable. And until you break the business model, you're never going to be able to tear [4:07] this system apart. And that's what it is. It's about money. And that's why it's being driven so [4:15] strongly because the ratings are going down. And you can see as the ratings go down, the hatred and the [4:22] insanity goes up and it's going to reach a breaking point pretty soon. Well, some argue, Dana, the breaking [4:28] point is three assassination attempts on the president that by the grace of God, he's to [4:32] survive them. But I mean, what the future, it just, it seems really terrifying. And to your point, [4:37] I was under the table with a lot of journalists that use words like Kristallnacht and likened his [4:42] campaign rally here at MSG to Nazi Germany and Hitler-esque. I mean, these are words that are [4:47] in headlines in these mainstream media journalists. Well, unity was over by the time President Trump [4:53] finished the press conference on Saturday night. And, but I really think in some ways, obviously [4:59] there are people, people on cable news hits, but I was mentioning yesterday, but since this is a new [5:05] group, I will say it again, because I keep thinking about where everybody is in the muck and in the soup [5:11] and it's, there's the cable news. Yes. Okay. And the media. Yes. Okay. But where people are mostly [5:16] getting information is online. And that is where it is really just disgusting, filled with conspiracy [5:22] theories. We're going to probably talk about that in a little bit as well as we did yesterday, [5:25] as we should. And the one thing I wonder about the Democrats is there's a lot of them who want [5:31] to be president and they want to run in 2028. So they keep doing the same thing over and over again. [5:37] There's been three assassination attempts. We have the same thing happen each time. There's a call for [5:43] unity or a call for calming down the rhetoric. And then they'll say, okay, yeah, we should do that, [5:47] but he should do that. And then within 30 minutes, it's over and everybody's going back. [5:52] And I just wonder, is there a Democrat out there who is smart enough to say, I'll do something [5:59] different. Mr. President, could we meet? Could we come in? There's just three things we'd want to [6:05] work on. One, two, three. And maybe we could figure out something to do. Like I'm willing to [6:09] meet you halfway. Could you meet me halfway? Could we come see you? Of course the president's going [6:13] to say, yes, he'll meet with anybody that's willing to have a good faith conversation. And so [6:18] is there a Democrat who has the courage to think about not just catering to the far left-wing base [6:25] of the party, but to actually lead more in a way that says, I'm willing to do something different [6:30] and to try to change the trajectory of these things that would maybe change the conversation, [6:36] maybe get a few things done. Like there are some big problems that the country is facing that we could [6:40] all maybe use some unity on and at least going forward and have somebody moderate the conversation. [6:48] Maybe it's Harold. Maybe Harold and I go together and we moderate this conversation. I mean, [6:53] there seems to me there's a room for something new and different if somebody is willing to pivot. [6:58] I love that suggestion, Harold. And especially because it benefits the American people [7:02] whom the Democrats serve as do Republicans. But I note that it seems to me that any Democrat [7:08] that tries to do that in any primaries or by their colleagues, they are slandered and slammed [7:14] as allying with Donald Trump, that being bipartisan is actually a negative against their history, [7:21] that somehow being defiant and engaging in this violent rhetoric is the only way for their stock [7:26] to remain approved on the Democrat side. I don't know about that. I think it probably goes both ways. [7:32] It may, you know, you see Tom Massey and others who differ with the president, [7:36] they face some primary challenges. It's good to be with everybody. I hope you guys had a great time [7:39] at the dinner celebrating our country in the 250 years. I'm reminded of King Charles [7:44] as we talk about this, because I thought his speech yesterday was outstanding. I wasn't on the show [7:48] yesterday, so I didn't get a chance to comment. The seriousness of the speech, the way he appealed [7:54] to the best of us. And even when he talked about his differences and our country's differences, [8:00] he talked about it, whether it be NATO or other things, he talked about it with such calm dignity. [8:05] And a sense that our belief in sharing with the American people, those who follow these things [8:11] closely or those who don't, I think sometimes we get, we're so invested in some of these [8:15] conversations and some of these narratives and arguments that we can forget that a lot [8:20] of Americans, if not the overwhelming majority of our audience, are working their tails off [8:25] and watch us for a little news or for a little entertainment or for both. And he, yesterday, [8:29] a lot of people were being introduced to him. And I thought the way he talked about our differences, [8:32] the U.S. and the U.K. on NATO and other things was so great. Now, I've set my piece on this issue. [8:40] And I think that, and I'll just repeat the highlights of it. I think that if we don't accept [8:47] the fact that we're all drowning in all of this rhetoric, the negative rhetoric, I don't doubt, [8:52] nor do I dispute that Democrats are probably the biggest generators of it now, the negative [8:57] things, the awful things. But Emily and everyone around the table, I'll remind us, we are steeped, [9:02] unfortunately, in a tradition of violence in our country and even political violence at times. [9:07] The data shows that last 10 years, maybe right-wing groups were more responsible for some of it. [9:13] In the last year, year and a half, this is just the data, that the last year and a half, [9:16] Democrats or the left-wing leaning groups have certainly been the biggest agitators. And according [9:21] to the data, more of it is coming from left-wing or Democrats and others. Now, I take no solace [9:27] over the last 10 years or contentment or inspiration because the violence may have been coming from [9:32] right-leaning groups, nor should anyone take any solace because it may be coming from left-leaning [9:37] groups. We're all going to be devoured by this rhetoric if our political body and political system [9:42] is unable to function because we all, because as I said the other day, there's a rot in our country. [9:48] But I want to be clear, I'd go with Dana anywhere. Dana asked me to go to