WHY DOES LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS HATE CATHOLICS?
https://kamala-harris-sociopath.blogspot.com/2020/10/kamala-harris-godless-just-follow-money.html
Harris is no friend of religious liberty. Her recent decision to exclaim in the year of our Lord, which has been conveniently picked up by her staff, is a ploy designed to appeal to unassuming Christian voters impressed by "God talk." As the old adage says, actions speak louder than words, and on this score, Harris fails to convince.
It is the handmaidens working for Planned Parenthood who have joked about selling aborted baby body parts. And it was Kamala Harris, when she was A.G. of California, who viciously prosecuted the young man who exposed that scandal, after she had received a hefty donation from Planned Parenthood.
THE SAN FRANCISCO CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE WAS VERY GENEROUS AFTER KAMAL HARRIS LET THEM AVOID PRISON…. JUST FOLLOW THE MONEY!
As most people know, prior to her being a Senator, she served as the chief prosecutor for the city of San Francisco. Now, complaints are coming forward that she flat out refused to pursue criminal cases against Catholic priests who allegedly sexually battered children.
People who say they were victims of childhood sexual abuse call out Harris for not doing all that she could to prosecute their cases.
Kamala Harris Filibustered Gorsuch, Smeared Kavanaugh; Won’t Answer on Court-packing
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) will almost certainly face questions — from the moderator, or from Vice President Mike Pence — during Tuesday’s vice presidential debate about her position on the future of the Supreme Court.
Harris, who is on the Senate Judiciary Committee, is opposed to the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett.
She has also refused to say whether she agrees with some Democrats’ calls to “pack” the Supreme Court — by expanding the number of seats, and filling them with liberal justices. (She, like Biden, has called such questions a “distraction.)
And Harris has also defended former Vice President Joe Biden’s refusal to divulge his list of potential Supreme Court nominees.
Biden has promised to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court, though he has refused to indicate who his candidates would be. Harris even declined to tell the NAACP who might be on the list: “There are so many [black women who could serve on the Court] — I’m not going to name any names — that Joe Biden will create his list at the appropriate time.”
Harris’s most important contribution to the Supreme Court debate thus far has been her controversial attempt to smear Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing in 2018.
She insinuated that Kavanaugh was linked to Russian collusion — a claim so absurd that she was mocked by both of the major newspapers in her home state, the San Francisco Chronicle and the Los Angeles Times. Harris also drew criticism for a deceptively-edited video in which she falsely suggested Kavanaugh opposed birth control.
Harris was not yet on the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017, when Justice Neil Gorsuch faced confirmation. But she joined Democrats in filibustering him, prompting Republicans to end the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees (former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) had set the precedent by ending the filibuster for executive appointees and lower court nominees in 2013).
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s Presidency. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
WHILE
KAMALA HARRIS APPEARS TO HATE CATHOLICS, IT DID NOT STOP HER FROM PROTECTING
PEDOPHILE PRIESTS. THE S.F. ARCHDIOCESE PAID HER A HANDSOME ‘CONTRIBUTION’ FOR
HER EFFORTS TO KEEP THE PERVS OUT OF JAIL!
Chinese Spies...Everywhere
Even in the CIA.
Fri Aug 21, 2020
The United States has taken a
dramatic step against a Chinese penetration of American schools and
universities. Known as Confucius Institutes, these—numbering some 75 across the
country—have set up shop in our educational institutions in order to spread
propaganda and suppress free speech.
The experts believe that China
views the bodies of dissidents as fair targets for transplants, and they are
frequently said to engage in harvesting organs as needed. As Newt Gingrich writes, the Chinese are at one with Biden and
Kamala Harris on this subject.
US Sen. Kamala Harris is the
most openly anti-Catholic bigot to be on a national ticket in modern times.
Her record is perfectly clear.
She is openly anti-Catholic in confirming
federal judges,
wanting to prosecute the Little Sisters of the
Poor, closing
Catholic Hospitals who
don’t join her union allies, and favoring tax paid
abortion up
until birth (in fact, she has twice voted against
bills that
would ensure that babies who lived through abortion procedures got medical
care).
Harris has made her
anti-Catholicism explicit by fighting against the confirmation of Brian
Buescher in 2017 as a member of the US District Court, where he now sits. As
Gingrich put it,
The most explicit example of
Sen. Harris’s anti-Catholic bigotry was her treatment of now-US District Court
Judge Brian Buescher during his confirmation hearings. Specifically, she
questioned Buescher’s membership in the Knights of Columbus – a faith-based
charitable organization which feeds the poor, assists in disaster relief around
the globe, provides scholarships for struggling students, helps refugees
fleeing violence and persecution, and a host of other philanthropic efforts.
