"I don't give a damn": Jeffries defends "maximum warfare" remark

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Axios

2 hours ago


House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) on Monday fiercely defended his use of the phrase "maximum warfare" to describe Democrats' redistricting efforts.

Why it matters: Republicans have characterized the remark as an example of the type of inflammatory rhetoric that can spark political violence following the White House Correspondents' Dinner shooting.

After Virginians narrowly voted last week to approve a new map that could give Democrats a 10-1 majority, Jeffries said at a press conference: "We are in an era of maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time."

It was a direct reference to an anonymous source's characterization of the White House's strategy on mid-decade redistricting in a New York Times story last summer.

What they're saying: "As it relates to the comment related to 'maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time,' in connection with the redistricting battle that Republicans launched, I stand by it," Jeffries said at a press conference Monday.

Addressing "so-called criticism from these phony Republicans," Jeffries said: "You can continue to criticize me for it. I don't give a damn about the criticism ... get lost."

Jeffries noted that the phrase originated from a source that the Times described as being "close to" President Trump.

Read more: https://www.axios.com/2026/04/27/hakeem-jeffries-trump-whcd-maximum-warfare

---

[Buddyzbuddy]

1. Good. I hope he is sincerely out of f*cks to give.

Last edited Tue Apr 28, 2026, 12:36 AM - Edit history (1)

That goes for the rest of my party.
F*ck decorum! And f*ck the Republican party!

[Skittles]

7. yes, I am liking this new version

I APPROVE

[WyLoochka]

2. Jeffries is underrated imo

He's smart, speaks directly and "gets it". He'll be a great speaker.

He's also the first minority leader in modern history, perhaps all of the 250 years of US history, to have to put up with a bare majority opposition party that robotically votes almost 100% of the time against the people, against the constitution, against representative democracy while ignoring executive branch acts and voting for schemes that, together, are driving the country into a deeply disgusting, overwhelmingly criminal and seemingly bottomless pit of corruption.

[dave99]

3. dealing with criminal persons posing as Republican Representatives

[Cha]

4. Whoa.. Leader Jeffries is Good!

Mahalo, BRDS!

So good calling out the Fescists!

[electric_blue68]

5. Ok, Hakeem! As I recently mentioned on the thread about him....

Last edited Mon May 4, 2026, 05:56 PM - Edit history (2)

I've been liking more statements fom him in recent months.

oh corrected typos!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

6. MaddowBlog-Trump wants Hakeem Jeffries to be impeached, which is foolish for all sorts of reasons

The president has no idea that members of Congress can’t be impeached. It’s emblematic of the profound ignorance that continues to undermine his presidency.

Trump’s call for Republicans to impeach Hakeem Jeffries is absurd for a variety of obvious reasons, but I found myself stuck on one thing:

Shouldn’t a sitting president in his sixth year in the White House know that members of Congress can’t be impeached?
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...

— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-05-04T17:17:39.854Z

https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-wants-hakeem-jeffries-to-be-impeached-which-is-foolish-for-all-sorts-of-reasons

In case Trump’s racism wasn’t quite obvious enough, he published a follow-up item last week, again arguing that the House minority leader has a “Low IQ” before adding that Jeffries “is nothing but a THUG, and he is a danger to our Country!”

On Sunday afternoon, the president went even further down the same unfortunate path, with another online missive that said:

Hakeem Jeffries, a Low IQ individual, said our Supreme Court is “illegitimate.” After saying such a thing, isn’t he subject to Impeachment? I got impeached for A PERFECT PHONE CALL. Where are you Republicans? Why not get it started? They’ll be doing this to me!

Let’s unpack this one, which stood out for a variety of reasons.

First, criticizing the Supreme Court is not an impeachable offense. Second, if criticizing the Supreme Court were an impeachable offense, Trump would have a real problem on his hands, given the severity of his recent condemnations of the court and its justices. (It was just last month when the president said “certain” conservative justices on the Supreme Court have “gone weak, stupid, and bad.”)

Third, Trump’s ongoing efforts to relitigate his first impeachment remain quite pitiful. Fourth, his “they’ll be doing this to me” comment seemed like an implicit acknowledgement that he expects Republicans to lose control of the House in the midterm elections.

But even if we put all of these relevant details aside, arguably the five most interesting words in Trump’s online statement were these: “Isn’t he subject to Impeachment?”

As it happens, there is an unambiguous answer: In this country, members of Congress cannot, in fact, be impeached.

The thing is, a sitting American president really ought to know that. Trump no longer has any excuses for flunking Civics 101 tests, since he’s no longer the rookie who got elected despite never having served a day in any governmental capacity. Trump is now in the sixth year of his presidency, and he’s had time to familiarize himself with the basics of how Washington, D.C., works

[Sweet Rosie Red]

8. Show me!

Actions speak louder than words! Start traveling and building grassroots support on the State level. Talk to the corporate state legislative leaders who are killing the party by going along to get along. Cussing may break through the media filter but action gets results.

[Bengus81]

9. Oh my! Now Dana Bash on CNN will have to tell him like Raskin to tone down the rhetoric

Really sucking up to your Fuhrer eh Bash?

[republianmushroom]

10. The man saying it like it has to be. IMO