Over the last four years, there has been a type of race by politicians and pundits who seek to outdo each other in the most sensational claims of how Donald Trump could be prosecuted or impeached on an ever-expanding list of offenses. Each claim is stated with absolute certainty despite long-standing questions or constitutional barriers. Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters of California has been a standout in this crowd — calling for impeachments and prosecutions from the very beginning of Trump’s term in office. She is now insisting that Trump can and should be charged with “premeditated murder” over the deadly riots at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6th. The statement was made on MSNBC which has trafficked in such ridiculous theories without any pushback from the media or legal experts.
Waters made her statement in an interview with Joy Reid, who has had one of the most controversial records in television for her racially charged language, dubious legal arguments, and unsupported claims. Reid notably does not press Waters on her claim that Trump should be charged with premeditated murder.
Here is the interview:
In the interview, Reid refers to the 1990s and the “insurrections in Los Angeles.” It is not clear from the interview what constitutes an insurrection in the 1990s but the term “riot” seems effectively barred today in favor of “insurrection.”
When Trump or his allies made outlandish and unsupported claims about the law in the past, the media piled on with coverage stating that such claims were ridiculous or unfounded. I regularly called out Trump for such claims, including his call for changing whole areas of law like defamation. However, equally unsupported claims on the left are met with little or no push back from hosts or the media.
Waters states “He absolutely should be charged with premeditated murder because of the lives that were lost for this invasion with his insurrection,. For the President of the United States to sit and watch the invasion and the insurrection and not say a word because he knew he had absolutely initiated it – and as some of them said, ‘he invited us to come. We’re here at the invitation of the President of the United States.”
In Washington, D.C., a person is guilty of first degree murder when he or she specifically intends to kill another purposely with premeditation and deliberation, or kills while in the process of committing a felony. See Section 22-2104. Most states require that first-degree premeditated murder be proven as a willful, deliberate, premeditated killing. That is treated as a specific intent crime with the showing of a purposive act or an act with express malice. You must generally show a specific intent to kill and premeditation is usually shown by evidence that a defendant reflected on the act or planned for the act of murder.
Waters’ home state courts have dealt with this issue recently:
“Murder, whether in the first or second degree, requires malice aforethought. (§ 187.) Malice can be express or implied. It is express when there is a manifest intent to kill (§ 188, subd. (a)(1)); it is implied if someone kills with “no considerable provocation . . . or when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart” (§ 188, subd. (a)(2)). When a person directly perpetrates a killing, it is the perpetrator who must possess such malice. People v. Gentile (Riverside County Court December 2020).”
In this case, there is no evidence that Trump directly murdered anyone or sought the death of anyone. He is being accused of conspiring in the commission of such murders. That sounds more like a claim of being an aider and abetter to murder. However, even in California, the use of a natural and probable consequence has been limited. Courts have balked at such broad interpretations. “Under the natural and probable consequences doctrine, an accomplice is guilty not only of the offense he or she directly aided or abetted (i.e., the target offense), but also of any other offense committed by the direct perpetrator that was the “natural and probable consequence” of the crime the accomplice aided and abetted (i.e., the nontarget offense).” Moreover, as explained on one legal site, the courts have held, in People v. Medrano, 42 Cal. App. 5th 1001 (2019), that a prior law eliminated “the natural and probable consequences doctrine [as] a viable theory of accomplice liability for attempted murder.”
This distinction was again recently discussed by a California court:
“In Chiu, we held that the natural and probable consequences doctrine cannot support a conviction for first degree premeditated murder. (Chiu, supra, 59 Cal.4th at p. 167.) We reasoned that in the context of murder, the natural and probable consequences doctrine serves the purpose of “deterring aiders and abettors from aiding or encouraging the commission of offenses that would naturally, probably, and foreseeably result in an unlawful killing.” (Id. at p. 165.) But this purpose “loses its force” when an accomplice is held culpable for first degree premeditated murder under a natural and probable consequences theory. (Id. at p. 166.) First degree premeditated murder carries significantly higher penalties than second degree murder and requires the additional mental state that the killing be “willful, deliberate, and premeditated.” PEOPLE v. GENTILE Opinion of the Court by Liu, J. 12 (§ 189, subd. (a); Chiu, at p. 166.) Whether or not the direct perpetrator killed with premeditation “has no effect on the resultant harm. The victim has been killed regardless of the perpetrator’s premeditative mental state.” (Chiu, at p. 166.) We further concluded that subjecting an accomplice to enhanced punishment based solely on the “uniquely subjective and personal” mental state of the direct perpetrator was inconsistent with “reasonable concepts of culpability.” (Chiu, supra, 59 Cal.4th at pp. 166, 165.)”
In her interview, Waters was apparently referencing charges that some of the rioters had planned in advance to storm the Capitol. On the day of the riot, many of us noted that some of the rioters clearly brought ropes and other items that indicated preparation to the attack. Those reports however cut both ways. It certainly shows that those individuals had premeditation, but it also shows that the speech itself may not have been the incitement for those individuals. Critics can fairly note that the President had engaged in reckless rhetoric for weeks. However, there is a difference between reckless and criminal speech. More importantly, if such comments are now dispositive evidence of premeditation for murder, it would allow such vicarious charges for homicide in a wide array of cases involving politicians.
While Waters has defended her long list of impeachable offenses as based on the view that “impeachment is whatever Congress says it is,” the same is not true of the criminal code.
Gotta love Maxine Waters. She always good for a laugh or a cringe. This is no exception. As all Americans, she has a right to be a pinhead. Unfortunately, she excels at being one.
Maxine Waters is really calling for a trial that will result in the death of Donald Trump. Some are calling her courageous. Why does she mince words. Why doesn’t she just say, put a needle in his arm. She should say the actual words and not hide behind the word “trial”. If she is honest she should plainly state her final desired result.
Well, the problem is Maxie can’t spell “Trial.” So it kinda inhibits your use of the term.
I’d like to see an article from Turley responding to this CIA cretin saying that Republicans who were not even at the Capital riot, should be hunted down like Al Queda or the Taliban.
Really, is this not dangerous talk far beyond whatever Maxine said? From somebody who has actually been in the business of hunting people down and literally killing them?
If you didn’t get fazed over this folks, then you are not listening. CIA veteran calls for war against… Republicans who are now deemed terrorists
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/02/963343896/former-cia-officer-treat-domestic-extremism-as-an-insurgency?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=nprnews
sal sar
Sal Sar says that the CIA is out of control and attacking American citizens. Where were you Sal when the CIA was attacking Carter Paige. Where were you when the FBI doctored evidence to say that Carter Paige was not an American intelligence asset. Though your awakening to the danger of the CIA is belated it is a welcome change of observance. Store it in your memory. You and I have traveled the same path.
Oh, I been complaining about them for decades.
Recently, with regard to the false Russia frameup of Trump, I was complaining about John Brennan, former CIA capo di tutti capi.
He openly called for sedition on Twitter and Jack Dorsey gave him a gold star for the day.
Well, those were the days. Moving on now past Trump, they are going to be framing up all of us.
Tick tock on how long before another :”Stephen Paddock” emerges who inexplicably murders upteen people with “assault rifles” thus justifying the next ban
Notice how the FBI “found no motive” for his amazingly effective massacre. And how could they! They might have had some ‘splainin to do
It’s getting to the point where you don’t have to ask yourself if what the government says is a lie, because so often they lie, rather, you have to ask whether it is true, like when the wrong clock is right twice a day
Sal Sar
Marjorie Taylor Greene has just recanted her Quanon statements from 2017. Democrats need to start looking for boogeymen, again.
I would add Marjorie learns from her mistakes. Others not so much.
You’ll miss Trump. CNN already does.
Correction, she’s recanted all Quanon statements and other conspiracy theories, not just those from 2017.
I never bought into Qanon fantasies but as far as I can tell, wtc7 was demolished. Im not recanting that one. Nor that there was more than one JFK shooter. Sorry, not sorry
But then again I am not in Congress so I don’t have to hold up the establishment’s lies
Sal Sar
this is an orange:
She also refused to take responsibility and said “I was allowed to believe things that weren’t true”
Who “allowed” her to believe these things? She allowed herself. But she can’t bring herself to say “I allowed myself to believe things that weren’t true.” She expressed no remorse for endorsing shooting the Speaker of the House. Maybe you consider that “learning from her mistakes,” but I don’t.
I never allowed myself to believe the lie that wtc7 just burned on a few floors for 45 minutes and then simultaneously all its 10 or more central support columns of reinforced concrete simultaneously disintegrated so that it uniformly collapsed on its own footprint at freefall speed. but NIST said it so it’s dogma for government bootlickers
I cant speak for Marge
Sal Sar
The SQUAD and AUNT ESTHER still have their committee assignments. What’s up with that?
Maxine Waters is not qualified to chair the House Financial Services Committee.
