While the new president may argue as to whether or not the rain stopped or started as he made his first address as commander in chief, there is no doubt last weekend’s inauguration of Donald Trump was a stormy moment for visiting the nation’s capital.

On Saturday, the day after the Republican’s swearing-in as the 45th U.S. president, thousands gathered in Washington for the Women’s March, a massive protest against the new president, who attendees believe stands in opposition to women’s rights.

Outside a questionable statement made during a speech by singer Madonna — who told the audience she had contemplated “blowing up the White House” — there were no calls for violence during the march. The attendees made their voices heard in firm yet peaceful, which, regardless of whether you agree with their views or not, is well within their rights as Americans to make.

Contrast their behavior with those exhibited by “protesters” the previous day, where many people showed their opposition to Trump’s ascension to the White House by physically assaulting the president’s supporters, setting cars aflame and smashing windows of local businesses — all while covering their faces like they were preparing to rob a convenience store or bank.

These glorified street thugs had no coherent message, no arguments against the new administration  — just displays of violence and intimidation toward anyone who supports it.

Thankfully, many of these agitators were arrested and now face charges of felony rioting, which could be punished by up to 10 years in prison.

Unfortunately, the destruction on display in Washington could just be a sign of what is to come from the people who see Trump as the figurehead of a racist, fascist America.

As we have argued vehemently in past editorials, violence and vandalism have no place in the marketplace of ideas. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not freedom to physically attack those who disagree with you.

Do not mistake our position — opposition to the Trump administration should not only be allowed, but also encouraged. Many of Trump’s initial decisions — from his order to place a media blackout on the Environmental Protection Agency to his plans to proceed with building a border wall with Mexico — are worth examining and criticizing.

However, responding to the administration’s decisions with violence will not convince the government nor Trump’s supporters to change course — it will only further the divide and could possibly provoke an authoritarian response from the feds.

In a time where scrutinizing our leaders is more important than ever, we must make sure that valid detractors of the Trump administration are not drowned out by reactionary calls for violence and turmoil — for only the former is going to make a difference for the better.

Opinions expressed are those of the editorial board consisting of General Manager Ambrosia Neldon and community editors Ted Yoakum and Scott Novak.