The police officer accused of causing the death of drug addict George Floyd in Minnesota last year was convicted on charges brought before a threatened jury and lacked hard evidence, thus bowing to excessive pressure from the radical left. 

The pressure at all levels was so great that Fox News host Greg Gutfeld’s questionable “glee” was responded to by “The Five” host Dana Perino, as quoted by Business Insider on April 21.  

“Greg, we do not sacrifice individuals for the sake of how people feel,” thus defining what happened with the Chauvin verdict, where fairness would have taken a back seat. 

Democratic Representative Maxine Waters incited violent protesters to escalate their actions, saying, “We have to stay in the streets, and we have to be more active, we have to be more confrontational.”

The mob had already announced that they would burn the cities to the ground as a threat to replicate on a larger scale the destruction they had already carried out last year in many cities of the country.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked to sanction Waters for her dangerous harangue calling to break the law. Pelosi instead said that Waters’s comments did not amount to inciting violence and that she should not apologize for them.

Democratic President Joe Biden, along with other political figures, expressed his preferences before the verdict was pronounced, something that was unacceptable in the past. 

Jurors’ identity is supposed to remain anonymous to protect them and their families. However, local media published the biographies of all the jurors during the trial.

“So we were dealing with what we thought was a sense of extortion. That if this didn’t go a certain way, I’m speaking the truth. If it didn’t go a certain way, there was going to be destruction. We know that. Why pretend otherwise? Come on,” Gutfeld also commented. 

For his part, prosecutor and Fox analyst Andy McCarthy confirmed the irregularities of the trial in his notes: “The best way to show that the jury was not bamboozled into convicting would have been if deliberations had gone on for a few days. If they maybe acquitted on a count. If they made a record where you could say they made a discriminating appraisal of the evidence,” which they did not.

He added, “The best way to show that he [Chauvin] might not have gotten due process is a quick verdict with no notes where they just convicted on everything.  And that’s what happened.”

For his part, Judge Peter A. Cahill granted Chauvin the option of using Waters’ reckless interference as a valid argument to seek reversal of any guilty conviction on appeal.

“I will give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned,” said Cahill, who had previously called Waters’ interventions at least “disrespectful.” 

This whole sorry process, which began in May with Floyd’s death in police custody, has caused much grief, the deaths of many people, and the destruction of thousands of properties in many U.S. cities, all with the sponsorship of the radical left.

Sign up to receive our latest news!

By submitting this form, I agree to the terms.