Marx and Engels wrote plenty about how violence might be unavoidable. Y'know, the people who Marxist-Leninists (CPUSA is supposedly ML) beliefs are fundamentally based on. Lenin had quite similar things to say. Condemning adventurism is a common ML line, but they seem to go a bit far.

"Will the peaceful abolition of private property be possible? It would be desirable if this could happen, and the communists would certainly be the last to oppose it....But they also see that the development of the proletariat in nearly all civilised countries has been violently suppressed...we communists will defend the interests of the proletarians with deeds as we now defend them with words" - Engels. Where are they getting that "only..non-violent struggle" from?

I mean, I sorta get where they're coming from, endorsing violence has dubious legality, but if you have to compromise so hard why say anything at all.