Why Maxine Waters Wanted a Mistrial for Derek Chauvin

Why Maxine Waters Wanted a Mistrial for Derek Chauvin

American Thinker      April 21, 2021

 

When Maxine Waters called for people in the streets of Minnesota to be more active and confrontational if Derek Chauvin were to be acquitted, like many, I thought she had handed a gift to the defense on appeal.   In some ways, she did.  We all heard Judge Cahill describe her behavior as abhorrent, and, while he didn’t think her remarks mattered in terms of the evidence and jury deliberations, he was unequivocal that her actions likely provided the defense with the basis for a mistrial at the appellate level and could well result in the case being thrown out.  Why, if that’s what he thought, didn’t the judge declare a mistrial himself?

Some might say it’s because he didn’t want to try the case again, but I think he didn’t want to be “that guy” responsible for letting Chauvin off the hook and reaping the wrath of a good part of the country that had long promised to burn it all down.  Why bear that burden himself and potentially subject his family to violence when it’s so much easier to pass the buck to the appellate court?

We also have to question why someone as politically experienced as Maxine Waters would so brazenly deliver a message of incitement, knowing the optics and, more importantly, that her words and conduct would only serve the interests of the defense in claiming that this was textbook intimidation of both judge and jury.  Why would a ruthless, calculating, lifelong professional left-wing s—kicker like Waters knowingly cross state lines to, if not incite, certainly agitate for continued unrest on America’s streets?

Because without an acquittal or a mistrial — either of which would have unquestionably given rise to increased violence — Rep. Waters and most Democrats actually want the bedlam to continue.  After all,  racializing everything by pointing fingers at the straw men of white supremacy; white privilege; and the conveniently invisible and unmeasurable systemic, structural, and internalized variants of racism is the bread and butter of the Democrats.  Without it, they have no raison d’être.

Had Maxine kept her mouth shut, a simple conviction without a strong basis for a mistrial on appeal would cut short the mayhem in the streets.  A pause in the bedlam is not good for the left, whose entire existence and justification is predicated on being the party of racializing everything — especially relationships between black communities and white cops.  On the other hand, a conviction accompanied by overt threats of violence reeking of jury intimidation, from a political figure, keeps alive the likelihood of a mistrial on appeal and could extend the rioting all the way to the 2022 elections.  This is a tempting insurance policy that would allow the Democrats to continue to foment racial division and milk dry other white cop–black victim scenarios until their goals are reached of defunding the police, reimagining the criminal justice system, getting rid of police and replacing them with civilian security, eliminating bail, unleashing untold numbers of violent criminals back onto the streets, and disarming the public so they cannot protect their families.

Previous

Understanding Critical Race Theory

Next

U.K. Open to U.S. Proposals for Global Minimum Corporate-Tax Rate

1 Comment

  1. Leonard S. Feinman

    Judge Cahill issued a “threat” about Waters’ comments, but they will be dismissed. He was absolutely right, but the same Establishment that quashed the election ballot recounts still has the power to dismiss her actions.
    If Waters were to think through her comments, she might understand why you don’t light fires when you handle gasoline. Common sense is missing, but her popularity among her constituents amazes me.
    I know my idea that only “some” people should be allowed to vote, but too many uninformed people exercise it just to hop on the bandwagon. I would let “low information voters” continue to vote, but I would like to be assured that fellow voters understand who they are electing.
    Maxine Waters merits an Ethics Investigation, but her party will support her, and it will quash any negative information, or dismiss it as “non-vital,”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén