The Daily Beast reports:

The wife of a man suspected of killing a Democratic lawmaker and her husband was detained in a traffic stop after police discovered a weapon, ammunition, cash, and passports in the trunk of her car.

Jenny Boelter was stopped by officers in Onamia, Minnesota, around 10 a.m. on Saturday, local news KTSP reported, though it was not clear whether the check was a routine stop or a planned raid by law enforcement as part of efforts to track down murder suspect Vance Luther Boelter, 57.

Jenny and three relatives with whom she was travelling were detained for two to three hours while police searched the car and asked questions.

It was not clear whether the couple were living together at the time of the attack, but Boelter’s known residence in Camden, Minnesota, was raided by law enforcement on Saturday afternoon.

Vance Boelter, 57, allegedly shot and killed Minnesota state Representative Melissa Hortman, 55, and her husband, Mark, and wounded state Senator John Hoffman, 60, and his wife, Yvette, while dressed as a fake police officer and driving what looked like a police car on Saturday. His best friend indicated that he was a “strong” supporter of President Donald Trump. [Continue reading…]

Brian Klaas writes:

Political violence—and assassinations in particular—are notoriously difficult to predict, precisely because the violence is often carried out by “lone wolf” attackers. Just one deranged zealot is sufficient to carry out an act of consequential violence. In a country of 340 million people and even more guns, there will always be a small pool of potential killers eager to wreak havoc on the political system.

That’s why researchers who study political violence, including myself, try to understand what elevates or reduces the risk of violence, even if it can never be fully eradicated. In a context such as the United States, three key factors stand out: easy access to deadly weapons, intense polarization that paints political opponents as treasonous enemies rather than disagreeing compatriots, and incitements to political violence from high-profile public figures. When you combine those three social toxins, the likelihood of political violence increases, even as it remains impossible to predict who will be targeted or when attacks might be carried out.

Again, law-enforcement officials still don’t know the attacker’s precise motivations, and trying to draw conclusions from any single act of political violence is foolish. Because they are rare, randomness plays a role in these instances, and many perpetrators are mentally unwell. But consider this comparison. Although we can’t say that climate change caused a specific hurricane, we know that climate change produces stronger hurricanes. Similarly, we may not be able to draw a direct link from rhetoric to a specific act of violence, but we do know that incitements to violence make killings more likely.

The United States has repeatedly refused to do anything about easy access to deadly weapons, despite having, by far, the highest rate of mass killings among developed democracies. As a result, the only feasible levers are reducing polarization and stopping high-profile incitements to commit violence. Instead, during the Trump era, polarization has sharply increased. And over the past decade, Trump himself has been the most dangerous political actor in terms of routinely inciting violence against his opponents, including against specific politicians who could become assassination targets.

Such incitements matter. When a person with a massive public platform spreads information that encourages violence, attacks become more likely. [Continue reading…]