talk about politics and to [9:53] talk about trying to solve things because I think at the end of the day, if all we do, [9:57] and I tried to say it yesterday or two days ago, if all we do is retreat to a crowd saying it's them, [10:02] they're the problem, then we're not going to solve the problem. There's nothing wrong with saying [10:05] it's them to try to let everybody know that they made a mistake. But if it's them because we're getting [10:10] some contentment or satisfaction that it's not us, I think that's a dangerous thing. So Dana, [10:15] I'm going to sign up with you. If they let us in at the White House, I'm with you. [10:19] Where are we going? [10:20] And Greg, we're learning that the right-wing extremist violence was actually funded by the [10:23] left-wing extremists. So it seems to be that, per your point, recently it is coming all from [10:28] one source. And it would be nice if the leadership had any attempt at quelling it. [10:33] Yeah. And also the research that the media uses to kind of equate both sides is incredibly flawed. [10:38] A joke even. I mean, I could just list the types of crimes, whether it is ambushes. We remember [10:48] the ambushes. We remember the sustained rioting, the sustained looting, the attacks on government [10:53] facilities, the attacks on law enforcement, businesses, individuals, religious institutions. [11:01] It's like something nearly 500 in the past, I don't know, seven years that could be linked to [11:07] the left, one to the right, January 6th. And that has been exploited. We know that. [11:13] I am going to say, let's just ignore the rhetoric. We're never going to get past that. The rhetoric [11:20] thing is done. It's a tradition in America to say bad things about people. So why don't we just [11:25] ask who's guilty of the violence? You know, that's the avoidance that we're seeing in the media. [11:33] What they're trying to do is they're trying to get us into the battle over rhetoric. Well, you guys do it [11:38] too. Well, I do it too. Okay, then let's just find out what sides words lead to violence. Because I agree [11:46] with you. Trump says some really mean things, but we don't kill the Democrats afterwards. Liberals [11:52] won't advance to that next step. They want you to believe it's about the quantity of rhetoric when [11:59] it's really the quantity of violence from the rhetoric. The Dems simply compare the rhetoric, [12:05] divorce from the sustained violence. It is that simple. And I'm invested in that. I'm invested in [12:10] that a lot. I am very wary of people who say both sides. And I think because it betrays, it's a [12:16] confession. When somebody says both sides are doing it, they're not denying that they're doing it. [12:23] Yeah, you got me. But I want to be clear. No, I'm not talking about you, Harold. I'm guilty of what [12:27] you said. I admit both sides do it. I mean. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. Well, then let me. When somebody [12:33] says both sides do it, they aren't defending their side. They're just saying you do it too. So instead [12:41] of arguing against the accusation, they expand the definition of what it is. So we, I'm just talking [12:50] about violence. Okay. That was created by political instruction to do so. By all means necessary, [12:59] eliminate. But they said, well, you call Democrats communists. You call them losers and creeps. Not [13:07] the point. I'm just talking about the sustained violence. So when they say on both sides, they are [13:13] basically just shifting. I hate to say goalposts, but they're changing it. Last, my last point, then I'll [13:17] shut up. We're all familiar with the broken windows theory where visible signs of disorder [13:23] where visible signs of disorder create a lack of societal control. And that encourages for more and [13:28] more serious crimes. Where did this left-wing violence come from? Well, how many instances have [13:33] we seen in the last 10 years where conservatives were targeted on campus? Pro-lifers get attacked. [13:38] Riley Gaines gets swarmed. Speakers are mobbed. Vandalism everywhere. No countless attacks. [13:45] Nobody gets charged. Tolerance towards that violence was the broken window theory that now [13:51] makes it seem to younger people, young men, that violence is now more acceptable. It's the same [13:59] kind of incubation you see on city streets where, you know, vandalism, public urination then leads [14:05] to mugging. So... That's a really good point, the broken window theory on political violence. [14:10] But Greg, just for a minute, back when, years ago, there were people who were pro-abortion, [14:15] people who were for abortion who were being attacked. You had abortion clinics being blown. [14:19] My only point is, I'm not denying that the violence is probably worse on one side today than it is [14:24] before, than it was before. But we can't ignore the fact that violence is, has been a part because [14:30] rhetoric has led them to it. What I'm saying is, I don't, I'm not comfortable, and I'm not saying you [14:34] are either. I'm not saying it's okay if it's, if it's the Republicans doing it, not me. [14:37] I'm not talking about you, Harold. I know, and I know, and I'm not talking about you. I think some [14:41] people are okay with it, saying it's them. When I'm telling you, it's going to come for all of us [14:46] if we don't find ways to deal with the riots. But if it does come for all of us, it's not going to [14:50] come from us. Yeah. I know, I disagree, because it has come from a side... You can give me, well, [14:56] we've done this before, but... Abortion activist people, abortion clinics being blown up, Charleston, [15:00] the guy going into a prayer group and saying, I'm killing you because you're black... Do you want me to go [15:04] through the 500 examples? No, but Greg, I think it goes to, this word, you don't like the words, [15:08] it's both sides. And to me, what both sides means is America. We've got to solve this for America. [15:14] I think we're, I think we're talking past each other. No, I think we're talking to each other. [15:17] I'm going to talk... You know what? I'm going to talk behind your back. [15:19] I'm going to talk about you. If you just are talking about political violence, though, [15:23] graduation matters. And when you talked about those words, when you said loser, when you said creep, [15:27] when you said communist, those aren't words that put death targets on people's back. Name me one Republican [15:32] president that has not been called a Nazi. You can't name one. That's the issue on the left, [15:37] and that's what puts targets... What do they call Republicans before Hitler? I don't know. [15:41] Mean-spirited. Awesome.