Satire has always been a part of the democratic tradition. An ability to criticize the government of the day is guaranteed by freedom of speech. Yet when you describe satire as a weapon, you should consider that the sword cuts both ways. Nazis used to relentlessly satirize Jews as a means to dehumanize them. Is that the objective here, to dehumanize President Trump, and turn him into a simple charicature, thereby providing the moral justification to reject all his policies, regardless of merit? Or is satire being used to illustrate contradictions in policy, which is entirely different? When you write that satire is a weapon, you're no longer using satire as humor. In point of fact it is the opposite of humor, as the intention is to do harm in the name of fun. And there is nothing funny about that.