Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Maxine waters, inciting violence?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Don't you worry, they're planning to censure her. That's right, the dreaded censure!
    Even though ever since Clinton the censure has become a joke, they do not have the intestinal fortitude to even do that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I think they should impeach or recall Waters, whatever the process is to remove a congress person. She has done this in the past and shows a careless disregard for public safety with her incessant inciting of violence. All she cares about is herself and being the center of attention. I say give her the attention she deserves and kick her out of congress or arrest her.
    Don't you worry, they're planning to censure her. That's right, the dreaded censure!

    Leave a comment:


  • CivilDiscourse
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    On the other hand, I think it's likely this will die on the vine -- everybody knows Waters is a race-baiter, and the MSM isn't going to push this. I suspect there will be a lot of angry words over this, then nothingness.
    If the liberal commenters on this thread are any indication, there will be very little about it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

    Oh, absolutely. Her incitement will be the reason for a future overturning (I can't see any scenario where there won't be on after this), but certainly the media will not portray it that way, they'll portray the justice system as racist for blaming a black woman in order to free a white cop.
    On the other hand, I think it's likely this will die on the vine -- everybody knows Waters is a race-baiter, and the MSM isn't going to push this. I suspect there will be a lot of angry words over this, then nothingness.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    I think they should impeach or recall Waters, whatever the process is to remove a congress person. She has done this in the past and shows a careless disregard for public safety with her incessant inciting of violence. All she cares about is herself and being the center of attention. I say give her the attention she deserves and kick her out of congress or arrest her.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Some have suggested that Waters is going to get the blame if the verdict is eventually overturned because of her comments, but I don't think she will be. Rather, the courts will be accused of using her words as an excuse to let a white man get away with murdering a black man.
    Oh, absolutely. Her incitement will be the reason for a future overturning (I can't see any scenario where there won't be on after this), but certainly the media will not portray it that way, they'll portray the justice system as racist for blaming a black woman in order to free a white cop.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Some have suggested that Waters is going to get the blame if the verdict is eventually overturned because of her comments, but I don't think she will be. Rather, the courts will be accused of using her words as an excuse to let a white man get away with murdering a black man.
    Unfortunately, I cannot disagree with this assessment.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Source: Judge Scolds Maxine Waters for 'Abhorrent' Comments, Says She ‘May Have Given’ Chauvin an Argument for Appeal


    After the prosecutors and defense attorneys presented their closing arguments in the Derek Chauvin trial, the defense moved for a mistrial because of media coverage of the case and comments by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). Judge Peter Cahill acknowledged that Waters might have given the defense an argument to use for an appeal, and scolded her for making "disrespectful" and "abhorrent" comments on the case, but did not feel that the issue rose to the level that would require a mistrial.

    Defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that the high level of media attention was "so profound" and "so pervasive" that it was impossible for the jury to not have been tainted by it. The jury who will decide if Chauvin is criminally responsible for the death of George Floyd was not sequestered during the trial itself, and will only be sequestered now during their deliberations.

    Nelson referenced Waters’ recent comments as she joined a protest in Minneapolis that if Chauvin was not convicted that they would have to "get more confrontational," calling it "mind-boggling" that "we have U.S. Representatives threatening acts of violence in relation to this specific case."

    Nelson had not mentioned Waters by name, but Cahill was clear on the reference he was making. "Well, I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned," the judge said, "but what’s the state’s position?"

    Prosecutor Steve Schleicher replied that "vague statements" made out of court were not properly part of the record on appeal, and that if Nelson wanted to make this argument, "then there needs to be some sort of formal offer of proof with the exact quotes and the exact statement or some kind of a declaration."

    Frank added that the jury had been instructed throughout the jury selection process and the trial itself to avoid outside influences, and the law presumed that they were able to follow those instructions, barring specific evidence to the contrary.

    Nelson replied that he was making his objection to preserve the issue for appeal, and that he was willing to supplement the record with specific media reports.

    Cahill agreed that Nelson would be allowed to supplement the record, but added that he was "aware of the media reports," and that “Congresswoman Waters was talking specifically about this trial, and about the unacceptability of anything less than a murder conviction, and talking about being "confrontational."

