Rep. Goldman Calls for Trump to be “Eliminated” After Decrying his “Inflammatory Rhetoric”

Even in his freshman year, Democratic New York Rep. Dan Goldman has proven one of the most controversial members in Congress from attacking witnesses to inadvertently undermining the Biden defenses. The latest controversy involves a call to “eliminate” Donald Trump after accusing him of using “inflammatory rhetoric.” He has since apologized for his own language. Despite being one of the many past targets of Goldman’s wrath, I do not believe that Goldman was calling for violence. It was what I call “rage rhetoric” in my book The Indispensable Right. However, the incident shows the perils of criminalizing political speech.

Goldman remains a favorite on MSNBC where he rarely fails to disappoint viewers with his brand of smash-mouth politics and rhetoric. It was, therefore, somewhat ironic for Jen Psaki to interview him on the inflammatory rhetoric in this election on MSNBC’s “Inside with Jen Psaki.”

Goldman responded:

“rhetoric is really getting dangerous, more and more dangerous, and we saw what happened on Jan. 6, when he uses inflammatory rhetoric. It is just unquestionable at this point that that man cannot see public office again. He is not only unfit, he is destructive to our democracy and he has to be eliminated.”

Some have called for Goldman to be investigated by the Secret Service. Others have called for a censure resolution. I do not agree. It was clearly reckless rhetoric and not a true threat.

Yet, the incident shows how inflammatory terms are often used in politics. In the very same sentence in which Goldman denounced “dangerous” rhetoric, he proceeded to use dangerous rhetoric.

Rep. Goldman has been one of the most vocal voices for prosecuting incitement based on such language. In an interview with NPR, Goldman (who was counsel in the Trump impeachment) defended the use of such rhetoric as the basis for impeachment or prosecution:

“there’s all sorts of speech that is criminalized. You can’t – you know, you can’t use hate speech. You – people – in all sorts of crimes. You can’t send death threats across, you know, the Internet. There are so many criminal laws that do criminalize speech, and so the notion that the president of the United States somehow has a First Amendment right to be protected by the government for his speech doesn’t make any sense. It’s a backwards argument, and it’s a loser.”

As a threshold observation, the interview shows how dangerously ill-informed Goldman is on the First Amendment. He claims, as have other Democratic members, that “you can’t use hate speech.” That is demonstrably and completely wrong. Hate speech is protected under the First Amendment. You cannot commit hate crimes.

Indeed, in Brandenburg v. Ohio, a 1969 case involving “violent speech,” the court struck down an Ohio law prohibiting public speech that was deemed as promoting illegal conduct. It supported the right of the Ku Klux Klan to speak out, even though it is a hateful organization. Likewise, in RAV v. City of St. Paul in 2011, it struck down a ban on any symbol that “arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender.” In Snyder v. Phelps, also in 2011, the court said the hateful protests of Westboro Baptist Church were protected.

I have previously criticized the calls to criminalize Trump’s Jan. 6th speech as inimical to free speech. On Jan. 6, I was contributing to the coverage and denounced Trump’s speech while he was still giving it. I have long criticized Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric as well as similar rhetoric coming from the left. However, the calls for criminal charges ignore the danger to free speech.

While Trump used language like going to “fight” for his cause in the protest on the Hill, he never actually called for violence or a riot. Rather, he urged his supporters to march on the Capitol to express opposition to the certification of electoral votes and to support the challenges being made by some members of Congress. He expressly told his followers “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

If Trump called to “eliminate” Pence or Pelosi, it would have no doubt been added to calls for prosecution. Indeed, Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe even declared Trump guilty of the attempted murder of Vice President Mike Pence on January 6, 2021. Even though no prosecutor has ever suggested such a charge, Tribe assured CNN that the crime was already established “without any doubt, beyond a reasonable doubt, beyond any doubt.” Others have suggested premeditated murder charges in his unhinged environment.

I am glad that Rep. Goldman apologized and I wish Trump would have retracted some of his prior language. However, rage rhetoric is a reality in our contemporary politics. We need to continue to denounce it on both sides, but it will produce even greater costs if we cross the Rubicon into criminalizing political speech.

189 thoughts on “Rep. Goldman Calls for Trump to be “Eliminated” After Decrying his “Inflammatory Rhetoric””

  1. There is only one interpretation of “eliminated” when the party running DoJ uses it. You can be sure they are thinking if a way to “eliminate” and get away with it.

  2. That’s right! Goldman used the word “eliminate ” the same way Israel uses the word for Palestinians. He just means…uhh, something else than what the word means. You know, like… I don’t know ? Something something. It’s a political word. Let me check my political dictionary. It’s gotta be here somewhere….

    1. In all of the reporting by the Israeli press I have read lately, it speaks of “eliminating ” terrorists and terrorist leaders, with the clear meaning that they have been killed. Goldman clearly means for President Trump to be killed.

  3. Those of you who regularly read this blog may recall how often some of us have warned the peaceful to protect themselves.
    Kevlar is one of my calls from pre-emptive protection — weapons may soon follow though I am an ‘optimist’ and haven’t yet bought guns into our household. Dan Goldman should be eliminated… the spiritual sense of the word, right?

  4. He just wanted to say “eliminate”. Sywnwoafs. Taxoxpbgt. Ao etc. Fork tongued is all they are. Demons.

  5. OT. The media (leftist Israel/Jew haters) keep telling us that Biden is doing badly among young people due to the Israel/Hamas
    war and Biden’s support (so far) for Israel. However, maybe he is losing support among younger people because they cannot longer buy a home due to 8% interest rates. The monthly cost of a mortgage has now priced out many young first time buyers, many of them being really close only 2 years ago.

    Just something to think about the next time the media tells you that young people are suddenly foreign policy wonks and not just self-interested folks just like the rest of us.

    1. “NO DEATHS”


      “Minneapolis police rendered 44 people unconscious with neck restraints in five years”

      Since the beginning of 2015, officers from the Minneapolis Police Department have rendered people unconscious with neck restraints 44 times, according to an NBC News analysis of police records. Several police experts said that number appears to be unusually high.

      Minneapolis police used neck restraints at least 237 times during that span, and in 16 percent of the incidents the suspects and other individuals lost consciousness, the department’s use-of-force records show. A lack of publicly available use-of-force data from other departments makes it difficult to compare Minneapolis to other cities of the same or any size.

      Police define neck restraints as when an officer uses an arm or leg to compress someone’s neck without directly pressuring the airway.

      – NBC

    2. This is unbelievably depressing.

      While I have no doubt this production is “spun” towards a particular narrative.
      Enough of it is indisputable fact that we we saw was revolting.

      I was aware of some of what is in this movie – but there is SO MUCH.

      I was not aware that EMS was called nearly immediately, and still took almost 10 minutes to respond – despite the fact that they were 8 blocks away.

      I was aware that Floyd tested positive for drugs. I was not aware that he had 3 tmes the lethal dose of 2 different drugs, as well as a long list of other health problems.

      I was aware that the Technique used by Chauvin to restrain floyd was part of police training. I was not aware that it was in the very last training manual prior to Floyds arrest and that there are photo’s and graphics that exactly match the video of Chauvin.
      In otherwords he was doing EXACTLY what Mineapolis trained him to do.
      I was not aware that Ofc Keung was black.
      I was not aware of how much evidence was excluded by the judge, that absolutely should have gotten in at trial.

      I was aware that Floyd was restrained outside the police cruiser – because he refused to get into the cruizer and 4 police officers were unable to get him into the cruizer because he was resisting.

      I was not aware that the Minepolis Cheif of police LIED under oath at the trial.

      There is so much wrong with what happened here – not just the trial – but everything.

      1. “There is so much wrong with what happened here – not just the trial – but everything.”

        Yes, everything. The last wall of defense against mob rule, the judiciary, collapsed at first touch because it seems it was manned by cowards.

  6. Jonathan: In a previous comment I pointed to the close ties between Speaker Mike Johnson and DJT. Proof is that Johnson is releasing 40,000 hours of of J6 videos to help DJT in his propaganda campaign to try to taint the jury pool in the March criminal trial involving J6. Now there is additional evidence of the close relationship between the two.

    On Monday Johnson travelled to Mar-a-Lago to meet with DJT. There is no reporting on what the two discussed. But I have a confidential informant inside Mar-a-Lago who reports the following: The two shook hands and DJT thanked Johnson for releasing the J6 videos. In turn, Johnson thanked DJT for endorsing his bid for the House speakership. DJT had weighed in on the speakership by calling Tom Emmer, who briefing sought to become Speaker, a “Globalist RINO” and said it would be a “tragic mistake” to vote for Emmer. That sealed the deal for Johnson and he told DJT he was “eternally grateful to God and you”. DJT told Johnson: “I’m not sure you should be grateful to God. I was the one who got you the speakership”. Except for my literary license I have no doubt about some of things Johnson and DJT discussed.

    Johnson and DJT have always been bosom buddies. Johnson is leading the effort in the House to impeach Biden. Johnson also led the effort by the GOP to “stop the steal” and overturn the 2020 election. DJT can always count on Johnson to do his bidding. “Lapdog” is the word that comes to mind.

    1. Dennis – how can actual facts, like the raw video footage from J6, “taint a jury pool.” You seem to have reversed truth and falsehood.

    2. Why is it relevant that X might be “close” to Y ?

      How can the 40,000 hours of video “taint” the jury pool ?

      Would NOT releasing it and allowing the jury to have a FALSE perception of J6 actually taint the jury pool ?

