Posted on 08/21/2020 5:06:16 AM PDT by karpov
...
She made a potentially disastrous misstep early in her tenure as San Francisco D.A., when she decided not to seek the death penalty for a cop killer. In 2004, during a routine traffic stop, a black gang member, David Hill, ambushed a popular young SFPD officer, Isaac Espinoza, gunning him down with an AK-47 assault rifle. Espinoza, who left behind a wife and young daughter, had no chance even to draw his weapon; his partner was wounded but recovered. The San Francisco Police Officers Association, which had endorsed Harris in 2003, vigorously opposed her decision. In her campaign for D.A., Harris had run as an opponent of capital punishment, contending that it gets applied disproportionately to members of minority groups. Yet even anti-death-penalty liberals often make an exception for cop killers. Not Harris. Spurning pleas from Espinoza’s family, she said: “I approach the work of being a prosecutor as the responsibility to do justice. It’s not about the responsibility to lock people up for the maximum amount of time. It is the responsibility to make sure the criminal justice system has integrity.” Harris’s stand probably would have derailed the career of a district attorney in any other city in California.
California attorney general Bill Lockyer (a liberal Democrat) reviewed Harris’s decision but didn’t overturn it, concluding that she hadn’t abused her prosecutorial discretion—though he noted that he would have sought a death sentence if he were the D.A. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer publicly disagreed with Harris’s decision. Boxer went so far as to urge that Hill be prosecuted under federal death-penalty laws. Even Gavin Newsom, San Francisco’s mayor at the time, said that the case “rattled” his opposition to capital punishment. But Harris, while damaged by the case, didn’t lose the support of San Francisco’s famously liberal voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Liberals keep gushing on what a “historical” choice Kamala Harris is as a black woman Vice Presidential candidate. Since Biden’s team basically limited his search for a VP to black women, Kamala’s “historical” and “unprecedented” achievement was being marginally more qualified than the four or five other black women considered for the job, none of whom had ever been elected to anything above the local or state level.
His politics are awful, but Obama is a nice human being.
Harris is full of hatred.
I guess Biden couldn’t find a Latina left enough for his tastes.
Biden is a front....really, a joke.
It’s Harris that’s actually running for POTUS.
She is a ruthless “so-called black” female lib...the worst of the worst. Outright pure nasty in every aspect of her life...and ours should she prevail.
She’d be a Obama on steroids...and then some. Same MO and not even eligible.
I’m definitely no fan of Tulsi, but when she lambasted her during the primaries, it was soooooo sweet. Harris didn’t win a single electoral but now is actually running for POTUS....only pure DS/DNC/lib ruthlessness and insanity would foist something like that upon America...as if the virus wasn’t enough.
"Historical" by virtue of some difference in detail doesn't necessarily mean "good." Caligula and Nero were "historic" Roman Emperors.
I wouldn't go so far as you do and call him a nice person, but you're right inasmuch as Obama doesn't have one thousandth of the racial chip on his shoulder that Harris has (she made a name for herself on the debate stage by saying that even Biden was "racist" for not supporting busing). And on top of that racial grudge, Harris has a radical feminist's hatred of men, which seems to be even more instense than Hillary's.
If Biden were elected president, Harris becoming president would be a virtual certainty.
Every time I hear her I think she’s three sheets to the wind. There’s something in her voice, the pitch, the cadence — she sounds like she’s in a gin joint and it’s getting late.
If elected, Biden will dodder around for a few months or perhaps a year or two as President in name while Kamala is de facto President. Then his dementia will become so blatant that he'll be forced out of office and Kamala will become the official President. So you're right, this election isn't Trump vs. Biden, it's Trump vs. Harris.
20 or 30 years ago, Biden would have made a lousy President, but one I could live with - a lower IQ version of Bill Clinton who occasionally said something sensible or at least pretended to agree with Republicans on some issues. Today, he's not only drifted far to the Left, but in his diminished state he won't even be calling the shots - the hate-filled, radically anti-white, anti-male Kamala will be.
Ditto. They seem to be on the same page politically, but Gabbard and Harris are very different in demeanor and presentation. Gabbard is calm, serious, measured -- Harris talks like a disheveled dipso, laughing inappropriately, often unfocused, relying on canned responses.
It's like an adult versus a teen getting home five hours past curfew.
If Gabbard is as deliberate and thoughtful as she appears, she won't be a lefty much longer.
What kind of drugs are you on?
Obama is just as evil as Harris.
Three Nationality Harris is just as ineligible as Obama.
“His politics are awful, but Obama is a nice human being.
Harris is full of hatred.”
Anyone that would try to change the greatest country on earth into a socialist hellhole is not a nice guy.
Aspiring senator and future president of Cuba.
Nice? Nice? toilet paper is nice.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.