Trump's call for a "bloodbath" was literal — let's not waste time pretending it was ambiguous

When Donald Trump declared "If I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath" during his rally speech in Ohio Saturday, two things were immediately and obviously true: That is a threat, and it's a literal one. No honest person could dispute that just hearing the snippet of the quote, in which Trump articulates, "It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country." Presented in the larger context, there can be zero honest doubt that this is a call for real-world violence.

In the same speech, Trump celebrated the January 6 insurrection at length, calling the people who ransacked the Capitol "unbelievable patriots" for attempting to steal the 2020 election for him. He also underscored the fascist ideology he was espousing by declaring that immigrants are "not people," and sneering, "But I’m not allowed to say that because the radical left says that’s a terrible thing to say." One doesn't need a doctorate in history to recognize this blunt dehumanization is typically used to justify genocide and hate crimes. Frankly, most people who stoke racist violence tend to be more subtle than Trump with the dehumanizing rhetoric.

We don't need to guess why Trump is doing this. As with the riot he incited on January 6, he views the threat of MAGA violence as a way to intimidate potential opponents into backing down. I think he's wrong. His threats will make most people more determined to stop him. The one problem, however? Many, if not most, Americans are not hearing about Trump's unsubtle promise to rain more violence down upon the country.

Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.

As with Trump's "Mein Kampf" comments or his routine use of Hitler-esque rhetoric accusing immigrants of "poisoning the blood of our country," Trump's violent rhetoric just doesn't seem to break through. The small flurry of political coverage he gets isn't loud or sustained enough to penetrate the blanket of ignorance draped over most voters, who just don't read the news regularly enough to catch these stories. Part of how Trump hides his fascist violence in plain sight is, ironically, by being so relentless with it. He says vile things so regularly that it has been normalized. While most Americans have no idea, it's "old news" to a press that runs on novelty. For them, "Trump is being violent again" has become dog-bites-man stuff.

But a big part of the problem is that, when Trump does this, his comments get bogged down with the bad faith debate about what he "really" meant. So the press often gets dissuaded from covering Trump's violent rhetoric with the heft it deserves, especially as he has only been escalating since he instigated a riot in 2021.

As soon as the press started to cover Trump's threat of a "bloodbath," Trump and his minions got to work gaslighting everyone, denying we heard what we heard. The Trump campaign spokesman pretended it was a metaphor for "an economic bloodbath for the auto industry." This transparent excuse took off with MAGA bullies, including Twitter owner Elon Musk, who insisted, "Trump was referring to job losses in the auto industry."

Let's be quite clear: No one who says this believes it. Sure, Trump had been talking about the auto industry right before the threat. But anyone who has seen him speak knows he pings around like a demented pinball, even on his good days when he remembers who the current president is. Saturday, he happened to be speaking with more clarity than usual. There is no mistake. He explicitly said, "It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country." (Emphasis mine.) This is not a double entendre, but a single entendre.

Trump's campaign sent out a fundraising Monday morning, falsely claiming, "They used edited clips to viciously misquote me." This is a flat-out lie. The clip circulating around is straight from his mouth, unedited, and verified by basically every news agency. One can see it here:

Trump is a liar, of course, and should never get the benefit of the doubt. But that he lied so blatantly about this specific speech offers even more reason not to engage the bad faith denials over this.

Yet, as is often the case, Trump's gaslighting was effective at intimidating much of the press. CNN had a "debate" about "what he meant," pretending ambiguity where none exists. Politico ran the headline, "When is a 'bloodbath' not a bloodbath?" Downplaying the bloodbath comment or giving credence to the idea that it could have been a metaphor, ignores the fact that Trump had, just minutes before, been praising the January 6 insurrectionists who bashed cops and attempted to murder his vice president. Numerous outlets put the "auto industry" language in headlines, mostly adding confusion to what was not a confusing comment.

Trump and his fascist fanboys may think they're clever with these hand-waving techniques, so it's worth yet another reminder that they didn't invent gaslighting. In fact, their strategies go back to the Nazis. As philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre documented in his 1945 essay on fascist rhetoric, "Anti-Semite and Jew," saying something risible and then pretending to be misinterpreted was a favorite Nazi strategy to muddy the waters and waste the time and energy of their opponents. The "bloodbath" debacle shows that the comments being argued over don't even really need to be ambiguous in order for fascists to pretend they are open to interpretation. At this point, Trump could shoot a puppy in the head on stage and the discourse would get hijacked by MAGA talking heads arguing over whether it's still a "puppy" at six months old.

Both the press and the public have agency here and can choose against being bullied or distracted by disingenuous distractions from known liars. President Joe Biden's campaign went at this the right way, by ignoring the Trumpian bad faith. The Biden campaign spokesperson said straightforwardly that Trump "doubles down on his threats of political violence" and "wants another January 6." They immediately released an ad that put Trump's remarks in the larger context.

There may be no way to completely ignore the MAGA liars playing the "nuh-uh" game, but one does not need to take seriously arguments offered in bad faith. It really is just a matter of budgeting time and energy appropriately. Trump's glib and false denials need to be quoted, of course, as is journalistic custom. But they can and should be balanced appropriately by giving the audience the full context of the comments — with heavy emphasis on the pro-January 6 rhetoric that shaped Trump's speech, showing that "bloodbath" was no metaphor.

The good news is many outlets did resist the pressure to downplay Trump's remarks. NBC News went with the headline, "Trump says there will be a 'bloodbath' if he loses the election." CBS News was also blunt: "Trump says there will be a "bloodbath" if he loses November election." Even the New York Times, which tends to bend over backward to give credence to Trump's lies, offered a clean headline that even gave more context: "Trump Says Some Migrants Are ‘Not People’ and Predicts a ‘Blood Bath’ if He Loses."

This is a step in the right direction, but the next step is not letting Trump's provocations sink beneath the waves. Trump's violence may not be novel to political junkies and journalists, but a lot of Americans have no idea how bad he's gotten because they don't pay much attention. The only way they will learn is if the press keeps up a steady drumbeat. Some options: Dramatically reducing the "Biden is old" stories — which are the definition of "not news"! — in favor of covering Trump's violence. Doing more polls asking voters if they think it's okay for Trump to make these threats. Bringing in more context, like connecting Trump's violent rhetoric to other MAGA aggression, such as that aimed at schools or LGBTQ events. Conducting more "man on the street" interviews asking people, both at random and at Trump events, whether they approve of his calls for a "bloodbath." The media knows how to keep a story alive, if they want to.

Ordinary people can do their part, too. Trump's violence may be "old news" to people who read the news every day, but not to their less politically engaged friends and family. Sharing these stories and clips regularly —both on social media and in person — can help get them in front of people who are otherwise unaware. Just remember the golden rule of dealing with MAGA bad faith: Don't waste your one precious life arguing with people who don't believe the things they say. A curt "sure, Jan" dismissal is all those lies deserve. If MAGA people can't respect themselves enough to stop acting stupid, they don't deserve to be treated as honest interlocutors by others.