As a Consumer Psychologist with 55 years experience dealing with the perceptions, attitudes and behavior of Americans, I can say that there is no scientific evidence to prove the claims made in AOL articles concerning the relationship between Trump and violence. Many variables enter into the decision to be violent, and many facts point to the violence being initiated by other than the plain citizen who is upset by something Trump has said or done. Granted Trump's actions and words may be a factor in contributing to the violence, but in comparison to other factors, such as membership in group planning anarchy and other acts contrary to moral and anti-American values, it is unlikely that his actions alone would be the major impetus to violence. What happened in D.C. was most likely initiated by a hard core of those pre-disposed to generating the incident who succeeded in creating the "crowd-mind" syndrome so that the average citizen was caught up in event. However, it is unlikely that the desires of that average citizen would match the more violent intentions of those who led the uprising. The ability to identify the hard core violators is easy when you observe their costumes and equipment compared to the average participant. In the final analysis, from a psychological perspective, Trump's speech that day probably made it easier for the hard core violators to motivate the crowd to action. But one has to doubt if the President of the United States wanted to see people break into the Capitol and destroy furniture as well as threaten the lives of Congress. That does not seem like an intelligent and accurate perception of the values of the current President, notwithstanding any egotistical shortcomings.