Former Prosecutor Kamala Harris Claims She’s “Completely Confused” At Smollett Release

How many of you remember this tweet from Sen. Kamala Harris in support of actor Jussie Smollett’s alleged attack back in January 2019.

A lot of conservatives are using conspiracy to put these two individuals in the same camp, almost working together for a common goal. I don’t see it like that. I see an individual, Smollett, thinking he has political connections and is untouchable.

Anytime you try to bring a race war in your city, your state, on unfounded allegations  or shall I say the police investigation has you point-blank guilty of fraud, and you can get off scot-free after paying $10,000 and reminding the community you have provided a great service over the many years, you are connected, my friend.

Recommended: Smollett — Hey Everybody, I Would Like Nothing More Than To Get Bac...

Harris, a 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate, weighed in on the shock news of Tuesday that saw Smollett released and his record cleaned of the 16 felony counts. She claimed to be confused just like the rest of America, or at least the ones that do not understand privilege.

But I think there’s a point that the mayor made that I would like to emphasize because I’m seeing it around the country and it’s a very real issue, which is the seriousness of hate crime. Over the last two years, we have seen a growth of hate crime, be it in terms of race, be it religion, anti-Semitic crime, Islamophobic crime, crimes against — that are born out of homophobia and transphobia.

We have seen an increase around our country, and frankly around the world. And we cannot play games with it. We have to take it very seriously because it obviously can result in lethal consequences if we don’t take it seriously.

What Smollett did wasn’t just a hate-crime hoax, it was a political dirty trick intended to fuel hatred for Trump and Trump supporters.

Here’s a question – did someone suggest it to him? Or suggest something which turned into what happened? Given the complete laughability of the hoaxes and the ease of the subsequent police debunking, I still can’t quite credit him with the requisite brain power to initiate a political dirty trick for a particular candidate, but self-promotion, I can see that a mile away or even a couple of states over.

Views: 17

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Personally I think she is a complete idiot, my opinion.

lol

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

OMG!!! Ruth Bader Ginsburg Voted Best Real-Life Hero At MTV Awards

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday was crowned the best real-life hero at the MTV Movie & TV Awards.

The 86-year old judge — whose 2015 biopic The Notorious RBG help cement her as a cultural icon among Liberals — beat out tennis star Serena Williams, WWE wrestler Roman Reigns, and comedian Hannah Gadsby to take him the award.

Though it wasn’t a clean sweep for Ginsburg last night.

The RGB documentary lost the “Best Fight” category for “Ruth Bader Ginsburg vs. Inequality” to “Captain Marvel vs. Minn-Erva.”

The justice was absent from the ceremony in Santa Monica, California.

Last December, Ginsburg had surgery to remove cancerous growths on her left lung. She was released from the hospital in New York four days later and recuperated at home.

Earlier this year, Ginsburg missed three days of arguments, the first time that’s happened since she joined the court in 1993. Still, she was allowed to participate using court briefs and transcripts.

Ginsburg has had two previous bouts with cancer, in 1999 and 10 years later.

Flashback: Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Pregnant Woman Is Not A ‘Mother’

Celebrated liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued in an opinion released Tuesday that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.”

“[A] woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother’,” Ginsburg wrote in a footnote, which in turn responded to another footnote in the 20-page concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. case.

As Breitbart News’ legal editor Ken Klukowski reported, the case concerned a law signed by then-Governor (now Vice President) Mike Pence of Indiana in 2016, which required that the remains of an aborted fetus (or baby) be disposed of by cremation or burial. The law also prohibited abortion on the basis of sex, race, or disability alone.

The Court upheld the first part of the law, but declined to consider the selective-abortion ban until more appellate courts had ruled on it.

In his lengthy opinion — which delighted pro-life advocates, and distressed pro-choice activists — Thomas wrote that “this law and other laws like it promote a State’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.” He traced the racist and eugenicist beliefs of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and warned that the Court would one day need to wrestle with abortion as form of racial discrimination.

In a footnote, Thomas attacked Ginsberg’s dissenting opinion, which argued the Court should not have deferred to the legal standard used by the litigants in the lower courts, but should have subjected the Indiana law to a more difficult standard instead, since it impacted “the right of [a] woman” to an abortion.

Ginsburg cited no legal authority for her claim that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.” The claim that a fetus is not a child is central to pro-choice arguments.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service