Let’s take what one might think is the most easy part of her remarks to understand: “violence directed at individuals” (Source C-SPAN clip). In order to make my statement, I must ignore that “individuals” refers to only Muslims. What would be the logical conclusion one can make if she were to mean individuals of any type?
A rational—read, American—meaning to “individuals” would require the victims and the perpetrators to be the same; and, don’t forget that many victims are killed. If AG Lynch were serious, then the victims of the Garland, Texas attack are the ones who would be prosecuted for anti-Muslim rhetoric. (The major-Media took the lead at the time.)
This scenario would—in my fantastic world or rational thought—lead some lawyer to succeed in getting a Judge to dismiss the charges against the attackers of the Garland event—had they lived—for the fact that the crime of anti-Muslim rhetoric (cartoon competition) caused them to “edge toward violence”. In this scenario, the participants of the events who survived would be the unlucky ones, particularly if the Judge gets the idea of making the survivors examples for the rest of those who think of “lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric”.
Oh the pain, the pain…