That is amazing, isn’t it! What’s this world coming to?
If you understand that just as Obama and his phony AG Holder protected the billionaire banking interests in the wake of the financial crisis, then you can understand how Maxine is perfect for doing the same thing. The black skin is a sort of cultural camouflage, which tricks people into thinking they are opposition. They are not. they are corrupt false opposition, wholly in thrall to financial interests. They are not “marxists” in the slightest bit. They are the servants of global capitalism
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/23/untouchables-wall-street-prosecutions-obama
Sal Sar
Representing really ugly people WaWADaws prepares for another round of ripping off her Constituents.
Jonathan: Bait and switch. Distraction seems to be your tactic when you don’t want to discuss the real issues. Rep. Maxine Waters may have overstated the case against Trump, but not by much. Trump would unlikely be charged with “premeditated murder” over his Jan. 6 speech but certainly could be liable for aiding and abetting under case law and criminal statutes. The DOJ just arrested and charged a top member of Proud Boys for aiding and abetting in the storming of the Capitol. Two other Proud Boys members, Nicolas Ochs and Nicolas DeCarlo, have been indicted by a grand jury for conspiracy to obstruct Congress. During the Jan. 6 riot Ochs and DeCarlo posted videos in real time inside the Capitol with the comment: “defaced the Capitol by scrawling onto the Memorial Door the words “MURDER THE MEDIA'”. It seems at least these two are not the brightest lights on the Proud Boys’ Christmas tree! Do we need any further evidence of the “intent” of some of the Trump supporters who trashed the Capitol and threatened members of Congress?
Early on after the Jan. 6 riot you weighed in arguing that in his speech Trump was just exercising his right of “free speech”. Apparently you are big on “free speech” for rioters and their accomplices–not the case when it comes to Antifa. You would probably throw the book at them had they participated. But they didn’t despite Rudy Giuliani’s wild conspiracy theory. In addition, you argued in another column that the second “snap” impeachment should fail because there were no House hearings. Finally, you met behind closed doors with Senate Republicans to, no doubt, urge them not to convict Trump. Just shows you are not the detached constitutional scholar you claim but someone willing to get down in the trenches and fight for Trump like almost every Republican politician. I would argue that you should be charged with a “premeditated” attempt to prevent Trump from being held accountable–at least “aiding and abetting” his seditious action to prevent Congress from performing its Constitutional responsibilities
Proud Boys ?
Oh right, the “extremist organization” who had as a top leader, an FBI informant since 2012
FBI: they make the problems they presume to solve!
Sal Sar
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/27/proud-boys-leader-enrique-tarrio-fbi-informant
Dennis:
“Jonathan: Bait and switch. Distraction seems to be your tactic when you don’t want to discuss the real issues. Rep. Maxine Waters may have overstated the case against Trump, but not by much.”
************************************
Hard Stop! Thanks for keeping me from reading further.
If we were in jail– which perhaps we are, in ways that we were not before, since we are “locked down” due to COVID, and silenced in the mainstream and social media;
But if we were in jail, then we would be making extra shivs and doing double exercise to prepare for the coming conflict, making sure everybody is ready.
Most of all, lead the friends and family, by righteous example. Put in the work!
Maybe our Gotterdammerung arrives soon. We welcome it! Did you want to live forever?
Graduates,(like Maxine),of the prestigious Whatsamatta U. School of Law have enjoyed a history of defying established law…..and reality.
Here is a song from my years in college, straight outta Mad Maxine’s district
remember Reginald Denny?
We saw that replayed many times over in 2020
the logic of this conflict is inexorable
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADdpLv3RDhA
Sal
@anonymous
Reginald Denny deserved the beatdown due to his “white privilege”. Not to mention the beatdown was “mostly peaceful”.
antonio
Easy defense. Trump has never done anything premediated
Your gene pool might run deep, but you individually did not participate. Only Jesus Christ was persued and persecuted (prosecuted) by his enemies any harder, or more rigorous than DT for last 4 & 1/2 years, 24/7. The establishment’s hate for him and loss of power even attempting a Coup, and that is unprecedented . The worst precedent is the lack of prosecuting the attempters. Nero is now fiddeling.
I suggest that you learn more history. Plenty of people have been pursued and prosecuted more than Trump. Gandhi comes to mind.
Waters, along with Al Green and Shelia Jackson Lee, is a black partisan who can say and do anything and get away with it because of the color of her skin. Water is certifiably crazy as is Green and Lee’s only goal is staying in power.
Waters is from Missouri.