Author Topic: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris  (Read 50374 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
10 minute video, Kamala Harris' policies not well thought out
« Reply #500 on: September 16, 2024, 07:20:08 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
MSNBC tells the Kamala Harris lie
« Reply #502 on: September 17, 2024, 06:07:59 PM »
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/kamala-harris-joe-biden-progressive-policies-rcna171298

“[Kamala’s] attention is now fully on barnstorming the purple areas of swing states,” Brown wrote, “focused less on appeasing the progressive base of the party than on winning over whichever voters are still making up their minds about how to vote in November — or if at all. The result has been a campaign that’s burning through the fuel the base provided when she became the nominee.”
...
"Policywise, this has meant shying away from some of the positions Harris took before assuming the vice presidency,” Brown wrote. “Her campaign has disavowed her support for a mandatory buyback program for assault weapons, for example, as well as her previous openness to expanding the Supreme Court. Any former support for ‘Medicare for All’ or banning fracking has been tucked into a box and shelved in the darkest recesses of the Naval Observatory. These are still good policies, in my view, but not the sort of thing Harris wanted to have in the spotlight.”


-----------------------------------------------------

[Doug]  She got the money from the extreme Left and is selling moderate positions to the swing voters in swing states - with a nod-nod, wink-wink to the base, "my core values haven't changed".

What's dishonest about that?

Update:  The Hill knows:
---------------------------------------------------
The Hill:
Democrats bet Kamala Harris will move left as president
https://x.com/thehill/status/1835921664657256503

Democrats know. 

I hope moderate swing voters know.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2024, 08:00:47 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
On Day One? Kamala Harris has been in office 30 years!
« Reply #503 on: September 17, 2024, 08:15:01 PM »
https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1836110658678722777

.
@JDVance
 on Kamala Harris' promise to lower prices and close the border: "Day one was 1,400 days ago! What the hell have you been doing the whole time?"

"If you’ve been in office for 30 years like Kamala Harris, you can stand up and, without an ounce of shame, look at the American people and say, ‘On day one, I’m going to lower grocery prices.’

That’s what Kamala Harris says. ‘On day one, we’re going to lower the price of housing,’ and ‘On day one, we’re going to close down that southern border.’

It’s like, ‘Kamala, day one was 1,400 days ago. What the hell have you been doing the whole time? Why don’t you stop talking and get to work?’”
« Last Edit: September 18, 2024, 04:09:05 AM by DougMacG »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
It’s GOT to be the Chardonnay
« Reply #504 on: September 17, 2024, 08:16:17 PM »
We need a new word for this morally superior, patronizing, it’s-just-us-girls (assuming you so identify), rambling, faux profundity, arrogant, likely drunken, twaddle:

https://x.com/trumpwarroom/status/1836120953824198804?s=61

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
Re: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris
« Reply #505 on: September 17, 2024, 09:13:06 PM »
she lectures us on drivel.

playing the self proclaimed professor lecturing us students .

Like Obmamster telling us (anyone on the Right) this is "not who we are".
Go "read Jake Sullivan's book".   etc., but  in a more nonsensical way.

no thanks, I say to either one.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris - 7% Maximum for child care??
« Reply #506 on: September 18, 2024, 04:13:01 AM »
That's the most people can afford for their kids or they can't afford to work.

The right answer to the wrong question,

That's the most people should send away from their family to the government,

Then ALL the rest is available for Child and family expenses.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Jonathon Turley points out the lies... Kamala Harris
« Reply #507 on: September 18, 2024, 04:14:58 AM »
https://jonathanturley.org/2024/09/16/with-fact-checks-like-these-how-does-truth-stand-a-chance/

With Fact-Checks Like These, How Does Truth Stand a Chance?
Below is my column in The Hill on the controversial role played by the ABC moderators in the presidential debate. Three false claims in the debate continue to be repeated in what is now our post-truth political environment. (ABC later challenged another claim by Harris on the deployment of U.S. troops).

Here is the column:

“You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.”

That famous line from Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) remains a virtual mantra for politicians and pundits. Yet, judging from the presidential debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, we have officially entered the post-truth political era.

ABC News has been widely criticized for the bias of the two moderators Linsey Davis and David Muir. Even liberal outlets acknowledged that the two journalists seemed inclined to “fact check” only Trump. In the meantime, they allowed clearly false statements from Harris to go unchallenged.

Three of the unchecked claims are being widely disseminated by supporters, including some in the media. Here are three legal “facts” that are being repeated despite being clearly untrue.

“Crime is down under the Biden-Harris administration.“

One of the most notable slap downs by ABC followed Trump commenting that crime rates have drastically risen during the Biden-Harris administration. Muir immediately balked and declared: “As you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is coming down in this country.”

Harris and her allies have been repeating the claim by ABC. But the actual statistics show that Trump was right. The Justice Department’s released survey found that, under the Biden administration, there has been a significant increase in crime. Violent crime was up 37 percent from 2020 to 2023, rape is up 42 percent, robbery is up 63 percent and stranger violence is up 61 percent. Other reports had shown startling increases such as a doubling of carjackings in D.C. in 2023.

“Harris has not supported transgender operations for undocumented migrants.”

