GOP resolution to censure Maxine Waters 'may have legs' as moderate Democrats join effort
Some Democrats as 'so angry' with Waters and Nancy Pelosi they may fully support the move to unseat Waters from her House Financial Services chairmanship
Maxine Waters is facing a GOP resolution for censure that some moderate Democrats are supporting. It would at least remove Waters from her committee chairmanship and perhaps result in her expulsion from the House. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)
Monday, in an op/ed piece, ACV called for House Republicans to back Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene’s (R-GA) resolution to censure Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) for remarks to a crowd of demonstrators Brooklyn Center, Minnesota about the Derek Chauvin murder trial. Her vitriol, including the comment that the crowed needed to “get more confrontational,” are tantamount to jury intimidation, tampering and inciting to riot.
Tuesday, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was pushing that resolution forward. It normally would not stand a snowball’s chance in hell, given the Fascist Democrat majority in the House.
However, Fox News and ACV have independently confirmed some Democrat lawmakers are reportedly “so angry” with the remarks Waters made, they are willing to back her GOP-led censure. It would definitely strip her of her position as chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee. It could expel her from the House.
Waters said at a protest in Minnesota over the weekend that demonstraters were looking for a guilty verdict, and if they don’t get what they want, then “we cannot go away.” Regarding what protesters should do if they do not get the verdict that they want, Waters responded that activists have “got to stay on the street,” “get more active,” and “get more confrontational.”
Trial judge Peter Cahill commented in open court Monday to Chauvin defense attorney Eric Nelson that “Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned." Cahill went on to say he considered Waters “to be irrelevant,” and wished public figures would “stop talking about this case, particularly in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and the judicial branch in our function.”
Fox News reporter Chad Pergram reported Tuesday morning that the anger among some Democrats “metastasized” after Cahill slammed Waters with those remarks on live television during closing arguments Monday.
Judge Peter Cahill slammed Maxine Waters in comments to Chauvin defense attorney Eric Nelson Monday, stating the California congresswoman may have given him grounds to overturn the case, if needed, at the appeals level. (Photo: Screen Capture/Fox News)
“Some Democrats conceded privately they are not pleased with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) saying that Waters shouldn’t apologize,” Pergram wrote. “Fox is told that a lot of Democrats are angry at Waters, are concerned about the optics of potential violence being linked back to her and Democrats generally.”
ACV also confirmed with five moderate House Democrats Tuesday morning that they would support the censure resolution. They did not wish to be identified due to fears of retribution from Pelosi and the media.
Moderate Democrats were damaged during the election after far-left members of the party pushed the “defund the police” movement. The reason those Democrats are reportedly mad at Waters doesn’t appear to be based on any kind of moral conundrum they have with what she said, but rather because they are “concerned about the optics of potential violence being linked back to her and Democrats generally.”
The Democrats’ majority is so slim right now — only two votes, following the death of Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) two weeks ago — that five votes would tip the scales that could require censure of Waters. One knowledgeable Democrat told ACV that some Democratic members are so angry at Waters now that they would relish the opportunity to censure her.
McCarthy’s censure resolution may actually have legs. He said in a statement over the weekend that he would take action against Waters if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to do so. On Monday, Pelosi said that she thought that Waters should not apologize, and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki avoided a direct answer as to whether Biden supported Waters’ remarks that protests should “get more confrontational.”
In a statement on Monday, McCarthy announced that Republicans would seek to censure Waters.
Waters allegedly broke local law by violating curfew — she made her comments on the street in a crowd of BLM and Antifa demonstrators after 8:00 p.m. Saturday — and then broke federal law, crossing state lines to incite violence through her comments. She did not guard her words at all, using the phrases highlighted in this report.
Waters has a history of inciting violence. She refused to condemn the 1992 Rodney King rioters, instead says they were more like “a rebellion” than a riot. Sixty-three people died and thousands of buildings, including her congressional officer, were destroyed. (Photo: Frank Darby/Los Angeles Times)
No other conclusion can be reached. As she has done countless times before, she intended her words to intimidate the jury and encourage riots, looting and violence if the radical Fascist Left in Minneapolis does not get the verdict it wants.
Increased unrest has already led to violence against law enforcement in the greater Minneapolis area as tensions over the coming verdict in the Chauvin trial have mounted. Waters’ comments appeared to intentionally pour fuel on the fire.
Waters is no stranger to inciting violence. Three years ago, she instructed a group of her supporters to confront Trump cabinet officials in public. Waters’ comments then were, “They’re not welcome anymore, anywhere”. Her comments over the weekend encouraging protestors/rioters to get even “more confrontational” on the streets of Minneapolis and beyond if Officer Derek Chauvin is not convicted are both reckless and dangerous.
In the 1992 riots following four police officers’ beating of Rodney King, she refused to attempt to quell the violence, encouraging it instead. In May 1992, Waters defended the actions of rioter and looters who destroyed parts of South Central Los Angeles after four white police officers were found not guilty in the beating of black motorist Rodney King.
Sixty-three people died and thousands of buildings, including Waters’ congressional office, were burned over the course of nearly a week in late April and early May 1992.
“I maintain it was somewhat understandable, if not acceptable. So I call it a rebellion,” Waters told The Los Angeles Times regarding the riots. “If you call it a riot, it sounds like it was just a bunch of crazy people who went out and did bad things for no reason.”
Waters appeared to double down on her Saturday remarks in Brooklyn Center during an interview Monday, claiming without evidence that Republicans were attacking her because they were trying to raise money from the “KKK” and “white supremacists.” Waters laughably claimed that her comments about being “confrontational” were about “confronting the justice system” and “confronting the policing that’s going on.”
We’ve heard this type of violent rhetoric from Waters before, and the United States Congress must clearly and without reservation reprimand this behavior before more people get hurt. Pelosi is ignoring Waters’ behavior.
The House must act on Taylor-Greene’s resolution swiftly.