It appears that words no longer matter to Nancy Pelosi. For years, Pelosi and other Democrats have blamed President Donald Trump and Republicans for their “inciteful rhetoric.” In seeking Trump’s impeachment, Pelosi bellowed that the use of “words such as a cry ‘to fight like hell'” produces violence and added, “words matter. Truth matters. Accountability matters.” No longer. After all, she explained, “we can’t take responsibility for the minds that are out there and how they hear it.”

Democrats and the media have long applied a double standard to political violence. CNN made “fiery but mostly peaceful” protests a national joke in describing riots that caused massive property damage and deaths. CNN’s Chris Cillizza even denounced Trump for using the word “riots” to describe the violent protests in Kenosha in 2020. Violence on the left cannot be riotous; it is righteous.

Pelosi has shown the same relativity. When a mob destroyed statues, Pelosi brushed aside the criminal conduct and said, “People will do what they do.” 

Pelosi’s latest pivot comes as Democratic leaders whip supporters into a frenzy over the impending death of democracy and the need to “fight back.”

Despite objections from many of us that the rhetoric was pushing supporters to violence, Democrats have continued to call for resistance to tyranny or oligarchy.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D, Mass.) declared, “Elon Musk is seizing the power that belongs to the American people.” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D, Md.) claimed on MSNBC’s “The ReidOut” that Musk and Trump were conducting a “rapidly expanding and accelerating coup.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) appeared to be working off the same talking point and declared that a “coup” was being carried out. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) warned that Musk was “taking away everything we have.”

Many are using the very words that Pelosi previously said were not just impeachable but criminal incitement. Democrats ratcheted up claims of a “coup” and called for Democrats to “fight in the streets.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem  Jeffries (D., N.Y.) has called for people to take to the streets to save democracy and posted a picture brandishing a baseball bat.

Jeffries has also called for Democrats to fight  “in the streets.”

Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump. Liberal sites sell Antifa items to celebrate the violent group.

California Governor Gavin Newsom declared, “I’m going to punch these sons of bitches in the mouth.” It follows other violent rhetoric from Democratic leaders.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Cal.) said, “We are here to fight back.” Sen. Cory Booker (D., NJ) called on citizens to “fight” and declared, “We will rise up.”

Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D., TX) yelled, “We are gonna be in your face, we are gonna be on your a–es, and we are going to make sure you understand what democracy looks like, and this ain’t it.”

Rep. LaMonica McIver (D., N.J.) added: “God d—it shut down the Senate!…WE ARE AT WAR!”

Such rhetoric can inspire unhinged citizens who actually believe that this is a war against a coup. It is the type of rhetoric that can prompt anti-Republican Nicholas John Roske to try to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh or Sanders supporter James T. Hodgkinson to try to massacre Republican members playing softball.

Democrats have admitted that the rhetoric is causing many to consider violence. One House Democrat told Axios, “Some of them have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.”

Yet another admitted that constituents have told them to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy.” Others reported that liberals are talking about the need “to storm the White House and stuff like that.”

One explained that “They’re angry beyond things.” Another said, “It’s like … the Roman coliseum. People just want more and more of this spectacle.”

Some are discussing triggering or staging violence. One member said, “What I have seen is a demand that we get ourselves arrested intentionally or allow ourselves to be victims of violence, and … a lot of times that’s coming from economically very secure white people.”

In one encounter, a lawmaker told Axios: “I actually said in a meeting, ‘When they light a fire, my thought is to grab an extinguisher’. And someone at the table said, ‘Have you tried gasoline?’”

However, when such arson and other violence occur, Democrats are mystified that anyone would point to their own rhetoric and responsibility. When the alleged shooter of Charlie Kirk was found to have scrawled antifa messages on his bullets, the response was again denial and deflection.

At CNN, the network repeated its “fiery but mostly peaceful”  approach to reporting. It told CNN viewers that there were “phrases related to cultural issues.” The wording was so painfully awkward and overly evasive that it only caused greater attention from viewers. CNN later admitted that the writing involved antifa references.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) was even angry with those acknowledging that the shooter was motivated by leftwing causes. He posted on X: “What f**king difference does it make if this murderer was left or right. Pull yourself together, read a book, get some exercise, have a whiskey or walk the dog or make some pasta or go fishing or just do anything other than let this algo pickle your brain and ruin your soul.”

Imagine if a MAGA supporter shot a Democrat. Would Schatz be calling for library and yoga visits?

However, Pelosi insists that words no longer matter. She may be speaking the truth when it comes to the left and the media. They do not matter if they convey righteously violent messages. It then becomes little more than “phrases related to cultural issues.”

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”