Some of the greatest mocking in the media concerned Trump’s statement that Harris has supported transgender conversion treatment for undocumented persons. New Yorker staff writer Susan Glasser immediately wrote “What the hell was he talking about? No one knows, which was, of course, exactly Harris’s point.”

On CNN, Wolf Blitzer declared how “outlandish” it was for Trump to make such a claim.

But it’s true.

In 2019, Harris told the ACLU that she not only supported such operations but actively worked for at least one such procedure to take place. When it was reported by Andrew Kaczynski on CNN, host Erin Burnett was gobsmacked by the notion of taxpayer-funded gender transition surgeries for detained migrants. “She actually supported that?” Burnett exclaimed.

Even the New York Times later admitted that the “wildest sounding attack line” from Trump was “basically true.”

Harris does not support the right to abortion in the final three months of a pregnancy. 

Trump also hit Harris on her no-limits position on abortion rights, allowing women the right to abort a baby up to the moment of birth. Trump said Harris supports laws allowing abortions in “the seventh month, the eighth month, [and] the ninth month,” to which Harris retorted: “C’mon,” “no,” and “that’s not true.”

The hosts again said that Trump was making up his criticism of late-term abortions, including the risk of babies being born but allowed to die.

But in fact, many states, including Minnesota under Gov. Tim Walz (D), protect the right of a woman to abort a baby into the ninth month. While it is often said that this is left to the mother and her doctor, the law gives the decision to the mother.

Late-term abortions are relatively rare, but they do occur. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report estimated in 2019 that about 4,882 abortions were performed that year at least 21 weeks or later into pregnancy.

More than a dozen states, in fact, allow on-demand abortions after a baby is viable and can even survive outside of the womb. Nine of those states permit abortions throughout the entirety of pregnancy. Harris has supported these state laws and certainly did not answer the question on what limits she would support, other than saying that she supports Roe v. Wade.

Clearly, many late-term abortions occur to protect the life of the mother. However, you can have (as both Trump and Harris support) exceptions to protect the life of the mother without allowing abortions up to the moment of birth.

To be sure, Trump did not help himself with his wilder claims. These included debunked accounts of Haitian migrants eating people’s pets in Ohio, which Ohio’s Republican governor, Mike Dewine, has denied.

The issue is not fact-checking, but the failure to do so equally and accurately. ABC actually disseminated false information under the mantle of fact-checking, and that’s a real problem.

Moderator Linsey Davis admitted later that ABC did not want a repeat of what had happened in the last debate, wherein Trump was given free rein and the moderators limited themselves to asking questions and enforcing time limits. CNN was praised in that debate across the political spectrum for being even-handed.

What is most striking about this election is that none of this seems to matter. Indeed, even the debate did not matter. While Trump can legitimately object to a three-against-one debate format, Harris’s victory was clearly not dependent on bad calls by the refs. However, there has been little overall movement in the polls, even though 67 million people were watching.

The era of post-truth politics is evident in Harris repeating false claims about Trump’s support for “Project 2025” and debunked claims regarding his comments about an extreme-right Charlottesville rally in 2017. Leading Democrats continue to make these false claims, in some cases despite knowing that they are false.

On the other side, Trump is making promises he has to know can never be fulfilled. For example, he has pledged to make flag-burning a federal crime with a penalty of two years’ incarceration. The Supreme Court, including conservatives like the late Justice Antonin Scalia, has ruled that flag burning is protected speech under the First Amendment. Neither a president nor Congress can change the meaning of the Constitution without amending it.

With the help of the media, we have reduced our election to a political Slurpee. It’s all sugar rush and no nutritional value. We now have pundits supporting the idea of no further debates and even arguing that Harris shouldn’t give any interviews because it’s too risky.

Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) explained that Harris should avoid one-on-one media interviews because “sometimes, you drill down into a question until there’s a word that’s uttered that can be used in a negative way.” I suppose, as president, she will need to insist on meeting foreign leaders only in CNN town hall events.

If you do not say anything, there are no facts to check. The election then becomes a vote over whether you are for or against “joy.”

What is clear from the ABC debate is that citizens are on their own in the election to find actual facts and substance in the super-sized Slurpee of the 2024 election.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris's brother in law
« Reply #508 on: September 18, 2024, 01:46:32 PM »
Another source I've no experience with, but this has the ring of truth. If only intrepid journalists bothered to do their jobs:

There is a massive story for someone who has more resources than I have to investigate this further.

In 1977, the Department of Justice Civil Department required Congress to sign off on any settlement against the United States more than 100,000.00 dollars. But as society became more litigious, the cap was eventually removed. Then the DOJ civil department became one of the most powerful departments in the United States Government, basically, they could do whatever they want with Taxpayer money. The account became known as the Judgement Fund. The fund's operations have become secretive and often nefarious.

In 2009 a man named Tony West took over the Department of Justice civil litigation program. This program was in charge of settling lawsuits against the federal government. But this was an email that Tony West got upon being appointed to the job:

 “can you explain to Tony the best way to allocate some money toward an organization of our choosing?”

That is how taxpayer money became the vehicle to start funding Left Wing associated organizations and give them the resources needed to start what has become the party of lunacy.

For example in 2010, the DOJ had all but won a case in Supreme Court after a decade long fight DOJ lawyers were on the verge of winning a case against discrimination claims by 91 Hispanic and female farmers.