    "This goes back to what I’ve been saying from the beginning," Cahill continued, clearly perturbed. "I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that’s disrespectful to the rule of law, and to the judicial branch and our function. I think if they want to give their opinions, they should do so in a respectful -- and in a manner that is consistent with their oath to the Constitution, to respect a co-equal branch of government. Their failure to do so I think is abhorrent, but I don’t think it’s prejudiced us with additional material that would prejudice this jury."

    The jury had been told not to watch the news, he explained and he trusted that they were following those instructions and did not feel one congresswoman’s opinion was enough to taint the entire process.

    "Anyway, so, motion for mistrial is denied."


    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    If the judge had followed the antics of Mad Max[ine] Waters, he hardly would have been "mind-boggl[ed]" over her latest stunt. It is what she does.


    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Some have suggested that Waters is going to get the blame if the verdict is eventually overturned because of her comments, but I don't think she will be. Rather, the courts will be accused of using her words as an excuse to let a white man get away with murdering a black man.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

    Welp, that's partially his own stupid fault because he repeatedly refused to sequester the jury during the trial. So if it gets a mistrail, he's partly at fault for that.
    And defense council brought that up at the close of the closing statements. It's obvious it's already in his head for an appeal - I don't believe there will be a mistrial.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    Yeah, I thought about that after I posted.... not what I meant at all.

    I mean somebody of the caliber of MLK to call for calm, while somebody from the right steps up and calls for actual reform of the system. The Republicans had proposed reforms, but the Democrats wouldn't even consider them because they weren't drastic enough.

    I don't think that even the black community takes Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton seriously anymore --- they're just race baiters. BLM has usurped the authority of the black community, and they are, indeed, terrorists, in my book.
    Nowadays if MLK were around the left would smear him as being an Uncle Tom.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gondwanaland
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    The Judge in the Floyd case is none too happy with Waters at all. It was even discussed as a possible reason for a mistrial.

    He blasted her (and politicians) pretty harshly for butting in when they should just keep their mouths shut, and stop interfering with a co-equal branch of government.
    Welp, that's partially his own stupid fault because he repeatedly refused to sequester the jury during the trial. So if it gets a mistrail, he's partly at fault for that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

    Not sure that was a great way to say that. It was pretty much a "negotiate with terrorist" type of comment.
    Yeah, I thought about that after I posted.... not what I meant at all.

    I mean somebody of the caliber of MLK to call for calm, while somebody from the right steps up and calls for actual reform of the system. The Republicans had proposed reforms, but the Democrats wouldn't even consider them because they weren't drastic enough.

    I don't think that even the black community takes Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton seriously anymore --- they're just race baiters. BLM has usurped the authority of the black community, and they are, indeed, terrorists, in my book.

    Leave a comment:


  • CivilDiscourse
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    This would have been a tremendous opportunity for both sides to get together and agree on meaningful reforms in exchange for stopping this riotous madness.
    Not sure that was a great way to say that. It was pretty much a "negotiate with terrorist" type of comment.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Pffft. Too many folks are awaiting another opportunity to get free stuff (Target and Walmart have restocked their selection of big screen TVs) and raise cain. They're gonna go out and be rowdy and destructive even if Chauvin is convicted on all counts. They'll just call it a "celebration" then.

    A "mostly peaceful" celebration
    This would have been a tremendous opportunity for both sides to get together and agree on meaningful reforms in exchange for stopping this riotous madness.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by NorrinRadd, Today, 12:06 PM
1 response
27 views
1 like
Last Post Backup
by Backup
 
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 06:43 AM
19 responses
118 views
2 likes
Last Post Gondwanaland  
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 06:27 AM
14 responses
59 views
0 likes
Last Post CivilDiscourse  
Started by seer, 06-17-2021, 11:25 AM
7 responses
72 views
0 likes
Last Post oxmixmudd  
Started by oxmixmudd, 06-17-2021, 11:16 AM
64 responses
402 views
1 like
Last Post Ronson
by Ronson
 
Working...
X