Bitten in the 'ass' of his own making — Derek Chauvin trial judge Peter Cahill — versus Representative Maxine Waters

20 April 2021

As usual . . .

. . . the Lamestream has (probably intentionally) misreported Congresswoman Maxine Waters allegedly grievous contribution to racial unrest in America.

The media's mostly out of context reports have led to a political furor that should have been confined to the metaphorical miniature teapot — but escaped instead to rattle the purported foundations of our Great Ahmuhrika.

What really happened

Representative Waters made a trip to the Minneapolis area on Saturday, 17 April 2021. Minneapolis is where Derek Chauvin is being tried for George Floyd's alleged murder.

Waters spoke in nearby Brooklyn Center. Many people there are upset about Daunte Wright's — mostly self-initiated, but police-manslaughter-assisted — recent exit from life:

At one point, [Waters] was asked what she thought protesters should do if the jury did not find Chauvin guilty of the murder charge. It’s unclear if she heard the entire context of the question, so part of it was repeated: “What should protesters do?”

This is the controversial part.

Here’s how she responded: “Well, we’ve got to stay on the street. And we’ve got to get more active. We’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business.”

Then she was asked: “What do you think about this curfew tonight?” referring to an 11 p.m. curfew the city of Brooklyn Center had administered for Saturday night in an attempt to prevent violence, arson and looting.

“I don’t think anything about curfew. I don’t think anything about curfew. I don’t know what curfew means. Curfew means that ‘I want you all to stop talking. I want you to stop leading. I want you to stop gathering.’ I don’t agree with that.”

Real Clear Politics bolstered Waters' alleged 'inciting domestic terrorism' culprit-hood by quoting her more thoroughly:

"I hope we get a verdict that says guilty, guilty, guilty. And if we don't, we cannot go away. We've got to stay on the street. We get more active, we've got to get more confrontational. We've got to make sure that they know that we mean business," Waters warned.

Afterward, Judge Cahill ascended the national podium

Judge Peter Cahill — of Derek Chauvin trial fame — announced to Chauvin's defense team (in a televised forum) that Representative Waters' statements might give them a mistrial argument.

That legal argument, presumably, to be lofted upon appeal — if Chauvin is found guilty of bad behavior related to George Floyd's death under his arresting knee.

Judge Cahill went on to say that:

I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is 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 coequal 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.

A couple of pertinent points

First, Judge Cahill (notably competent though he is) is in no position to chastise Maxine Waters.

He is, after all, the same judge who prevented Chauvin's defense attorney (Eric Nelson) from getting the trial moved away from the Minneapolis metropolis — so as to (hypothetically) obtain a less pre-prejudiced group of jurors.

So now — having obstructed Chauvin's (arguably reasonable) request to move the trial away from Minneapolis — Cahill cannot persuasively argue that Congresswoman Waters upset his applecart by her blabbing inside the very geography that he (arguably unreasonably) failed to vacate.

Second, the nation's business does not cease, merely because one of its citizens is in the judicial dock.

Judge Cahill's implication is that the United States' daily activities should stop running — just because he (or someone in an equivalent position) is running a trial that might be negatively affected by what is going on outside.

My counter to Judge Cahill's perspective

The national stage is always an ecology comprised of competing and interfering interests.

Getting upset and implicitly claiming potential damage to Law and Order, over what Representative Waters allegedly incited — on the specific and misleading grounds that Cahill and Republicans cite in this instance — is unabashedly nonsensical.

The moral? — Context is everything

Forget or obscure context — and one looks like a self-important or meddling dope.

Maxine Waters (who admittedly sometimes exhibits a provocative 'mouth') is reasonably blameless in this instance.

She was merely carrying out her self-assigned soul-duty, as a member of an allegedly oppressed minority of American folk.

Can't fault her for that. At least not in good conscience and while of sound Liberty-loving mind.

Fractious ecology is necessary to Freedom's survival.

PeteFree.com

Bitten in the 'ass' of his own making — Derek Chauvin trial judge Peter Cahill — versus Representative Maxine Waters