Tony West personally intervened and the
DOJ agreed to a $1.33 billion settlement which included thousands of farmers who had never claimed bias, and of course ATTORNEY FEES in the millions. More importantly, the case lawyers vehemently was against the settlement noting they had obviously were going to win the case and not cost the taxpayers money at all. Law firms, some which did not even participate in the case were awarded an additional 133 million in attorney fees.

The projected settlement size ballooned to over $4.4 billion as additional plaintiffs were added, including Native American farmers.

One government expert was appalled: “‘If they had gone to trial, the government would have prevailed . . . It was just a joke. . . . I was so disgusted. It was simply buying the support of the Native Americans.’”

Sound Familiar? Kind of like forgiveness of student loans, promises of cash for down payment on houses.

This dirty deal also inflated the number of claimants, creating a $60 million windfall for the plaintiff’s lead lawyer, a member of the Obama/Biden transition team.

Tony West did not just shakedown taxpayers, he also went after any right-wing corporations.

In a series of bank settlements, West wrote in PROVISIONS TO THE SETTLEMENTS THAT
Donations were mandatory and be given to DEMOCRAT ACTIVIST SUPPORT GROUPS. (Perhaps those shills we see like Brooklyn Dad, JoJo From Jerz, you know, all the paid propagandists we see on Twitter)

What makes things worse, is his settlements specifically provided that right wing groups were not eligible for any of these payments. This was around the same time Obama was having the IRS target right wing not for profit groups also.

An internal email shows West deputies rewording a settlement’s donation provisions to ensure the bank could not select a “conservative” property rights organization as a recipient. In 2016, before Trump took office, a 2 billion Electric Car initiative was mandated although explicitly rejected by Congress.

An email circulated saying they ought to build a “statue” to West and “bow down to this statue each day after we receive our $200,000+.”

Who was signing off on all these corrupt settlements in California? California’s attorney general at the time, Kamala Harris, was an active participant, cosigning agreements for her state.

Then, Donald Trump was elected and immediately ended the Judgement Fund. In fact, his attorney general banned them altogether citing the misuse, allocation and dangers of such a fund.

But a funny thing happened, in 2020, the Biden/Harris administration reversed the ban and started the fund up all over again. Once again, left wing organizations are getting billions of dollars in settlements while conservative groups are ineligible. You remember FBI Agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page? This is the fund that paid them their multi million dollar settlement although they had no expectation of privacy by sending texts on government issued phones. Perhaps that Plan "B" that they talk about how they would stop Trump in those texts was the reason for such a payout.

But you may ask, who is Tony West? Well, He is Kamala Harris's Brother-in-Law and is expected to be named White House Counsel if she is elected.

This guy makes Hunter Biden look like Mother Theresa, as the New York Post aptly said;  A new “Big Guy” is coming to town. Kamala, with the help of Tony West and his cronies, will show you how Honest Graft is really done.--Dishonestly

But where the story really is, all that money that was spent on dishonest settlements have been coming back to the Harris campaign in spades.

Sources:
New York Post
New York Times

https://x.com/DocNetyoutube/status/1836417227215565214

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
Cellphone Data Shows Same Phones at Most Harris Rallies
« Reply #509 on: September 21, 2024, 05:53:43 PM »
Meaning it looks like the campaign is bussing the same crew of enthusiastic rally attendees from rally to rally. Jeepers, seems like the sort of thing the press would be interested in investigating, and would were they Trump rallies:

https://x.com/amuse/status/1837565918760542368?s=61

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile
The meaning of "Unburdened by what has been"
« Reply #510 on: September 23, 2024, 02:44:03 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDX5q30V_-E

https://decodetheworld.substack.com/p/unburdened-by-what-has-been-so-they?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true&fbclid=IwY2xjawFWj-9leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHYXxqxEsU7JCL6sa9Gtx6ejT2LM5qnrgjtGN3izFCU2YVbCQ3GsjZYXB5g_aem_XFuf6h5YN3KxgzWgafDCow

=================

The point made here is one well worth noting IMHO.   

"Unburdened by what has been" means wiping out the history and the culture of the society (for America this means Natural Law and the Constitution)  in order to create "the new/socialist man".
« Last Edit: September 23, 2024, 08:13:59 AM by Crafty_Dog »


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
IRS "union" endorces you know who
« Reply #512 on: September 23, 2024, 10:05:23 AM »
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/09/23/nolte-irs-joins-dick-cheney-putin-iran-kamala-harris-endorsement/

WTH? 
IRS has a union!  how obnoxious is this?

Federal employees should NOT be unionized!

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Re: IRS "union" endorces you know who
« Reply #513 on: September 23, 2024, 11:11:01 AM »
quote author=ccp
"Federal employees should NOT be unionized!"
------------

Government employees should not be unionized.

As I understand union logic, the greedy capitalist has too much power, leverage, over the individual worker so only bargaining collectively can make it fair.  With city hall, county, state and federal governments, who takes the place of the greedy capitalist?  We the people, the will of the people. Equating that with evil capitalist doesn't make any sense.

Government sector, by definition, should be smaller than private sector at every level, unable to monopolize the labor market. To get good workers, they compete with the private sector - like everyone else.

You can't underpay them, they would just choose to work somewhere else if not competitive.

