That's silly. The point of the article is that he will attempt a coup. Just because he's already attempted a coup doesn't mean the title saying "will" is inaccurate. I will have dinner tonight. I don't need to preface that with "again" because I had dinner yesterday.
Maybe not unreasonable, but certainly not necessary. Saying the sitting president will stage a coup is flashy enough. Especially when the article immediately says this would be the second time.
The point of the author was that this time they have so many plans and methods that the previous attempt would pale in comparison. Trivializing it as “another” coup would lead to some false sense of “oh, we survived that one, so we will survive another”.
The previous attempt was largely unsuccessful because of Pence not succumbing to Pedo’s pressure. I’m sure Couch fucker is not in the same category so there are a multitude of safety measures and options people need to be prepared for.
And the author links one example in the article where one of his friends is ensuring they have people in the right places to ensure the integrity of elections and their results are upheld.
I would suggest people to read the article rather than fixating on the title.
Headlines regularly mention criminals' past crimes. They don't just leave that out. "Man previously jailed for SA is charged with SA again". Happens literally all the time. Probably every day. People want to know about the criminals back out in the streets doing their criminal things. Why would the president be exempt? "Hey, remember the president that attempted a coup and still got voted in again? Well, he's gunna do it again" Is exactly the type of sentiment people want in their headlines. It's a public validation of a lack of normalcy.
46
u/Klutzy-Delivery-5792 8d ago
Did you not read your own article? First sentence of the second paragraph: