Tag: kamala harris

“How the F*** Are You Going to Put All These White People Ahead of Kamala?” Donna Brazile Plays Race Card in Warning to Democrats About Replacing Biden

Donna Brazile, the former interim Democratic National Committee chair, issued a blunt warning to Democrats thinking about passing over Kamala Harris as a replacement for Joe Biden should he withdraw from the Democrat presidential nomination, “How the f*** are you going to put all these white people ahead of Kamala?”

Brazile made the comment in an interview with CNN about the nightmare scenarios facing Democrats since Biden’s presidency ending debate performance against President Trump Thursday night in Atlanta.

CNN laid out what ‘terrified’ Democrats and Brazile were saying about the party’s options (excerpt):

More than two dozen top Democratic officials, political operatives and donors tied to Biden and to many of the people most discussed as potential substitutes – many of whom asked for anonymity to discuss the most politically fraught situation most have ever encountered – say they’re terrified by nearly every scenario: Going forward with Biden, a Kamala Harris nomination, a nomination of someone else who would in that case have beaten the first Black female vice president, long nights of multiple ballots spilling ideological and personal feuds on national television, even just revelations of embarrassing details about people who have never been vetted by a national campaign.

“It would be a Category 5 hurricane,” said one top Democratic official nervous about Biden considering what would happen if the president stepped aside. “People don’t understand the sheer destruction that would be unleashed.”

…Even as minds turn to a list that includes Harris, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Whitmer, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and even relatively new Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, none have gone public with anything but words of support for Biden. They worry about being called traitors. They worry that it might make Biden dig in more.

A debate watch party in Los Angeles on Thursday night happened to feature Harris’ husband Doug Emhoff, Pritzker, Whitmer and Beshear. There were other high-profile attendees – by a few answers in, Rob Reiner was screaming about losing and Jane Fonda had tears in her eyes, according to people in the room.

…In an interview, Brazile said that her reaction to the calls that she has been getting since the debate with people inquiring about other candidates is: “How the f**k are you going to put all these white people ahead of Kamala?”

Backers of other possible candidates acknowledge that the internal feelings of deference toward her would be widespread and hard to overcome, and fears about the backlash among Black and women voters from ditching her would run extremely high.

The Trump campaign has released videos reminding voters that a vote for Biden is a vote for Harris.

Keep reading

Kamala Harris Implausibly Claims Biden’s Marijuana Pardons Number in the ‘Tens of Thousands’

“We have pardoned tens of thousands of people with federal convictions for simple marijuana possession,” Vice President Kamala Harris bragged on Thursday. It was not the first time she had offered that estimate, which she also cited during an appearance in South Carolina last February and at a “roundtable conversation about marijuana reform” the following month.

Where did Harris get that number? From thin air, it seems. “While Harris said ‘tens of thousands’ have been pardoned under President Joe Biden’s October 2022 and December 2023 clemency proclamations,” Marijuana Moment noted in February, “the Justice Department estimates that roughly 13,000 people have been granted relief under the executive action.” And only a tiny percentage of those people have bothered (or managed) to obtain evidence of their pardons: This week the Justice Department reported that “the Office of the Pardon Attorney has issued 205 certificates of pardon” to people covered by Biden’s proclamations.

In October 2022, President Joe Biden announced pardons for people who had possessed marijuana in violation of 21 USC 844 or Section 48–904.01(d)(1) of the D.C. Code. That proclamation applied to “all current United States citizens and lawful permanent residents” who had “committed the offense of simple possession of marijuana” on or before October 6.

According to a count by the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC), about 7,500 citizens and 1,200 “resident/legal alien offenders” (only some of whom would be eligible for pardons) were convicted of marijuana possession under 21 USC 844 from FY 1992 through FY 2021. Those numbers include some people who also were convicted of other offenses.

That count did not include D.C. Code violations. “We estimate that over 6,500 people with prior federal convictions for simple possession of marijuana and thousands of such convictions under D.C. law could benefit from this relief,” a White House official said during a press background call on the day Biden announced the pardons.