But instead of competing with the private sector, they pay 30% more and drive up the cost of everything for everyone.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2024, 11:45:14 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile
WSJ: The Harris plan for more housing shortages
« Reply #514 on: September 24, 2024, 07:07:34 AM »
The Kamala Harris Plan for More Housing Shortages
Her plan would stimulate demand, not supply, and redistribute wealth to the sellers of existing homes.
By Edward Pinto
Sept. 23, 2024 5:58 pm ET

A signature feature of Kamala Harris’s housing plan is providing first-time home buyers with $25,000 in down-payment support, at a total cost of $100 billion over four years. Absent a severe recession, this policy is all but certain to lead to higher home prices. That’s because the four million program recipients would become price setters for all buyers in their neighborhoods.

According to the American Enterprise Institute’s Housing Center, 77% of all home purchases would be subject to this home buyer “tax,” causing the price of these homes to increase by 3.6%. Over four years the increase in home prices would total $175 billion, more than the $100 billion cost of the program. The price increase would show up in higher revenue for sellers, thus acting as a wealth transfer to them.

The law of supply and demand dictates that an increase in demand without a commensurate increase in supply will result in higher prices. This effect on prices is because we’re currently in a strong sellers’ market, which exists when the number of months it would take to sell all the homes currently on the market is less than six. As of August, the overall supply of homes for sale was 3.7 months’ worth. For houses in lower price tiers, that number drops to 2.4 months. Sellers’ markets create upward price pressure on home prices, which grows more powerful when demand is further stimulated. Ms. Harris’s policy would do just that, boosting demand by giving buyers more spending money.

The plan’s defects don’t stop there. Ms. Harris’s proposed tax incentive for building starter homes is intended to increase housing supply substantially. This approach has led to significant market distortions on at least two occasions.

The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, with its easy credit terms and substantial subsidies, resulted in a surge of housing permits in 1971 and 1972. By 1975 the housing boom had reversed, leaving lasting scars on cities including Detroit, Chicago and Cleveland. Similarly, the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, which set affordable-housing goals, combined with Bill Clinton’s National Homeownership Strategy, led to credit liberalization in the runup to the 2008-09 financial crisis. Housing permits doubled, from 1.1 million in 1992 to 2.2 million in 2005, but then collapsed by 73% in 2009. In the aftermath, millions faced foreclosure, and the resulting housing-supply deficit still afflicts us today.

Without such dangerous credit easing, it is likely that Ms. Harris’s proposal would provide incentives largely for new homes that would have been built anyway, with any incremental construction being unevenly distributed across the nation. This would cause further imbalances between supply and demand.

Ms. Harris also proposes a $40 billion fund for local governments to explore “innovative” housing solutions. The Housing and Urban Development Department would likely channel this money into programs laden with self-defeating government-mandated affordability requirements, which markets abhor.

History offers a cautionary tale against such federal interference in the housing market: From the 1930s to 2008, at least 43 housing, urban-renewal and community-development programs were signed into law. Despite these laws’ lofty goals, these initiatives consistently failed to make housing more affordable.

There is indeed a housing affordability crisis. The root cause of this is a housing supply shortage of between three million and eight million housing units. Rather than pursuing Ms. Harris’s misguided plan, the federal government has several options to increase the housing supply at market rate:

• Implement a 10-year plan to auction surplus federal lands for home construction. Doing so could add 200,000 homes per year. By my estimate, these sales could generate $10 billion in annual receipts.

• Eliminate the tax deduction for interest on mortgages. This would increase supply and reduce demand by freeing up over the next decade 700,000 existing homes currently being used as secondary residences.

• Adopt a credible plan to reduce deficit spending. This could lower the 10-year Treasury rate (and mortgage rates along with it) by 0.75 to 1 percentage point.

• Subsidized housing projects often involve a cycle of subsidizing, rehabilitating, tearing down and rebuilding, all on the same parcel. Congress should require HUD to document, project by project, this revolving door of waste.

These measures, in combination with state and local efforts to deregulate land use and zoning, would mitigate the housing affordability crisis—all at no taxpayer cost and without unintended consequences.

Mr. Pinto is co-director of the American Enterprise Institute’s Housing Center.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile
AG Harris vs. the First Amendment
« Reply #515 on: September 24, 2024, 07:25:54 AM »
second

CALIFORNIA

Harris puts up First Amendment fight but loses first round in court

By Stephen Dinan THE WASHINGTON TIMES

It must have seemed like a good political fight to pick at the time for California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

The billionaire conservative Koch brothers were the left’s boogeyman, and the Supreme Court’s recent Citizens United decision created the perfect storm for outlandish fears among Democrats.

Ms. Harris, a rising star in California Democratic circles, saw an opportunity. Flexing the state’s charity disclosure laws, she demanded that charities turn over secret documents detailing donors. No other state required the document, which usually went only to the IRS under strict privacy protections.

The result was a case that went to the Supreme Court. The justices gave Ms. Harris a firm rebuke and reaffirmed the fundamental constitutional rights of free association.

Those who battled Ms. Harris say it was also a chilling warning about her willingness to use government power to encroach on the First Amendment and a striking incompetence in carrying it out.

