Impeach and remove Maxine Waters

[disciple Clint]

Do you share her standards?

What standards do you think she has?

 

[disciple Clint]

I believe if Derek Chauvin is found innocent. Riot, protesting, murders and looting will 10 times worse. It's not a good thing. But anyone with commonsense. will know it will be worse. If Derek Chauvin is found guilty. I believe huge parties will happen.

OK but do you have any concern about Waters effectively demanding a verdict for Murder in fact she even went to the level of Murder One. Setting expectations at that level is ensuring violence especially when the charge of Murder One is not before the court.

 

[disciple Clint]

Now it seems to have escalated to jury tampering...

Yes Waters has managed to open mouth, insert foot, and create a whole new problem that effectively was the same as shooting herself in the other foot. I hope the people who voted for her are questioning supporting her in the future.

 

[mark46]

Yes Waters has managed to open mouth, insert foot, and create a whole new problem that effectively was the same as shooting herself in the other foot. I hope the people who voted for her are questioning supporting her in the future.

I think that she should be censured by the House.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

It seem that her comments may have backfired...

Judge in Derek Chauvin trial says Rep. Maxine Waters' comments may be grounds for appeal

The judge overseeing former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin's trial in the death of George Floyd said Monday that Rep. Maxine Waters' comments could be grounds for appealing a verdict in the trial.

"I'll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned," Judge Peter Cahill told defense attorney Eric Nelson on Monday.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm very disappointed in Rep. Waters' words. I say that in times of crisis and tension, it is the duty of our elected officials to use their influence to defuse the situation -- not exacerbate it.

... of course, I've been saying that since January 6 -- nice to see more people getting on board.

 

[98cwitr]

I'm very disappointed in Rep. Waters' words. I say that in times of crisis and tension, it is the duty of our elected officials to use their influence to defuse the situation -- not exacerbate it.

... of course, I've been saying that since January 6 -- nice to see more people getting on board.

Here's the entire Jan 6 speech transcript, quote where the incitement is: Read: Former President Donald Trump's January 6 speech - CNNPolitics

 

[TLK Valentine]

Here's the entire Jan 6 speech transcript, quote where the incitement is: Read: Former President Donald Trump's January 6 speech - CNNPolitics

And again, most people would stand there at 9:00 in the evening and say, “I want to thank you very much,” and they go off to some other life, but I said, “Something’s wrong here. Something’s really wrong. Can’t have happened.” And we fight. We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.

So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give… The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

Now, I will grant that without proper context, it's difficult for someone (particularly the unwilling) to see the incitement.

However, bearing in mind that:

1. Donald spent the last 4+ years thriving on incendiary rhetoric, to the point of even explicitly encouraging violence against his political enemies in the past,

2. He'd spent the previous 3 months spinning stories about the massive conspiracy against himself (and by extension, against them) to steal the election -- stories which his followers swallowed hook, line, and sinker.

3. The FBI knew that there were people in the crowd who were already planning an, and the FBI reports to both the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security...agencies which both report directly to Donald, which means that Donald knew perfectly well that he was speaking to a crowd that was not only predisposed to violence, but had a plan in motion... a plan he could've defused with his influence, but instead chose to exacerbate.

4. In reference to Point 3, even though some people have claimed in the past that Donald has the attention span of a fruit fly and wouldn't understand a security brief unless it was written in yellow crayon, I personally disagree.
In any case, even in the unlikely event Donald was too busy/too lazy to read the security briefings that his staff prepares for him, the United States Secret Service does read them. Assuming a competent Secret Service, when Donald announced that he was going to speak to the crowd, the USSS would have told him they were plotting something violent and advised him against speaking to them. Donald would have had to ignore their warnings and instead explicitly directed the rallying crowd towards the largest nearby collection of his political enemies: The U.S. Capitol Building.

All of this is context which his ideological defenders are required to ignore... unless they can use context to hang Rep. Waters with her words -- doublethink being a necessary skill.

 

[Mayzoo]

The judge apparently told both lawyers that she likely provided a valid reason for an appeal if Chauvin is convicted.

 

[Mayzoo]

Now, I will grant that without proper context, it's difficult for someone (particularly the unwilling) to see the incitement.

However, bearing in mind that:

1. Donald spent the last 4+ years thriving on incendiary rhetoric, to the point of even explicitly encouraging violence against his political enemies in the past,

2. He'd spent the previous 3 months spinning stories about the massive conspiracy against himself (and by extension, against them) to steal the election -- stories which his followers swallowed hook, line, and sinker.

