Rep. Peter Meijer Responds To His Censure By Calhoun County GOP

As I reported last Friday freshman Congressman Peter Meijer narrowly avoided a censure from Michigan’s 3rd District Republican Party when their executive committee deadlocked 11-11 on their vote to censure him.  He was not so lucky with one of the counties in his district that being Calhoun County.

The Calhoun County Executive Committee of the Republican Party has issued a formal Letter of Censure to Congressman Peter J. Meijer (R-MI).   Their press release states:

‘This action comes in response to Rep. Meijer’s vote in support of House Resolution 24 to impeach President Donald Trump just seven days after rioters stormed the United States Capitol.

“Our decision to censure was not made lightly,” said Calhoun County Chairwoman Jeannie Burchfield. “Both our executive committee and other local Republicans who inundated us with calls to take action agreed that we needed to make Congressman Meijer aware, through formal means, of the numerous objections we had to his vote to support the impeachment of President Trump.”

This is the first time in the history of the organization that a censure has been issued against a sitting elected official.

“Even in this atmosphere of heightened political tension, our desire is to be factual and fair,” Burchfield stated. “We believe that a fair assessment of the facts warranted this unprecedented response.”

To read their official censure please click on:

Congressman Meijer did not take me up on my offer to come on my show to discuss the censure but he did speak with WZZM13’s “On Your Side” main anchor Nick LaFave  about his censure.  Their conversation went as follows:

LaFave: "What does this tell you right now about your district?"

Meijer: "It's not surprise. This was not a decision that we expected would be politically popular. We made the decision based on what we thought was right and necessary and where we think accountability should lie for the events of January 6th."

LaFave: "Does it, how does affect you moving forward when you've got these local leaders censuring you?"

Meijer: "Folks might remember one of the slogans of my campaign was to return the strong, stable and effective representation that Gerald Ford, Vern Ehlers and Paul Henry brought as well.  Paul Henry was actually censored back in the 80s because he objected and didn't support the MX Missile Program of the Reagan Administration. So, it's something that happens when there are disputes and disagreements. And I think what we all should hope for and strive for is - when we have points where we disagree, to do it without being disagreeable."

In my very humble opinion Congressman Meijer being censored because someone objected and didn't support the MX Missile Program of the Reagan Administration is quite different than your situation.  You voted to Impeach a President day’s after the incident occurred in an impeachment process that lasted just 3 hours with no investigation, no hearing, no witnesses, no defense, no due process...nothing.  

Prior to your impeachment vote the shortest impeachment hearing in House history was 10 days.  It is now being reported by the likes of CNN and MSNBC that this riot at the Capitol building was pre-planned.  This effectively means President Trump could not have incited the riot with his words that day.

Even the liberal “fact check” website titled Snopes was asked to fact check the following question: “Did Trump Tell Supporters to Storm US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021?”

They answered in the following way:

“Trump did not explicitly tell people to "storm" or "breach" or "break into" the Capitol.”

In an interview I had with Congressman Meijer he told me what he believed to be the evidence that President Trump incited the riot.  He pointed to two statements he made and they were:

  1. The President claiming he won in a landslide victory. As I stated to him wow I have never heard a politician speak in hyperbole.
  2. The President stated that they should “stop the steal” of the vote.

Those two points would have a tough time getting past a Grand Jury let alone be a basis for a guilty verdict in a court of law.  Now I understand that impeachment is a completely political prosecution and we have established that yours and others reasoning would not stand up in a court of law.  

So just admit it, yours and others vote to impeach was for political or emotional reasons.