      Regardless why are you so scared of the video of J6 ?

      Either it reflects what you have Claimed is True or it does not.

      Regardless,. this video is from security cameras and body cameras of the capitol police.
      All of it is being made public – except a tiny amount that the Capitol Police have requested not be disclosed because it concerns capitol security measures.

      It is not like Johnson is editing the video, or only selecting that which distorts peoples perception

      Like democrats and the media have done.

      Why is it that left wing nuts like you are CONSTANTLY scared of any inquiry that you do not have total control over ?

      We have fought for 3 years over the 2020 election.
      But it all could have been resolved easily – Democratic election officers could have allowed the public scrutiny the law requires BEFORE and During the election.

      Security cameras at ballot boxes could have been monitored and people arrested who dropped more than a few ballots or who showed up at multiple different ballot boxes. Had you done your job – nd followed the law – so many things would not be conflicts.
      But then again had you followed the law and allowed transparency – Biden would have lost.

      You fought to block the TRUE story of the hunter Biden laptop.
      You found to censor TRUE information about Covid.
      You prevented election observers from condyucting legally mandated oversight in counting rooms.
      You fought recounts,
      You fought signature audits.

      You fought tooth and nail every single possible type of inquiry into the election.

      If there is nothing to hide – why are you working so hard to prevent inquiry ?

      Your frothing at the mouth over the J6 video.

      Why ? If you have been telling the truth about J6 it will confirm it.

      Why are you so afraid of the truth ?

      Johnson has made the video available to anyone.

      Personally I think he should have just put it up on the web.
      40,000 hrs is ALOT of video. it would take a person 8 years to watch it all if they watched 24x7x365,
      regardless, WaPo can go in and review the video.
      NYT can go in and review the video.

      No one is stopping the left wing nut media or democratic organizations from searching out further evidence of misconduct by protestors.

      Again I think the video should be put on the web.

      Left wing nuts – and there are an enormous number of young ones with massive amounts of free time
      As they proceed through college unable to read at a collefe level.
      Crowdsource the left reviewing it all and looking for people who committed crimes that have not yet been identified.

      And those on the right are going to do the same – looking for antifa members and Feds.

      Let the chips fall where they may.

      I have repeatedly told you and others here that the J6 narrative by the left is a BIG LIE.

      This video will prove me right, or it will prove me wrong.
      So go for it – prove me wrong.

      1. Jan 6 IS the epitome of the Big Blue Lie. If a Lefty’s lips are moving or their evil, corrupt heart beating it is a lie.

    3. The gist of your rant seems to be – I do not like it when other people do prefectly legal and legitimate things that undermine my lies.

      I have no idea whether your story about the Trump/Johnson meeting matches reality.
      If it does SO WHAT ?

      You wanted a different republican to win. Nearly all house republicans DID NOT.

      Trump’s endorsement has meaning – because it reflects the wishes and values of about 100 million americans.

      While I have personal problems with SOME of the attacks on so called “rinos”.

      I have ZERO interest in Chris Christie as president and he speaks for very few republicans.
      But he was the best governor that NJ could actually elect.

      Nikki Halley is doing an excellent job of losing my vote. The last thing we need is another Republican NeoCon.
      But she is entitled to her voice and she does reflect the views of a large number of republicans.
      Not a majority thank god. But still a voice we must allow to be heard.

      I do not expect all republicans to support Trump or MAGA – and they do not.
      I have no problem with policy differences inside either party.
      But today the MAGA elements of the GOP make up a super majority of republicans.

      I do not expect those republicans with different policy preferences to go along with policies they do not agree with.

      But I do expect that given that they are a minority in the party they will not engage in obstruction.

      But most importantly I do not support their efforts to join those on the left and malign the rest of the party.
      And I especially do not support that when they are WRONG.

      Is there a republican who voted for Trump’s impeachment who has a political carreer left ?
      NO – and they should not. Not because disension is not allowed,
      But because when you are THAT WRONG about the FACTS, you should not be in congress.

      Most republicans are going to support Trump – and that is OK – he is the leader of the party and he accurately reflects the will of the overwhelming majority of republican voters on the issues.

      I do not think that Johnson and Trump are joined at the hip – but so what if they are ?
      They are doing what republican voters want.

    4. The 2020 election should have been overturned.

      You constantly use that phrase as if there is a crime of “overturning an election”
      There is not.

      A judge in NC overturned a 2018 house election there.
      Al Gore attempted to overturn the election in FL in 2020
      Al Franken overturned the election of Coleman.
      Hillary attempted to overturn the election of Trump.
      A court in CT overturned the primary election of the Bridgeport mayor.

      We have a myriad of constitutional and legal mechanisms that exist for the explicit purpose of overturning fraudulent elections.
      Or elections where the outcome is wrong because of errors.

Leave a Reply