Senator Harris joins an imposing
list of Chinese spies, many of them from the heart of the dark state. As Pompeo
was announcing the mounting crackdown on Confucius, the Justice Department
confirmed the arrest of a twenty-year veteran of CIA.
It’s a target-rich environment.
Why is Kamala Harris getting the kid-glove press treatment?
By Jack Hellner
The media endlessly attacked Sarah Palin when she was a
much-talked about female vice presidential candidate in 2008, but they treat
Kamala Harris with kid gloves.
How come you wouldn’t prosecute Catholic priests for sexual and
child abuse? Where was your empathy?
As
most people know, prior to her being a Senator, she served as the chief
prosecutor for the city of San Francisco. Now, complaints are coming
forward that she flat out refused to pursue criminal cases against Catholic priests
who allegedly sexually battered children.
People
who say they were victims of childhood sexual abuse call out Harris for not
doing all that she could to prosecute their cases.
Joey
Piscitelli, who himself is a survivor of sex abuse, says that the DA before
Harris, Terence Hallinan, worked hard at getting he and his fellow victims
justice.
However,
after Harris beat Hallinan in the election, the progress they were making to
prosecute the cases seemed to stop altogether.
Who's the
Real Joe Biden?
Is
there any such thing as "the real Joe Biden" in the sense of an
actual, breathing human being with enduring loyalties and principles? His
long political record and recent behavior provide some idea.
The
choice of Kamala Harris as running mate is one indication. Harris
has often been described as a "politician on the make," someone who
will do whatever is expedient. Writing for RealClearPolitics, Debra
Saunders calls Harris a "progressive
opportunist." Yves Smith, looking through her less than
progressive record as California prosecutor, would alter that to
"opportunist to the core."
KAMALA HARRIS,
ETHICALLY SQUALID LAWYER
Unethical conduct plagues legal career of Kamala Harris
“However,
I would like to encourage my fellow Democrats to approach Senator Harris with a
healthy dose of skepticism. As a prosecutor and California State Attorney
General, Harris has engaged in blatantly unethical behavior for her profession
and embraced positions that actively hurt her constituents.” JESSER HOROWITZ
On
Jan. 2019, U.S. Senator Kamala Harris declared her candidacy for President of
the United States of America to great fanfare.
She
earned quick praise and frequent comparison to former President Barack Obama. A
recent Democratic Party straw poll by the Daily Kos ranked her in the top tier
of Presidential candidates, with 27 percent of respondents voicing their
support for her candidacy. So far, she has pitched herself to the American
people as a strong progressive with a particular passion for criminal justice
reform.
Harris
has a reasonable chance at winning the Democratic Party nomination. She’s
charismatic, smart and very likely to bridge the growing divide within the
party between the progressive left and the centrists. If she wins the
nomination, she might even defeat Donald Trump in the general election. I
understand why some voters in the party have decided to rally around her: She’s
a promising alternative for Democrats who want someone progressive like Bernie
Sanders but better than he is at speaking to identity politics.
However,
I would like to encourage my fellow Democrats to approach Senator Harris with a
healthy dose of skepticism. As a prosecutor and California State Attorney
General, Harris has engaged in blatantly unethical behavior for her profession
and embraced positions that actively hurt her constituents. While this does not necessarily have
to be a red line for everyone—and it certainly will not prevent me from voting
for her should she win the Democratic nomination—our party should hold Harris’
feet to the fire here. Even more concerning than her past positions is that she
refuses to own up to them, portraying herself as a long-time, progressive
criminal justice reform activist.
I
want to clarify that I have no inherent issues with a prosecutor being elected
to the presidency. We need prosecutors; we need people who serve the public
good rather than represent the interests of paying clients. However, if your
job requires you to make decisions that could potentially ruin people’s lives,
the ethical standards should be higher, not lower. If you, like Kamala Harris,
decide you want to run for President of the United States, it becomes imperative
that the public thoroughly and mercilessly scrutinizes every facet of your
political career.
In
2015, law enforcement caught Robert Murray, a prosecutor in Kern County,
committing one of the most egregious offenses a prosecutor could perpetrate.
