It is incredible that these people still believe they are fooling anyone. Yet another hysterical leftist has penned an op-ed crying about former President Donald Trump saying mean things about Democrats.

In the piece, former federal prosecutor James D. Zirin slammed the former president for criticizing judges presiding over the politically motivated prosecutions against him, claiming that his comments would somehow spark violence.

The article was a reaction to a gag order issued by Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over Trump’s hush money trial in New York.

Now, the judge has issued another ruling that will impact Trump ahead of and during the trial — on Tuesday, Merchan issued an order prohibiting Trump from making public statements on jurors, witnesses, and attorneys (other than District Attorney Alvin Bragg).

Under the gag order, Trump cannot make, or direct others to make, public statements about counsel in the case. The exception is DA Alvin Bragg, who is an elected official.

Prosecutors requested the gag order last month, citing Trump’s “longstanding history of attacking witnesses, investigators, prosecutors, judges, and others involved in legal proceedings against him.”

In granting the request, Merchan wrote: “It is without question that the imminency of the risk of harm is now paramount.”

In the piece, the author laughably claims that “This is not a left/right issue” and argues that “Threatening judges and their families, and exposing them to violence, crosses a red line in any civilized society.”

Zirin details how Trump lashed out at Justice Arthur Engoron, who presided over his fraud trial, and his wife over a social media post.

Last year, during Trump’s civil fraud trial in New York State court, Trump went after the wife of Justice Arthur Engoron for what he claimed she had posted on social media. Engoron said his wife’s purported social media account was not, in fact, her own — it was hacked.

When Trump speaks, the crazies listen. In January, Engoron received a bomb threat to his home, hours before closing arguments were set to begin. When Trump targeted Engoron’s law clerk, a court security official reported she was subject to constant threats and harassment that were “serious and credible and not hypothetical or speculative.”

The author also claims that the former president “has now trained his sights not only on Judge Merchan, who will preside over his New York criminal trial, but on Merchan’s daughter Loren, who has nothing to do with the case.”

And, naturally, no hit piece complaining about Trump’s rhetoric would be complete without a reference to Democrats’ most hallowed of holidays: Jan. 6.

We know that Trump’s social media posts can incite violence. They did so on Jan. 6, when his followers stormed the Capitol. They did so in August 2022, when a Trump-inspired gunman attacked an FBI office in Cincinnati, only to be killed by police shortly thereafter.

Yes, Trump has indeed gone after the judges and district attorneys trying to prosecute him to influence the outcome of the upcoming presidential election. As with other political opponents, the former president has verbally savaged them with his usual alacrity.

However, whether one agrees or disagrees with his comments, the notion that he is somehow inciting violence against these individuals and their families is about as sensible as putting pineapple on pizza or eating well-done steak.

For starters, Trump has never called for violence against any of these individuals. Nothing he has said could reasonably be construed as a way to spur people to attack those targeting the former president physically.

Next, as with most progressives spewing this narrative, Zirin does not have the same energy for folks on the left, many of whom have used rhetoric that is every bit as incendiary as Trump’s, if not more so. Indeed, while the author pretends Trump incited the J6 riot, he said nothing of the individual who attempted to massacre Republican lawmakers even though he was inspired by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

In the end, it is easy to see Zirin’s arguments for what they are: hysterical fearmongering and an attempt to blame Trump for any violence that could occur against folks on the left. These are not serious arguments; they are political maneuverings, nothing more.

The bottom line is that unless a politician clearly calls for violent action, they should not be held responsible for the actions of nutjobs who might use their words as an excuse to physically harm others.