@Metal-Brain saidNope and only an idiot would think that I am.
@no1marauder
The 2011 Supreme Court ruling requiring the state to reduce its prison population. Are you claiming Kamala did not know about it?
My post was abundantly clear what I thought.
EDIT: I'll repeat it for ya:
no1: Harris was the attorney for California, so she had an obligation to defend it's legal positions. But she did not have to agree with every argument made by her subordinates. As your links show, she did not approve of an argument that prisoners shouldn't be released because it would harm firefighting efforts and she ordered it not to be used.
@Metal-Brain saidLet me explain this clearly to you:
As California attorney general, she spent years subverting a 2011 Supreme Court ruling requiring the state to reduce its prison population. The overseeing judicial panel nearly found the state in contempt of court.
https://prospect.org/justice/how-kamala-harris-fought-to-keep-nonviolent-prisoners-locked-up/
To say she had no idea her underlings were fighting the Sup ...[text shortened]... lieve.
You can stop pretending Kamala is not toast when the election rolls around.
We all know.
The type of articles that you are presenting are generally from "progressive" sources criticizing Kamala Harris for not being "liberal" enough when she was a DA and an Attorney General.
These may well have been damaging to her in 2020. A leftist voter might well have thought "Gee, she has a liberal voting record in the Senate but there's these things she did I think were too conservative before. I'm going to vote for Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren or [some other progressive] rather than her."
But it won't hurt her at all in 2024. Progressives aren't going to look at such matters and say "That makes me want to vote for Donald Trump." And moderate independents aren't going to be sympathetic to an argument that they shouldn't vote for her because she wanted to keep criminals in prison.
That's as clear as I can make it.
@no1marauder saidI asked sue a simple question, but she disappeared as usual? Care to pop over and explain the logic to me since you’re so good at explaining things?
Let me explain this clearly to you:
The type of articles that you are presenting are generally from "progressive" sources criticizing Kamala Harris for not being "liberal" enough when she was a DA and an Attorney General.
These may well have been damaging to her in 2020. A leftist voter might well have thought "Gee, she has a liberal voting record in the Senate but ...[text shortened]... 't vote for her because she wanted to keep criminals in prison.
That's as clear as I can make it.
@mike69 saidHow patient you are to wait 9 minutes for someone on an internet Forum to answer a question in some other thread (which one I have no idea).
Crickets, next?
Sorry, it's a little late where I am but if you actually tell me WTF you are talking about, I might actually answer when I get the time.
@no1marauder saidI moved the thread up for you.
How patient you are to wait 9 minutes for someone on an internet Forum to answer a question in some other thread (which one I have no idea).
Sorry, it's a little late where I am but if you actually tell me WTF you are talking about, I might actually answer when I get the time.
@no1marauder saidThey were defying a 2011 Supreme Court ruling. That means they were breaking the law. Are you claiming as Attorney general Kamala didn't know her underlings were breaking the law and wanted to continue breaking the law?
Nope and only an idiot would think that I am.
My post was abundantly clear what I thought.
EDIT: I'll repeat it for ya:
no1: Harris was the attorney for California, so she had an obligation to defend it's legal positions. But she did not have to agree with every argument made by her subordinates. As your links show, she did not approve of an argument that prisone ...[text shortened]... shouldn't be released because it would harm firefighting efforts and she ordered it not to be used.
What is her job again?
@Metal-Brain saidNo they weren't.
They were defying a 2011 Supreme Court ruling. That means they were breaking the law. Are you claiming as Attorney general Kamala didn't know her underlings were breaking the law and wanted to continue breaking the law?
What is her job again?
Read your own linked article; they were litigating the case in court. No finding was ever made that their legal strategies "broke the law" and settlements were eventually reached.
@no1marauder saidYes they were.
No they weren't.
Read your own linked article; they were litigating the case in court. No finding was ever made that their legal strategies "broke the law" and settlements were eventually reached.
@no1marauder
Why doesn't Trump say Prison Slavery Kamala?
For the same reason he did not say Racial Jungle Joe. This so called "race" is as fake as pro wrestling. They will call each other weird instead. FAKE!
They are both holding back. Secret buddies like the pro wrestlers.
@no1marauder
As California attorney general, she spent years subverting a 2011 Supreme Court ruling requiring the state to reduce its prison population. The overseeing judicial panel nearly found the state in contempt of court.
Working in tandem with Gov. Jerry Brown, Harris and her legal team filed motions that were condemned by judges and legal experts as obstructionist, bad-faith, and nonsensical, at one point even suggesting that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to order a reduction in California’s prison population.
https://prospect.org/justice/how-kamala-harris-fought-to-keep-nonviolent-prisoners-locked-up/
Why doesn't Trump say prison slavery Kamala?
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/i-fking-told-them-enraged-butler-cop-bodycam-says-he-told-secret-service-cover-warehouse
Let her defend her record in her own words so she can be fact checked.
Her job was to oversee her underlings and she didn't do that.
@no1marauder
Tulsi took down Kamala and now she is on a watch list. Go figure.
To suggest Tulsi could take Kamala down but Trump cannot is nonsensical.
https://rumble.com/v5arrmt-tulsi-gabbard-placed-on-government-watch-list.html
Democrats keep saying Kamala is competitive with Trump in the polls, yet Trump has no need to call her Prison Slavery Kamala? Why not? Is it because the polls are fake and Trump does not see her as a threat? Or is this general election as fake as pro wrestling with carefully choreographed political smack talk? The attacks cannot be too personal.
@no1marauder saidTrump does not call Kamala "prison Slavery Kamala" because it would be like this:
Let me explain this clearly to you:
The type of articles that you are presenting are generally from "progressive" sources criticizing Kamala Harris for not being "liberal" enough when she was a DA and an Attorney General.
These may well have been damaging to her in 2020. A leftist voter might well have thought "Gee, she has a liberal voting record in the Senate but ...[text shortened]... 't vote for her because she wanted to keep criminals in prison.
That's as clear as I can make it.
no1 will not watch this SNL skit with the Rock, but trust me, it is hilarious!
I could not stop laughing.