“They were trying to intimidate and silence conservative organizations. I just don’t think there’s

As California attorney general, Kamala Harris gave a chilling warning in courts about her willingness to use government power to encroach on the First Amendment.



too much doubt about that,” said Brad Smith, a professor at Capital University Law School in Ohio.

Ms. Harris told the courts she was trying to stop charity fraud and needed to know who the donors were to sniff out any self-dealing or illegal business practices.

Conservative groups she targeted, including the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, said she was trying to score political points by sending warning letters and threatening fines.

They argued that Ms. Harris could get a subpoena if she needed the information for an investigation.

All nine justices agreed that Ms. Harris’ policy infringed on the foundation specifically, but six justices went further by holding that the law and Ms. Harris’ enforcement of it were blatantly unconstitutional.

“The upshot is that California casts a dragnet for sensitive donor information from tens of thousands of charities each year, even though that information will become relevant in only a small number of cases involving filed complaints,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in the critical opinion.

Every state requires charities that solicit within its borders to be registered. In California, that duty falls to the attorney general. Ms. Harris won the position in 2010. A few years into her term, she began sending warnings to charities she said were out of compliance because they hadn’t submitted their major donor lists and annual registrations.

State law had long required it, but previous attorneys general hadn’t pursued the matter. With national Democrats increasingly complaining about “dark money” in politics, Mr. Harris started rejecting charity registrations that didn’t include donor lists in 2013.

The document in question is known as Schedule B of Form 990, which is filed with the IRS. The tax agency keeps those forms confidential, though groups can release them.

The Americans for Prosperity Foundation did not want to release its form. It said Ms. Harris was targeting the organization because of its ties to David and Charles Koch, the billionaires at the heart of Democrats’ dark money complaints.

Ms. Harris warned of impending fines, and the foundation went to court in 2014.

The issue was debated between a federal district judge and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. After a bench trial, Judge Manuel Real eviscerated Ms. Harris in a 2016 ruling that said she could not “find a single witness” who indicated she needed the Schedule B forms to carry out her investigations.

The 9th Circuit was more forgiving of Ms. Harris. In a 2018 ruling, the appeals court said the state had a compelling need for the information.

The case AFPF v. Bonta eventually reached the Supreme Court. By then, new Attorney General Rob Bonta was tasked with defending his predecessor’s behavior.

Hundreds of groups with shockingly diverse political ideologies backed the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. They included People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Nature Conservancy, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Missionary Sisters of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, NARAL Pro-Choice North Carolina, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

Ms. Harris’ position received support from a much narrower slice of America: attorneys general in Democratic-led states, a group of Democratic senators and some liberal-leaning campaign and ethics watchdog groups such as the League of Women Voters and Public Citizen.

The Harris campaign did not respond to an inquiry for this report.

The Washington Times also reached out to five government ethics and campaign groups that backed Ms. Harris’ argument in the courts. None responded.

First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams filed a brief at the Supreme Court not necessarily backing Ms. Harris’ actions but defending the broader concept of donor disclosure.

“My own views are closer to hers than where the Supreme Court wound up,” Mr. Abrams told The Times. “I favor more disclosure rather than less as to who is trying to persuade the public on highly disputed issues of public policy.”

Mr. Smith, who ran the Center for Competitive Politics, a Koch-backed organization that also found itself under Ms. Harris’ thumb, said that while the attorney general argued she could keep the information secret, the groups that supported her were hoping for the opposite.

“It kind of revealed how at least a lot of Democrats looked at this,” he said. “They weren’t interested in the attorney general getting this because it made her law enforcement job easier. They were interested in this because they wanted it to be made public.”

Unfortunately for Ms. Harris, that was what happened.

At trial, Judge Real found that Ms. Harris’ office had posted more than 1,400 Schedule B forms to its public website, including some as the trial commenced.

“While human error can sometimes be unavoidable, the amount of careless mistakes made by the Attorney General’s Registry is shocking,” the judge said.

Ms. Harris’ sloppy approach also weighed heavily on Chief Justice Roberts at the Supreme Court. “Here the State’s assurances of confidentiality are not worth much,” he wrote.

John Bursch, who argued on behalf of the Thomas More Law Center, which also challenged Ms. Harris’ policy, called her effort “a pretty shocking First Amendment abuse.”

“She demanded that all nonprofits fundraising in California turn over their major donors’ names and addresses without any need for that information. And then she allowed her office to leak that confidential information like a sieve and did nothing about it,” said Mr. Bursch, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom.

Ms. Harris’ fight mirrored one from 50 years earlier.

At the time, segregationist Alabama Attorney General John M. Patterson demanded that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People turn over its member lists. In a 1958 ruling, the Supreme Court unanimously shut him down.

That case became the backbone of Chief Justice Roberts’ 2021 ruling against Ms. Harris’ program.

“We are left to conclude that the Attorney General’s disclosure requirement imposes a widespread burden on donors’ associational rights,” the chief justice wrote. “And this burden cannot be justified on the ground that the regime is narrowly tailored to investigating charitable wrongdoing, or that the State’s interest in administrative convenience is sufficiently important. We therefore hold that the up-front collection of Schedule Bs is facially unconstitutional.”

Mr. Smith said Ms. Harris’ approach differed from that of the segregationist Alabama attorney general in one way: He went after the NAACP while she cast her net more broadly, demanding donor documents from all charities.

Still, the conservative groups that received her warning letters were most vociferous in defying her demands.

Mr. Smith said it was an open question how much Ms. Harris was involved in the operation.

“I don’t know how much she was up there making the decisions at the top or just signing off. But it’s an indication she doesn’t have much strong interest in privacy, and she is not concerned enough about abuse or the potential abuse of power of government to veto this kind of thing,” he said.

By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, Ms. Harris was vice president. That created the odd situation in which the Justice Department ended up opposing, to some extent, her handling of the matter.

Acting Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said Ms. Harris’ actions risked a “chilling effect” on potential donors to the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. She called for the case to be returned to the lower courts for more examination.

The justices delivered a full rebuke instead.

Ilya Shapiro, who filed briefs for the Cato Institute’s backing the foundation, said the case was a worrying signal about what Ms. Harris might do in the White House.

“Harris really doesn’t like ‘misinformation’ and ‘hate speech,’ so wants to put political pressure on organizations she doesn’t like,” said Mr. Shapiro, now director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute. “The law at issue in AFPF v Bonta was a bridge too far even for her fellow travelers, but we’re already seeing in her campaign comments that she’s no fan of the First Amendment.”

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
re. Kamala for reparations
« Reply #517 on: September 24, 2024, 06:47:57 PM »


https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/166/565/874/playable/1c9be9d85a27b28e.mp4


She didn't get rated to the Left of Bernie and Liz Warren without checking all the liberal Leftist boxes.

She even threw in the trademark cackle at the end to make it authentic.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2024, 07:48:58 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris: "Not one active duty US troop in a combat zone"
« Reply #518 on: September 25, 2024, 07:25:22 AM »
Wrong then and wrong now:

AP: US is sending more troops to the Middle East as violence rises between Israel and Hezbollah
https://apnews.com/article/israel-lebanon-violence-war-hezbollah-63a15fa390a94acf46ef886cc5fb88db

If this was a goal or an accomplishment, mission failed.

I wonder if they will ask her about that in her next tough interview...  guess not.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris: Intruders will be shot
« Reply #521 on: September 26, 2024, 05:54:27 AM »
"if somebody breaks into my house, they're getting shot."  - Kamala Harris


[Doug]  How about at the border??

How about the Federal agents at Mar a Lago?

In MN, you go to jail for that, and that statement would be used against you relating to intent.

But it's the other guy who makes reckless statements...

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris: Americans are desperate for food under Biden Harris policies
« Reply #522 on: September 26, 2024, 06:39:08 AM »
Transcript: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/09/25/kamala_harris_trump_is_just_not_very_serious_about_how_he_thinks_about_issues_one_must_be_serious_and_have_a_plan.html

RUHLE: But as somebody who supports free markets, [No she doesn't] who's a capitalist [No she isn't], how do you go after price gouging without implementing price controls?
 
Because, once we get in this zone, people start to get worried and they say, I don't know what she stands for.

 
HARRIS:  So, just to be very frank, I am never going to apologize for going after companies and corporations that take advantage of the desperation of the American people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "desperation of the American people" she refers to is the rising food (and energy) prices and declining real wages the people faced under her policies.

I thought she was arguing everything is great...

Here is a "price control" for you.  I don't know the chains in your region, but if I don't like the prices at Safeway, HiVee, etc, I can go to Walmart, Target, Aldi.  If they are in collusion, breaking that up is a Biden Harris administration responsibility, but no one has alleged that.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile
FO: More from The Cackler for One Party Control-- ending the filibuster
« Reply #523 on: September 26, 2024, 02:56:59 PM »
During a radio interview yesterday, Vice President Harris said she will back Senate Democrats’ push to remove the Senate legislative filibuster, to pass a law codifying Roe v. Wade with a simple majority. (Democrats have pushed for years to get rid of the Senate’s legislative filibuster, which requires 60 votes to pass a bill. Changing the rule formally would require 60 votes. However, a Democrat majority in the Senate in 2025 could use other methods including the “nuclear option” to do so. Which would also open the way for Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) bill to disqualify Trump from office. – R.C.)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Re: FO: More from The Cackler for One Party Control-- ending the filibuster
« Reply #524 on: September 26, 2024, 05:43:19 PM »
Strange time to end the filibuster, right before you lose control of the Senate - forever.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
Emhoff supports Republican Party
« Reply #525 on: September 28, 2024, 06:20:05 AM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: September 28, 2024, 02:56:11 PM by DougMacG »



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
3rd post today on this thread
« Reply #529 on: September 29, 2024, 09:51:40 AM »
we see war in Ukraine, Mid East, Syria, threats in Taiwan, 20 to 30 million illegal immigrants and we are 37 trillion in debt, essentially civil war in US, and so why worry be happy and dance to the music:

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=harris+dancing&mid=EEBDA6521BEEE7EC2C15EEBDA6521BEEE7EC2C15&cvid=0F15E5701B7C451892B20205831E31F1&FORM=VIRE

And yet half the country loves the vibes.

 :roll:

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
4th post today
« Reply #530 on: September 29, 2024, 09:56:09 AM »
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?&q=don%27t+worry+be+happy&qpvt=don%27t+worry+be+happy&mid=D88FC3B4111556421C45D88FC3B4111556421C45&&cvid=08CEF08F79494B8BA4DC7EECD17CF800&FORM=VRDGAR

AS Harris explains in nearly every problem - "we have a lot of work to do" with no further explanation or evidence she has any clue what she is talking about.