3. The FBI knew that there were people in the crowd who were already planning an, and the FBI reports to both the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security...agencies which both report directly to Donald, which means that Donald knew perfectly well that he was speaking to a crowd that was not only predisposed to violence, but had a plan in motion... a plan he could've defused with his influence, but instead chose to exacerbate.

4. In reference to Point 3, even though some people have claimed in the past that Donald has the attention span of a fruit fly and wouldn't understand a security brief unless it was written in yellow crayon, I personally disagree.
In any case, even in the unlikely event Donald was too busy/too lazy to read the security briefings that his staff prepares for him, the United States Secret Service does read them. Assuming a competent Secret Service, when Donald announced that he was going to speak to the crowd, the USSS would have told him they were plotting something violent and advised him against speaking to them. Donald would have had to ignore their warnings and instead explicitly directed the rallying crowd towards the largest nearby collection of his political enemies: The U.S. Capitol Building.

All of this is context which his ideological defenders are required to ignore... unless they can use context to hang Rep. Waters with her words -- doublethink being a necessary skill.

He has also made it quite well known in the past that he encourages violence as part of his rallies and has stated he will pay the legal fees for those who engaged in it on his behalf.

 

[TLK Valentine]

He has also made it quite well known in the past that he encourages violence as part of his rallies and has stated he will pay the legal fees for those who engaged in it on his behalf.

That's where I was going with point #1... knowing that his followers are ideologically required to deny he ever did that... even after some of them listened.

A timeline of hate: Trump’s history of encouraging violence, from 2015 to 2021

 

[TLK Valentine]

The judge apparently told both lawyers that she likely provided a valid reason for an appeal if Chauvin is convicted.

...and that's unfortunate. Words have consequences.

 

[adderbolt]

...and that's unfortunate. Words have consequences.

How true -- even yours ...

 

[TLK Valentine]

How true -- even yours ...

Certainly... which is why I'm careful with the words I say in public, and I accept responsibility for them.

The world would be a better place if others did likewise, IMO.

 

[Arcangl86]

The judge apparently told both lawyers that she likely provided a valid reason for an appeal if Chauvin is convicted.

Which is odd to me considering that the jury is being sequestered, so they shouldn't even be aware of Rep. Water's statements.

 

[adderbolt]

Certainly... which is why I'm careful with the words I say in public, and I accept responsibility for them.

The world would be a better place if others did likewise, IMO.

One woman's dog whistle seems to be another woman's lullaby. And if none of it advances to yelling fire in a theater where or what is the solution? Or is there none except evermore trading barbs until the next brouhaha bubbles up into our collective consciousness?

 

[hislegacy]

I believe if Derek Chauvin is found innocent. Riot, protesting, murders and looting will 10 times worse. It's not a good thing. But anyone with commonsense. will know it will be worse. If Derek Chauvin is found guilty. I believe huge parties will happen.

Interesting - I think there will be continued violence and destruction regardless of verdict. They will justify it regardless - we will see what happens.

 

[TLK Valentine]

One woman's dog whistle seems to be another woman's lullaby.

And one man's dog whistle is another man's marching orders.

And if none of it advances to yelling fire in a theater where or what is the solution? Or is there none except evermore trading barbs until the next brouhaha bubbles up into our collective consciousness?

Good questions. We should all acknowledge that our words have consequences, and be mindful of the effect they have on others.

Alas, not everyone feels this is necessary, and worse, they seem to cheer on the ones who cause the most chaos.

Hence, why I am disappointed with Rep. Waters -- a person with her responsibilities should know better.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Which is odd to me considering that the jury is being sequestered, so they shouldn't even be aware of Rep. Water's statements.

Indeed -- the judge may be dropping a hint to the defense lawyers.

 

[wing2000]

I think that she should be censured by the House.

I agree.

There's far too much pre-decision speculation as it is. A Congress woman should know better and be held to account for her words.

 

[Mayzoo]

Which is odd to me considering that the jury is being sequestered, so they shouldn't even be aware of Rep. Water's statements.

I have never been sequestered, and have not been on a jury in a very long time. How do they ensure the jurors do not have access to news? Do they actually take their phones/tablets, stop incoming and outgoing calls and remove TVs/radios from the hotel rooms?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I have never been sequestered, and have not been on a jury in a very long time. How do they ensure the jurors do not have access to news? Do they actually take their phones/tablets, stop incoming and outgoing calls and remove TVs/radios from the hotel rooms?

Yes.