Keep reading

REVEALED: CCTV Video Shows Kamala Harris Exiting US Capitol at 11:21 AM on Jan. 6 – DOJ Later Lied and Said She was in the Building During Riot and Used this Lie to Persecute Hundreds of Trump Supporters

New CCTV video was posted earlier on Tuesday that shows Kamala Harris exiting the US Capitol at 11:21 AM on January 6, 2021.

The DOJ later lied and later filed indictments for a year against Trump supporters claiming Kamala Harris was still in the building later that day.

The video was released today by Free State Will.

And video also shows a man dressed as a protester in a hoodie coordinating with police before any protesters entered the US Capitol that day.

More than 100 J6 defendants were charged with 1512c felony charges for their actions that day. The DOJ claimed in the charges that Kamala Harris and VP Mike Pence were in the US Capitol at the time of the rioting.

Keep reading

VP Kamala Harris Claims Administration ‘Changed Federal Marijuana Policy’ While Using Incorrect Map Of State Legalization Laws

Vice President Kamala Harris cited the Biden administration’s moves toward reforming federal marijuana laws in a new video appealing to young voters—though her specific claim that policies have already been “changed” is premature. Meanwhile, the video also features a map that purports to highlight states that have legalized cannabis but that contains misinformation about which jurisdictions have actually ended criminalization.

“We changed federal marijuana policy, because nobody should have to go to jail just for smoking weed,” Harris says in the video, posted to X on Friday.

While President Joe Biden has issued mass pardons for people who have committed federal cannabis offenses and initiated a review of marijuana’s federal scheduling status, the clemency move did not free anyone from incarceration and the drug currently remains under Schedule I pending the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ongoing consideration of a Schedule III recommendation from health officials.

As such, the vice president’s claim that federal marijuana policy has already been “changed” in order to ensure that people aren’t in jail for cannabis is inflated.

Keep reading

NEVER FORGET… Kamala Harris Kept Black Men in Prison Past Their Release Date for Cheap State Labor in California

Kamala Harris kept hundreds of black men in prison past their release date so she could use these men for $2 a day for cheap California state labor.

That alone should have disqualified Kamala Harris from public office.
Extending prison sentences for cheap labor sounds like criminal activity.

Back in February 2019 Jackie Kucinich at The Daily Beast wrote about Kamala Harris’s Attorney General office keeping inmates locked up so the state could use them for cheap labor.

Just like slavers.

Kamala also locked up 1,500 people for marijuana violations.

The Daily Beast reported:

Ordered to reduce the population of California’s overcrowded prisons, lawyers from then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris’ office made the case that some non-violent offenders needed to stay incarcerated or else the prison system would lose a source of cheap labor.

In 2011, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Plata that California’s prisons were so overcrowded that they violated the Constitution’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Three years later, in early 2014, the state was ordered to allow non-violent, second time offenders who have served half of their sentence to be eligible for parole.

By September 2014, plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit were back in court, accusing California of slow-walking the process, which lawyers for Harris’ office denied.

According to court filings, lawyers for the state said California met benchmarks, and argued that if certain potential parolees were given a faster track out of prison, it would negatively affect the prison’s labor programs, including one that allowed certain inmates to fight California’s wildfires for about $2 a day.

“Extending 2-for-1 credits to all minimum custody inmates at this time would severely impact fire camp participation—a dangerous outcome while California is in the middle of a difficult fire season and severe drought,” lawyers for Harris wrote in the filing, noting that the fire camp program required physical fitness in addition to a level of clearance that allowed the felon to be offsite.

Not only that, they noted, draining the prisons of “minimum custody inmates” would deplete the labor force both internally and in local communities where low-level, non-violent offenders worked for pennies on the dollar collecting trash and tending to city parks. A federal three-judge panel ordered both sides to confer about the plaintiffs’ demands, and the state agreed to extend the 2-for-1 credits to all eligible minimum security prisoners.

This is the Democrat Party’s nominee for VP.

Keep reading

Why Kamala Harris Won’t Be Asked About the Suicide of a Newspaperman She Persecuted

The sitting vice president, shortly before moving to Washington, D.C., successfully scapegoated through heavily publicized if legally unsuccessful pimping prosecutions a career newspaperman who last week shot himself to death at age 74 rather than sit through yet another prostitution-facilitation trial that he insisted to his dying days was an attack on free speech.

Yet the chances of Kamala Harris being asked this week—or any week—about the late James Larkin, or her starring role in the demonization of his and Michael Lacey’s online classified advertising company Backpage as “the world’s top online brothel,” are vanishingly small. That’s because people have a natural revulsion toward anything associated—however falsely—with child prostitution or sex trafficking, true. But it also stems from something far less excusable: When it comes to conflicts between the feds and those from the professionally unpopular corners of the free speech industry, journalists have been increasingly taking the side of The Man.

You could see this dynamic in stark relief last month in the elite-media response to U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty’s Independence Day injunction against the federal government from pressuring social media companies to censor individuals for allegedly spreading “misinformation.” As catalogued at Reason by Robby Soave, J.D. Tuccille, Jacob Sullum, and Robert Corn-Revere, and as I experienced during a bizarre panel discussion on CNN, the default journalistic reaction was anxiety that the ruling (in the words of the New York Times news department) “could curtail efforts to combat false and misleading narratives about the coronavirus pandemic and other issues.” Sure, there may be First Amendment implications, but, well, have you seen that dangerous whackaloon Alex Berenson?

Far too often, journalists reserve their free speech defenses for people they actually like. And man, did they not like Jim Larkin and Mike Lacey.

This antipathy for Larkin/Lacey and the New Times alt-weekly chain the duo launched in Phoenix was obvious long before politicians began moving on from Craigslist to Backpage in their morally panicked crusade against technology companies that allegedly promote “sex trafficking.” (I use quotation marks here not to intimate that sex trafficking does not exist, but rather that, as Reason‘s Elizabeth Nolan Brown has documented better than any living reporter, the term is overwhelmingly deployed by politicians and law enforcement to describe and punish conduct that has nothing whatsoever to do with forcing unwitting adults, let alone minors, into the sex business.)

The New Times honchos—especially Lacey, who was always the more public and pugilistic face of the franchise—were resented because they threw sharp elbows at both the graybeard alternative weeklies to their left and at the big-city dailies that were originally to their right but then tacked over time to the kind of bloodless lefty respectability space inhabited by NPR. The New Times papers hurled buckets of snark onto anyone perceived as Establishment, which pissed off boomer lefty journalists almost as much as elected Republican officials such as Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Keep reading

The Distorted Story of Florida’s African American History Curriculum

“‘Do not, for the love of God, tell kids that slavery was beneficial’”

Um, what? According to the Florida Phoenix, Ron DeSantis’s Board of Education wants to teach that slavery was good! I saw this insanity posted on Facebook by an acquaintance, who called it proof that Ron DeSantis was a “racist fascist.” It was just the first in a stream of articles, posts, and tweets grabbing my attention that claimed Florida plans to horribly distort black history.

1

And the headlines were lies.

It didn’t stop with the media. This blatant falsehood was passed along by political leaders like Vice President Kamala Harris, who tweeted this to her 14 million followers…

Keep reading

The White House Does Damage Control After Kamala Harris Claims ‘Reducing Population’ is Needed to Fight Climate Change

Kamala Harris made an interesting remark during a speech on the purportedly devastating effects of climate change on Friday.

“When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breath clean air and drink clean water,” she said to applause.

The White House has already “corrected” the transcript of the speech by claiming that Harris meant to say “pollution.”

But Harris did not correct herself during her speech, and the audience applauded her message apparently without bridling at the de-population message.

Kamala Harris’s remarks, whether scripted or unscripted, do reflect a segment of the climate change activist community’s views on the matter.

In 2019, more than 11,000 “experts” signed an emergency declaration warning that energy, food and reproduction must “change immediately,” according to Bloomberg News.

Kathleen Mogelgaard, a consultant on population dynamics and climate change and an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland, told the Canadian site CBC News that population does play a role in climate change.

“It is a very complicated, multifaceted relationship. Population issues certainly are an important dimension of how society will unfold, how society will be able to cope with this crisis over the course of this century,” said Mogelgaard.

“But it’s not a silver bullet, and it’s certainly not the main cause of climate change. And fully addressing population growth is not, on its own, going to be able to solve the climate crisis. But it is an important piece of the puzzle,” she added.

Keep reading