This entire history of hers is truly offensive. (Kamala Harris)

excalibur

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2015
Messages
25,040
Reaction score
49,830
Points
2,290
Watch the short video. This is a terrifying glimpse into our future with a Harris presidency.

They acuse Trump of wanting to do something in the future, which they themselves have actually done and are doing under Biden's Reichsleiter Merrick Garland.

Harris would be even worse.


This entire history of hers is truly offensive.

But, as someone who was a federal prosecutor for 21 years, what truly offends me is the way she viewed her power to ruin lives.

I have written this before -- early in my career, I had a senior prosecutor I respected tell me to temper my enthusiasm for "doing right". His advice was to understand how my signature would ruin lives -- not just the defendant's life, but the lives of his/her spouse and children. Everything normal would be turned upside down by having the DOJ seeking to send them to federal prison.

The warning was meant to be sobering, and it stuck with me. Now as a defense attorney I see the reality of that warning that was only theoretical when told to me.

Harris never had that view -- her comments here, which came many years into her career -- reflect a lust for that kind of power. She seems to relish the fact that she could ruin lives rather than be restrained by it.

It is the very essence of prosecutorial discretion - to be influenced by other factors into not filing a criminal charge that might be technically warranted by a myopic focus on the facts alone.

She's a two-dimensional thinker who is oblivious to consequences of her decisions.

That makes her dangerous.



Quote
 
Yet shipwreck crew attorneys have been quite busy defending those who attacked the capitol building under Trump's orders.

We seen first hand the Trump presidency and what they will do to stay in power.

We been reminded in the latest election as they defend the story of the cats which has been debunked.

yet they still believe.
 
Kamala locked over 1,000 people (mostly blacks) who had to be set free once it was discovered her office fabricated evidence to convict them.
 
Facts.webp
 
  • Informative
Reactions: EMH
Watch the short video. This is a terrifying glimpse into our future with a Harris presidency.

They acuse Trump of wanting to do something in the future, which they themselves have actually done and are doing under Biden's Reichsleiter Merrick Garland.

Harris would be even worse.


This entire history of hers is truly offensive.
But, as someone who was a federal prosecutor for 21 years, what truly offends me is the way she viewed her power to ruin lives.
I have written this before -- early in my career, I had a senior prosecutor I respected tell me to temper my enthusiasm for "doing right". His advice was to understand how my signature would ruin lives -- not just the defendant's life, but the lives of his/her spouse and children. Everything normal would be turned upside down by having the DOJ seeking to send them to federal prison.
The warning was meant to be sobering, and it stuck with me. Now as a defense attorney I see the reality of that warning that was only theoretical when told to me.
Harris never had that view -- her comments here, which came many years into her career -- reflect a lust for that kind of power. She seems to relish the fact that she could ruin lives rather than be restrained by it.
It is the very essence of prosecutorial discretion - to be influenced by other factors into not filing a criminal charge that might be technically warranted by a myopic focus on the facts alone.
She's a two-dimensional thinker who is oblivious to consequences of her decisions.
That makes her dangerous.



Quote

If you truly are a defense attorney then your job is to defend

To ensure your clients get justice

The prosecutor works for the state and if those in charge have decided to prosecute, her job is to prosecute

They decide this on whatever evidence or facts that are available.

It is inherently different.

Your client may plead guilty but you still have a job that your paid to do unless your doing pro bono. Still even if paid you still have a job to do.

You may even believe he is guilty but you still have to present a defense

Your client may plead not guilty but you have a job that your paid to do.


Her job is to present a case and to achieve that verdict of guilty. If other conclusive evidence is found then yeah they can probably dismiss the case.

If solid evidence is found or someone else admits guilt then the case may be over for that person.

I would imagine being a lawyer is not about what one personally beliefs but what is the job they need to do especially if they accepted the job.

So trying to defined what the prosecutor must do is problematic for a defence attorney. They defend and seek to win the case.

If they cannot win then they still must make a good faith effort.
 


She was born in california. This is just republican mumbo jumbo to discreet her.

at a later date they moved to Canada after daddy decided to depart from the marriage. yeah you can say she was raised in Canada. Still does not change her place of birth.

if you want to quibble about how much time she was in california and how much time she lived in Canada

certificate of live birth in the state of California

Parents divorced and she moved to Canada

It is what country that the child is born.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside

Single parent with children in California so yeah they moved to Canada where cost of living was lower.

