Kamala Harris insists that her Department of Justice, should she be elected President, would pursue obstruction of justice charges against Donald Trump.
“I believe that they would have no choice and that they should, yes,” Harris said during an NPR Politics Podcast.
The comments echo those of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) who recently said she “want[s] to see him [Trump] in prison” and former congressman Beto O’Rourke (D-Beta) who said he would also prosecute the President if he wins the White House.
Not one of them can help but avoid saying something completely bats*** crazy. When one Democrat goes off the rails, the others all jump in line and dive off the cliff behind them.
“There has to be accountability,” Harris blathered on. “I mean look, people might, you know, question why I became a prosecutor. Well, I’ll tell you one of the reasons — I believe there should be accountability. Everyone should be held accountable, and the president is not above the law.”
Describing the Supreme Court Building, Harris said, “On one side etched in the marble are the words ‘equal justice under law.’ It doesn’t say ‘except for the president.’ There you go.”
Somebody should have asked her if she’ll be prosecuting Hillary Clinton, who Bill Maher recently explained obstructed justice, as well.
Harris knows full-well she has no grounds for which to have the Department of Justice pursue charges against the President. This is her ‘lock him up’ campaign push, desperate to get her name out there to a rabid base that might not want to see the establishment in Joe Biden garner the Democrat nomination in 2020.
One has to wonder if Harris made these comments about prosecuting Donald Trump after smoking something. After all, she believes marijuana “gives a lot of people joy.”
As would seeing the President go to jail.
Harris’ lunacy in this campaign doesn’t end with her wanting to abuse the power of the DOJ to jail her political opponent. She has supported Bernie Sanders in his call to allow terrorists the right to vote. And she has co-sponsored a bill that would allow illegal immigrants to work as staffers or interns in Congress.
Harris’ record as a prosecutor has been peppered with controversy as well, making it likely she’d bring incompetence to a DOJ under her administration as well. A 2010 video shows Harris gleefully relaying a story about jailing minority parents if their kids skipped school.
As California AG, she ignored an accusation and lawsuit alleging sexual harassment by a top aide in her office, a case which ultimately led to a $400,000 settlement and the resignation of that aide who had been described as one of Harris’s closest professional confidantes.
Now she wants to jail the President of the United States over random snippets in a two-year investigation on the Russia collusion hoax.
2020 was an off-year for humanity, but strangely enough, the Netflix series "Tiger King" which…
By Casey Harper (The Center Square) U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Tuesday that more…
You know where people with criminal intent love to wave guns at people? Places without…
By Casey Harper (The Center Square) Inflation has outpaced wages for nearly two years, federal…
Uncle Joe seemed quite proud of himself after he signed his first veto. This is…
A reporter airing his complaints about White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre not calling on…
View Comments
This isn't, and shouldn't be, about color; comments like those in this thread only give credibility to leftists' accusation that opposition to Obama and now to Harris is racial and not policy-based. If someone told me that the GOP was going to nominate Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina for President (Sen. Scott is black), I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.
Very simple: If there were a case to be made that there was obstruction of justice, Mueller would have secured indictments against those members of Trump's cabinet and staff as to whom there was probable cause to believe that they obstructed justice, and Trump would be named as an unindicted co-conspirator. Exactly that is what Leon Jaworski did in 1973-74 with several key Nixon administration figures, naming Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator. If Mueller thought he had a case, that's what he'd have done. He didn't do it, and there can only be one reason--that he thought there wasn't enough evidence to indict anyone. He has said further that he has no further evidence beyond his report, which said there was insufficient evidence to indict anyone. He's not adding anything else, so that's all there is. I certainly don't believe that the American people will vote for someone whose promise is to indict and prosecute Trump.
Kamala Harris is an immoral black female. Half her life she spent as a protected concubine of black San Francisco Mayor. These kind of people downgrade the fair image of a country in the world rest aside of being a President.
SHE COULD WRITE UP IMPEACHMENT TERMS RIGHT NOW!!
SHE'S GOT NOTHIN'!!!
Pamela Harris what? Didn't he pay you enough for the Governor Brown Special, special rates only for party members who you can sleep up with?
Is she serious...WOW. Another one showing their ignorance.
Her administration? She is getting a little ahead of herself isn't she? She doesn't even have the nominations as yet. And there has been some speculation about her eligibility. Even were she to be nominated and win the election she could only ask the DOJ to look into the possibility of bringing an indictment. There of course would have to be sufficient evidence of a crime. And prosecution would not necessarily mean conviction. Accusations are easy; proof is more elusive.
Just like Tiger Woods was never the first Thai golfer.
Probably appoint a new AG (picked from a field of strictly progressive/socialist/leftist) candidates). The typical dem playbook.....if you can't win honestly....cheat like hell.
This will be interesting. Our DOJ has just investigated Pres Trump, and concluded there were no crimes, no high crimes and misdemeanors, no collusion, no obstruction. So if Kamala is our next POTUS (now polling 12% among Democrats, per CNN 3/18), how will she use the same DOJ findings to prosecute? Change the facts? Call 16 Hillary donors liars? How? Anybody?