Read 'End of Everything" and many similarities to us today.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamalabama
« Reply #531 on: September 29, 2024, 09:39:16 PM »
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?&q=don%27t+worry+be+happy&qpvt=don%27t+worry+be+happy&mid=D88FC3B4111556421C45D88FC3B4111556421C45&&cvid=08CEF08F79494B8BA4DC7EECD17CF800&FORM=VRDGAR

AS Harris explains in nearly every problem - "we have a lot of work to do" with no further explanation or evidence she has any clue what she is talking about.

Read 'End of Everything" and many similarities to us today.


During the first Presidential candidacy of Obama I came across Pat Paulsen's book from the 1968 campaign. Nixon Humphrey was as appealing a choice to people then as Trump Harris is now.

Paulsen, people my age might recall, was a car parker for the Smother's brothers TV show who made a name for himself commenting on the campaign.  Mocking other big names of the day, he proclaimed he will not run and will not accept the office if elected.  Pretty soon he was a sensation and was being put on real ballots across the nation. His book made fun of politicians with meaningless, vacuous statements on both sides of issues, all nonsense that turned out to be nearly word for word the script of the Obama campaign. 

Harris is running for Obama's fourth term, and the vacuity just keeps growing.  Kamala has core beliefs and everyone knows they won't get her elected, so out come the platitudes.

"We are the change we've been waiting for."
"Build back better."
a "New Way Forward",
from an incumbent,
all meaning more government on top of more government, on top of more government.
Why can't they just say THAT?

What will you do SPECIFICALLY to bring down inflation?  'Well I grew up middle class and the neighbors took good care of their lawns'.  What?  Really??  Yes, and no one asks a follow up!

It's more like, 'my Mom was a flaming California liberal and my Dad was a Marxist Professor, just a regular middle class family. Then I slept with the most powerful man in the assembly, three times my age, so just a humble rise to power, so I think I got this inflation thingy.'

Question asked and answered?
« Last Edit: September 30, 2024, 06:14:55 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris fundraising in SF while hundreds(?) die in Hurricane
« Reply #532 on: September 30, 2024, 06:22:45 PM »
Acting President (?) Kamala couldn't give up a fundraising gig in San Francisco to handle the storm that buried a good part of the nation.  After telling the UN in NY last week, welcome to Washington, Joe was at the beach house in Delaware.  He says he was on the phone for 2 hours.  That's dedication.  Imagine if Republicans took governing that lackidaisically.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
VP Harris, should we stand for the national anthem?
« Reply #533 on: October 02, 2024, 11:19:34 AM »
https://x.com/ResisttheMS/status/1841190963567321387

Besides the word salad non-answer, watch the head nodding, yes-yes, no, no, not having anything to do what she is saying.

I can sympathize; I am also not ready for the national stage.  But I know the answer to the question.  "Please rise."
« Last Edit: October 02, 2024, 11:24:16 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris - Didn't Have Time for a Hurricane Season Breifing
« Reply #534 on: October 03, 2024, 10:50:21 AM »
She failed her bar exam, then skipped out on hurricane preparedness briefing.  What do we do, promote her to POTUS.

https://nypost.com/2024/10/01/us-news/kamala-harris-slammed-for-skipping-hurricane-season-preparedness-briefings-led-by-mike-pence/

Priorities?  She's got them and they aren't yours.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
LOL "Harris hits the airwaves"
« Reply #535 on: October 06, 2024, 09:25:56 AM »
Later in the week, she will also be a guest on ABC's "The View", as well as "The Howard Stern Show" and "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert" -- all of which are seen as generally sympathetic to the Harris campaign.

I wonder if Stern who a infrequently watched many yrs ago is going to ask her if she does anal sex which he did 2 x on the very few (maybe half dozen)  I watched . 

He is so virtuous   :wink:

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris on 60 CBS Minutes
« Reply #536 on: October 07, 2024, 10:23:13 AM »
“The work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel, that were very much prompted by or a result of many things including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region."

[Doug]  What could be more clear? 

Biden Harris weakness triggered this war.

https://x.com/TheKevinDalton/status/1842949116848222547
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/10/would-you-like-french-dressing-on-that-word-salad.php

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
work to do, or work we've done
« Reply #537 on: October 07, 2024, 10:52:07 AM »
yes, that is her one of her favorite phrases

When she claims credit for something she deserves NO credit for she
says "the work that we have done" because she has nothing else to say.

When she tries to explain policies she says "we have made progress, but we have much more work to do" because she does not know what else to say.

And that is her spiel plain and simple.

That's all folks.




DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Re: work to do, or work we've done
« Reply #538 on: October 07, 2024, 01:13:23 PM »
Yes, 'the work that we've done'.  Not the results we attained.

Note to her party, if the results you attained are horsesh*t, the work that you did is likely same.

(28% of the people think we're heading to the right direction.)
« Last Edit: October 07, 2024, 01:15:38 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris, CBS 60 Minutes
« Reply #539 on: October 07, 2024, 05:04:16 PM »
biggest corporations. And I plan on making that fair,’ she said.