Specifically, he falsified a confession transcript that connected the defendant
with a far worse crime than that with what he had actually been charged. When
the defense demanded a copy of the original tape recording, Murray admitted to
his crime but said that it was merely a harmless joke. The judge disagreed. He
stated that the court refuses to tolerate such outrageous conduct and dismissed
the indictment on the grounds of prosecutorial misconduct (Observer,
“California Prosecutor Falsified Transcript of Confession,” 03.04.2015).
How
does this incident involve Senator Harris? At the time, she was the Attorney
General of California. In that capacity, she appealed the indictment. According
to Sidney Powell of The Observer, this was the third time she had appealed a
prosecutorial misconduct dismissal in less than three months. As of March 2015,
Murray was still allowed to work as a prosecutor (Observer, “California
Prosecutor Falsified Transcript of Confession,” 03.04.2015).
As
Attorney General, Harris has a history of fighting to keep men she knew were
innocent in prison and of hiding cases of significant illegal activity
conducted by law enforcement. In 1999, Daniel Larsen was sentenced to 27 years
to life in prison for possession of a concealed weapon. There had been nine
witnesses who could testify that Larsen was not guilty, but the court called
none of them at the trial because of his incompetent and now disbarred
attorney. With the help of the Innocence Project, he was able to prove his
innocence, and the court overturned his conviction in 2009.
How
does this involve Senator Harris? She challenged his release not because she
believed he was guilty—she did not dispute his innocence—but because he hadn’t
presented proof of his innocence quickly enough. And so, she fought to keep a man
she definitely knew was innocent behind bars for life (NBCLosAngeles, “After 13
Years in Prison, Man Found Innocent of Crime Freed,” 3.20.2013).
In
another incident, law enforcement discovered that Deborah Madden had purposely
sabotaged the drug results of multiple cases as a technician at a San Francisco
crime lab. But even though the highest levels of the district attorney’s office
knew about Madden’s unreliability as a drug expert, Kamala Harris and her
office hid this information from defense attorneys. Superior Court Judge
Anne-Christine Massullo ultimately ruled that Harris’ office had violated
defendants’ rights through this act of prosecutorial misconduct, calling into
question the convictions of nearly 40 defendants (SFGate, “Judge rips Harris’ office
for hiding problems,” 05.21.2010).
However,
perhaps Harris’ most egregious example of immoral conduct happened in 2014. A
federal judge ordered that all non-violent second-strike offenders be eligible
for parole in California in an action against constitutional prison crowding.
Kamala Harris, then the Attorney General of California, disagreed with the
decision. She argued in court that by releasing these inmates early, prisons
would lose “an important labor pool” (Los Angeles Times, “Federal judges order
California to expand prison releases,” 11.14.2014). Despite pitching herself as
a lifelong champion for criminal justice reform, Harris had advocated that the
need to keep nonviolent offenders as slaves outweighs their constitutional
rights. How would the Democratic Party call itself progressive if members threw
their support behind someone with such an atrocious record on civil rights
issues?
Even
worse, Harris has yet to apologize for her actions and in fact has refused to
even acknowledge them (Reason.com, “Kamala Harris Hopes You’ll Forget Her
Record as a Drug Warrior and Draconian Prosecutor,” 01.31.2019). At a town
hall, she responded to a question calling her out on her past actions by
answering “I’ve been consistent my whole career,” and then explained how the
record supports her claim that she has been progressive on prison reform (CNN
Twitter, “I’ve been consistent my whole career,” 01.28.2019).
I
won’t delve into her argument because, in my view, it’s irrelevant. When you
actively cover up police misconduct, try to keep a man who you know is innocent
in prison and refuse to release nonviolent offenders because you need their
involuntary labor, you don’t get to reframe your narrative.
Kamala
Harris is not owed an audience. She is not entitled to one simply because she
wants to be president. We should not give her the benefit of the doubt, because
she refuses to even acknowledge her wrongdoings. We don’t have the right to
forgive her; that right belongs to all the people she’s wronged over the course
of her long career.
For
that reason, I ask you not to vote for Kamala Harris in the primary, no matter
how attractive a candidate she is or how well she explains away her
inconsistent career. It’s possible that her past really won’t have much of an
impact on how she’ll be as president, but why should we wait and see? The
best-case scenario is that she’s a progressive who repeatedly violated her own
principles so that she could promote her career. In the worst-case scenario,
she’s just another corrupt, rotten, regressive prosecutor.
Comments
Post a Comment