I actually happen to agree with Biden that you cannot be for democracy and simultaneously be for the political violence that happened in Washington DC on January 6, 2020 when Trump supported his supporters in an attempted a coup.
I see irony in his limitation of geography though. Political violence in the USA is not OK. I agree. But Biden's proconsul in east Europe, Victoria Nulled, is the same person who famously said, "F**k the EU" because they negotiated an early election to replace an unpopular but democratically elected President. (Google it and you'll find it at BBC.). Instead, Nuland and our ambassador in Kiev discussed who was desirable to lead the country after a coup. This politician is a "complicated electron" but that one is preferred. And, after the coup, the preferred one stepped in to be Head of State. Political violence sponsored by the USA abroad to replace a democratically elected leader is OK. But, per Biden, political violence to prevent a transition of power to a person who legitimately won an election (Biden did, get over it) is not OK. Who was that US army guy who trained the far right of Maiden in sniper tactics (what am I talking about: see the Ukrainian political scientist now working in Ottawa in his peer reviewed work: "The far right, the Euromaiden, and the Maidan massacre in Ukraine", in the peer-reviewed Wiley journal Journal of Labor and Society, 2019, 1-25)
Am I the only one who sees irony and hypocrisy here.
We know the Monroe Doctrine lives. After all, Kennedy showed that when the USSR threatened to put nukes in Cuba: Kennedy threatened nuclear annihilation in the Cuban missile crisis. But the USA arrogates to itself the right to create a powerful allied military presence on the borders of Russia and we pretend this must be OK and that an opposing great power has no say? And then we scupper negotiations between Ukrainian and Russia in April (per Fiona Hill in the ultimate establish rag, Foreign Policy) to stop the war ... because why?
Stop the world I want to get off.