‘But we’re dealing with the real world here,’ Whitaker told her, asking her how she would get it approved by Congress.

How bad is Kamala at the political basics, when she’s a Democrat being hamstrung by own party’s operatives with bylines a month before the election?
   - Ed Driscoll at instapundit
« Last Edit: October 07, 2024, 05:08:12 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile
Re: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris
« Reply #541 on: October 08, 2024, 06:39:57 AM »
The snippets I've seen of the 60 Minutes interview are pretty devastating.

Her explanation of all her purported changes of position?

"Well, I've travelled the country as VP (i.e. I got out of my CA bubble) and we are a diverse country and compromise is a good thing as long as I don't compromise my values."

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
Re: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris
« Reply #542 on: October 08, 2024, 06:50:50 AM »
I watched it.

rather short and I was pleasantly surprised interviewer did NOT leave her off the hook and kept pushing f/u questions.

then of course they went on to explain that Trump refused to show up and let them know in the past week he would not attend.

and of course had a hit piece about his claims afterward.
they had on some women disputing claims about Maricopia County but (I did not hang around to see this whole second part) did not STATE EXACTLY what we posted in election thread that it is truly impossible to prove election integrity or not and the part I saw did not make the case for our side well.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris
« Reply #543 on: October 08, 2024, 07:07:50 AM »
"Her explanation of all her purported changes of position?"

Video: https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1843487949981356508?t=RFJCD4s9W1KdDS1s94I-zA&s=09

  - Her words translated, I will say what I need to say to get elected, then go back to far Left governance after being elected, like Joe did. Translated further, she will say what she's told to say to get elected - told by people who study these things and make these decisions.

Does someone seriously think Kamala is the brains, the leader of the operation?

Name one idea that was her own. She is a vessel of talking points from focus group analysis, first to capture the furthest Left in her party and now to win a general election, or to keep it close enough fo operatives to make up the difference, "ballot harvesters", etc.

To paraphrase a recent quote, if Democrats are really the party of the academic elite, the cognitive elite, smarter than all the voters of flyover country combined, then how did we end up with Obama, Hillary, Biden, Harris and Walz as our leaders? These are talking vessels of back room strategists.

In my humble opinion.
——----------

Case in point, I started watching 60 Minutes interview. First question, Israel, Middle East.:

Vice President Kamala Harris: "Well, let's start with October 7. 1,200 people were massacred, 250 hostages were taken, including Americans, women were brutally raped, and as I said then, I maintain Israel has a right to defend itself. We would. And how it does so matters. Far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed. This war has to end."

(Doug). Isn't that exactly, word for word, what she said in her acceptance speech, which we know is written by staff, carefully crafted to appease both sides of a contentious issue.

The viewer might think the point of the interview is to dive deeper but Harris believes the interview is a chance to repeat and repeat again what was already crafted, rehearsed and memorized.

Compare that with Netanyahu speaking without notes for an hour on the topic with vivid details and powerful arguments. If she wanted to thread the needle and wants to be leader of the free world, why wouldn't she know the details inside and out.

"How it does so matters" negates the first part of the platitude, we support Israel's right to defend itself.  If you're going to second guess and put constraints on their defense, you better know the entire situation better than they do, and she most clearly doesn't.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2024, 12:21:04 PM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 71671
    • View Profile
Re: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris
« Reply #544 on: October 08, 2024, 07:46:09 AM »
""How it does so matters" negates the first part of the platitude, we support Israel's right to defend itself.  If you're going to second guess and put constraints on their defense, you better know the entire situation better than they do., and she most clearly doesn't."

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Kamala Harris, definition of Marxism?
« Reply #545 on: October 08, 2024, 12:24:08 PM »
Under Proposed Tax Scheme Government Will Own 50% of Every Corporation in America

If you haven't seen it, UP co-founder and chairman Stephen Moore (presently on leave) and Susquehanna International Group founder Jeffrey Yass have a lead feature in today's WSJ.

The article documents the frightening truth that under the proposed left-wing radical tax plan, half of all corporate profits will go directly to governments. This is because they plan to raise the corporate income tax to 33% (when adding state and local taxes) and the capital gains tax (a double-tax on corporate earnings) to 34%.  Add it together and the shareholders receive less than 50% of the returns.

Today's WSJ

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
"I was Born Into a Middle Class Sh!t Shovling Family"
« Reply #546 on: October 08, 2024, 04:06:25 PM »
Something about watching Harris attempt to use a shovel seems emblematic of her entire campaign:

https://x.com/catturd2/status/1843627098994553319

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19433
    • View Profile
Re: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris
« Reply #547 on: October 09, 2024, 05:52:00 AM »
" Something about watching Harris attempt to use a shovel seems emblematic of her entire campaign:"

Right

And she doesn't even know how to shovel on top of it.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19162
    • View Profile
Re: Sen/VP Kommiela Kamala Harris
« Reply #548 on: October 09, 2024, 06:43:35 AM »
" Something about watching Harris attempt to use a shovel seems emblematic of her entire campaign:"

Right

And she doesn't even know how to shovel on top of it.

Is this her Dukakis in a tank moment.  Shoveling in a pantsuit and no one told her how to hold it. Looks like hired help did the yard work in her middle class upbringing.  I have no problem with that, just don't tell us otherwise and fake it now.