It sounds like the hyperbolic language you hear when a bunch of pissed off people get together and talk. You also cut the quote off to support your narrative. He went on to say "Not from our guys though, but from somebody. I'd like to see that." (paraphrase)
That is not a threat.
How many other trucking protests are going to Ottawa, exactly? And even if they were speaking about another trucker, that's
still one of them inciting someone to try to ram Parliament.
Also, even if it was just "
locker room talk hyperbolic language", they are recording it. C'mon - in the age of social media, did they seriously think that people would see that and think "oh they're just pissed off and they're talking - they can't be serious"? People are
not supposed to do that because they can be taken out of context.
In this case, I'm not sure what other context they can be taken in - that guy is pretty explicit in what he wants "someone" to do. I'm pretty sure that once they recorded it, someone was thinking "oh crap - hopefully no one sees this."
While I'm here, let's dispell your other canard about special interests stealing the donations and laughing about it. You can read how wrong you were about it straight from the horses mouth. BTW, your particular bent on this was started by none other than Gerald Butts on Twitter and good little communists are trying to make it stick.
Remius already mentioned it it so I won't talk about trusting the "oh yeah we totally have it in hand" line on FB, linked to a Protonmail account which is specifically designed to be anonymous.
I'm more concerned that she never mentions who the accountants and lawyers are, or what firm they work for (or working for themselves, etc). So how are the supporters supposed to check whether or not she's lying? If she is so sure of their support, she would loudly be saying "I am working with XYZ accountant and ABC lawyers to ensure that the money gets to where it's needed." The fact that they don't is
yet another red flag.