AND YES THERE ARE MULTIPLE TOPICS ON THE SAME SUBJECT


 
Last edited:
Watch the short video. This is a terrifying glimpse into our future with a Harris presidency.

They acuse Trump of wanting to do something in the future, which they themselves have actually done and are doing under Biden's Reichsleiter Merrick Garland.

Harris would be even worse.


This entire history of hers is truly offensive.
But, as someone who was a federal prosecutor for 21 years, what truly offends me is the way she viewed her power to ruin lives.
I have written this before -- early in my career, I had a senior prosecutor I respected tell me to temper my enthusiasm for "doing right". His advice was to understand how my signature would ruin lives -- not just the defendant's life, but the lives of his/her spouse and children. Everything normal would be turned upside down by having the DOJ seeking to send them to federal prison.
The warning was meant to be sobering, and it stuck with me. Now as a defense attorney I see the reality of that warning that was only theoretical when told to me.
Harris never had that view -- her comments here, which came many years into her career -- reflect a lust for that kind of power. She seems to relish the fact that she could ruin lives rather than be restrained by it.
It is the very essence of prosecutorial discretion - to be influenced by other factors into not filing a criminal charge that might be technically warranted by a myopic focus on the facts alone.
She's a two-dimensional thinker who is oblivious to consequences of her decisions.
That makes her dangerous.



Quote



In the video she said, "I want money!", and willie brown saw she got it. She only had to sell herself to get it.

QuidProQuo = HO!

.
 
Watch the short video. This is a terrifying glimpse into our future with a Harris presidency.

They acuse Trump of wanting to do something in the future, which they themselves have actually done and are doing under Biden's Reichsleiter Merrick Garland.

Harris would be even worse.


This entire history of hers is truly offensive.
But, as someone who was a federal prosecutor for 21 years, what truly offends me is the way she viewed her power to ruin lives.
I have written this before -- early in my career, I had a senior prosecutor I respected tell me to temper my enthusiasm for "doing right". His advice was to understand how my signature would ruin lives -- not just the defendant's life, but the lives of his/her spouse and children. Everything normal would be turned upside down by having the DOJ seeking to send them to federal prison.
The warning was meant to be sobering, and it stuck with me. Now as a defense attorney I see the reality of that warning that was only theoretical when told to me.
Harris never had that view -- her comments here, which came many years into her career -- reflect a lust for that kind of power. She seems to relish the fact that she could ruin lives rather than be restrained by it.
It is the very essence of prosecutorial discretion - to be influenced by other factors into not filing a criminal charge that might be technically warranted by a myopic focus on the facts alone.
She's a two-dimensional thinker who is oblivious to consequences of her decisions.
That makes her dangerous.



Quote

I see you are advocating fer anarchy.
 
Just like you sell yer labor to yer employer.


Wrong, she fucked brown for political appointments. I wonder how many sets of commercial grade kneepads she went through during that time. And I haven't had an employer since the mid 70s. I either worked on contract or was self employed till I retired in 2013.

.
 
Wrong, she fucked brown for political appointments. I wonder how many sets of commercial grade kneepads she went through during that time. And I haven't had an employer since the mid 70s. I either worked on contract or was self employed till I retired in 2013.

.
I too was self employed and every customer was yer boss.
 
We need some answers as to whether or not Kamala ever failed to prosecute Paul Pelosi, who was busted in SF multiple times a year for driving drunk with cocaine and an underage boy after midnight...
 
We need some answers as to whether or not Kamala ever failed to prosecute Paul Pelosi, who was busted in SF multiple times a year for driving drunk with cocaine and an underage boy after midnight...
How is that a federal offense?
 
How is that a federal offense?


Cocaine is federal.

But Kamala never was, she was local and state.

Why did Kamala repeatedly decide to not prosecute Paul Pelosi???
 


In 1957, at the age of 16, Pelosi lost control of a car that he was driving on Skyline Boulevard, a mile north of Crystal Springs Dam in San Mateo County, California[4] and crashed. His older brother David, who was a passenger in the car, died in the crash.[4] Moments before the crash, David had warned his brother to reduce speed.[4] Paul Pelosi was exonerated in the matter by the coroner's jury.[16][17]



and was arrested dozens of times since and was never prosecuted until a 2022 bust, because it "got out" to the public...

Someone at the top of SF justice made Paul Pelosi above the law...
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom