KAMALA HARRIS = CLONE OF JOE, THE BRIBES SUCKER!
Kamala Harris Blames 'European Explorers' for 'Perpetrating Violence, Stealing Land, Spreading Disease'
(CNSNews.com) - "It is an honor, of course, to be with you this week, as we celebrate Indigenous People's Day -- as we speak truth about our nation's history," Vice President Kamala Harris told the annual convention of the National Congress of American Indians on Tuesday.
She did not name Christopher Columbus, lumping him in with "European explorers," who were evil people, she indicated:
Since 1934, every October, the United States has recognized the voyage of the European explorers who first landed on the shores of the Americas. But that is not the whole story. That has never been the whole story.
Those explorers ushered in a wave of devastation for tribal nations, perpetrating violence, stealing land, and spreading disease. We must not shy away from this shameful past, and we must shed light on it and do everything we can to address the impact of the past on native communities today.
Harris mentioned the "epidemic" of missing and murdered girls and women on Indian reservations, which is no fault of the European explorers.
She alleged that Native American voters are being "systematically denied access to the ballot box." And she mentioned that Native Americans continue to live in poverty, without adequate health care or affordable housing.
"This persistent inequity, this persistent injustice, is not right," she said.
Harris said she believes now is the time to change things -- and of course, that means passing the entire Biden social welfare agenda and the Democrats' voting overhaul bills.
45 Questions the Media Should Ask Joe Biden and Kamala Harris
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his running mate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) will appear in their first joint media interview on Sunday after accepting their party’s nominations this week.
However, unlike President Trump, Biden and Harris have thus far declined to take questions from the media in an open joint press conference where no questions or topics are off-limits.
In the event that such a press availability arises, here are 45 questions the media should ask them. This list is by no means exhaustive.
QUESTIONS FOR JOE BIDEN:
1. Why did members of your family keep getting lucrative business opportunities overseas while you were vice president?
2. How did your brother, Frank, secure $45,000,000 in taxpayer loans from the Obama administration for his Caribbean projects?
3. How did a newly-minted firm employing your other brother, James, receive a $1.5 billion contract to build homes in Iraq despite having no experience in construction or international development?
4. Why did your son Hunter accompany you on your official trip to Beijing in December 2013? What did he do on that trip? Who did he meet with? What should the American public make of the fact that just 10 days after this trip, your son’s boutique private equity firm secured a $1 billion investment deal from the state-owned bank of China (later expanded to $1.5 billion) despite having no prior experience in China, and with this deal, the Chinese government granted your son’s firm a first-of-its-kind arrangement to operate in the the recently formed Shanghai Free-Trade Zone—a perk not granted to any of the large established financial institutions?
5. Should the American public be concerned that your son’s private equity firm partnered with a Chinese government-owned aerospace and defense conglomerate to facilitate the purchase of an American company that produced strategically sensitive dual-use military technology that the Chinese government wanted?
6. Does your “Build Back Better” proposal contain any provisions to ensure that American taxpayer-funded technology is not bought off by Chinese state-backed enterprises working with private equity firms like your son’s?
7. Back in 2000, you voted in favor of giving permanent Normal Trade Relations (NTR) to China. At the time, you said that this would not lead to “the collapse of the American manufacturing economy” because China is “about the size of the Netherlands” and could not possibly become “our major economic competitor.” Furthermore, you predicted that free trade with China would establish “a path toward ever greater political and economic freedom” for the people of China. Do you still stand by these statements today after 3.4 million American jobs have been lost to China and millions of China’s citizens have been imprisoned, surveilled, disappeared, and used as slave labor by an increasingly authoritarian regime enriched by 20 years of record trade imbalances from flagrant trade violations?
8. The People’s Republic of China has a bold plan called “Made in China 2025” to dominate the key technologies of the future in order to overtake the United States militarily and economically. Do you still contend that China is “not competition for us”?
9. Why did you promote the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) to financial special interest groups when research was clear that the deal would make it easier for corporations to move U.S. jobs overseas?
10. Do you believe Xi Jinping kept his promise to Barack Obama to end cyber-espionage against the United States? If not, what are you prepared to do about it?
11. Do you accept that the coronavirus originated in China? Do you think China was honest with the world in its handling of the coronavirus? Are you satisfied with China’s explanations for how it spread? Do you believe their claims about the number of cases and fatalities in China?
12. Do you think China should be held responsible in any way for its handling of the coronavirus? If not, why not? What, if any, repercussions should there be for China in its handling of the coronavirus?
13. Did you suggest investigating Michael Flynn under the Logan Act, as Peter Strzok’s notes suggest?
14. You said in your DNC acceptance speech that America is ready to “do the hard work of rooting out our systemic racism.” What did you do in your 36 years as a U.S. senator and 8 years as vice president to root out systemic racism? Why didn’t it work?
15. You have called for “revolutionary institutional changes.” What does that mean in practice?
16. You have vowed to rescind the Trump tax cuts. Can you think of a single example of a country that recovered from a recession by raising taxes?
QUESTIONS FOR KAMALA HARRIS:
17. Why did you refuse to prosecute even one sexual abuse case involving the Catholic Church in San Francisco when you were attorney general, despite the pleas of victims’ groups?
18. Also, why did your attorney general’s office refuse to release the documents obtained from the San Francisco archdiocese with all the information about priests accused of sexual abuse? Victims’ rights groups have criticized your office for deliberately burying these documents and thereby covering up the crimes and leaving the public unprotected. Why did you do this? The San Francisco district attorney’s office claimed in 2019 that they no longer have these documents in their possession. What happened to them? How can you claim to be a defender of children when you declined to prosecute the abusers of children?
19. Why did your office decline to investigate the health supplement fraud cases involving companies your husband’s law firm represented? Did you, as California’s attorney general, ever purposefully decline investigating or prosecuting clients of your husband’s law firm?
20. You said you believed the women accusing Joe Biden of inappropriate touching. Do you believe Tara Reade? If not, why not? If so, how do you justify supporting him now?
21. You once attacked a judicial nominee on the basis of his membership in the Catholic fraternal organization the Knights of Columbus, which is the largest fraternal organization in the world and includes among its past and present members many prominent Americans like President John F. Kennedy, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), Gov. John Bel Edwards (D-LA), and Vince Lombardi. Do you believe that being a member of the Knights of Columbus disqualifies a person from holding public office? Would you refuse to hire someone on the basis of their membership in the Knights of Columbus or any other Catholic organization? In your questioning of this Catholic judicial nominee, you singled out the issue of the Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life. Would you disqualify a job applicant on the basis of their Catholic beliefs, including their beliefs about abortion? Do you believe that being pro-life disqualifies someone from employment?
22. Why did you single out journalist David Daleiden for prosecution for undercover journalism that others do without penalty?
23. Your chief-of-staff, Karine Jean-Pierre, wrote an op-ed last year attacking the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and Americans who associate with it, stating “You cannot call yourself a progressive while continuing to associate yourself with an organization like AIPAC that has often been the antithesis of what it means to be progressive.” Do you believe that pro-Israel activism is incompatible with progressive values?
24. The Biden campaign has adopted a version of the Green New Deal that calls for 100 percent renewable electricity generation by 2035. California has adopted similar “green” goals, but now it can’t keep the lights on due to the state’s reliance on wind and solar energy. California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newson admitted this week that the Golden State needs a “backup” plan for energy because the current blackouts caused by lack of wind and overcast skies have shown the danger of relying solely on “green” energy. Why would the nation fare any better than sunny breezy California in keeping the lights on if we adopt 100 percent renewable energy?
25. You said in the past that we “need to hold China accountable” for trade violations, but you are against the use of tariffs. How do you intend to hold China accountable? You also said that “we need to export American products, not American jobs.” How do you intend to make sure we don’t export more American jobs to China? How would your policy differ significantly from the same policies that led to the loss of 3.4 million jobs to China?
QUESTIONS FOR BIDEN OR HARRIS:
26. You both supported the George Floyd protests, which you claimed were peaceful. Have you spoken to any victims of the riots — people who lost loved ones or businesses?
27. Do you believe that the looting of the Magnificent Mile in Chicago was a “form of reparations,” as one Chicago Black Lives Matter organizer claimed? Is looting an appropriate form of protest as a means of reparations?
28. Seattle Black Lives Matter protesters stormed a neighborhood last week, demanding that residents “get the f*** out” and “give black people back their homes” as reparations. Do you support that style of protest?
29. If elected, would you object if protesters decided to tear down the statue of Andrew Jackson in Lafayette Square across from the White House? What about statues to Thomas Jefferson and George Washington? Would you be willing to sign a written pledge to protect our national monuments and statues?
30. What is the maximum number of illegal immigrants you would allow into the country before securing the border to stop more from entering?
31. The Obama administration deported an estimated 3 million illegal aliens. Was that a bad thing?
32. With 30 million Americans unemployed due to the coronavirus, would you support a halt on work visas for foreign workers competing with Americans for jobs?
33. Do you still support a ban on fracking? If so, what do you say to the estimated 7.5 million American jobs that will be lost due to such a ban, which includes an estimated 550,000 jobs lost in Pennsylvania, 500,000 jobs lost in Ohio, 363,000 jobs lost in North Carolina, 353,000 jobs lost in Colorado, and 233,000 jobs lost in Michigan?
34. Wall Street has praised the choice of Kamala Harris as VP. Why do you think financial special interests support her so much?
35. Will you be following the advice of your Wall Street and Silicon Valley donors in negotiating with China? If not, whose advice would you seek out in negotiating with China?
36. Do you support China’s actions in Hong Kong?
37. Do you support China’s actions in Xinjiang province where an estimated 3 million predominantly Uyghur Muslims are imprisoned in what the Pentagon has described as “concentration camps”? Are you concerned about the fact that Hunter Biden’s China-backed private equity firm invested heavily in the surveillance technology used to spy on the Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang province?
38. Do you disagree with how the Trump administration is handling Huawei? Do you think Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou should be extradited to the United States for trial?
39. Do you believe China’s Belt and Road Initiative is a form of colonialism or is it a good program that Third World nations should sign up for?
40. What are you prepared to do if China invades Taiwan or uses military force to assert its claims in the South China Sea?
41. Do you believe the U.S. should return to the Iran nuclear deal? Would you make further concessions to Iran to secure that? Do you believe the Iranian regime should be allowed to buy weapons again?
42. Are you pleased with the results of the Obama administration’s intervention in Libya?
43. Why did the Islamic State fold up so much more quickly under Trump than the Obama administration predicted?
44. Would you advise Arab nations to follow the UAE’s lead and make peace with Israel, or should they hold out for big concessions to the Palestinians?
45. Should the United States apologize for demanding NATO partners meet their financial commitments? If not, why didn’t the Obama administration ever do that?
Rebecca Mansour is a Senior Editor-at-Large for Breitbart News. Follow her on Twitter at @RAMansour.
VP Kamala Harris: ‘Racism Is Real in America, and It Has Always Been’
The White House
Volume 90%
Vice President Kamala Harris condemned the U.S. as racist, xenophobic, and sexist in remarks at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, where she and President Joe Biden traveled Friday to show solidarity with the Asian American community.
“Racism is real in America and it has always been. Xenophobia is real in America and always has been. Sexism, too,” Harris said.
Eight people were murdered this week at three massage parlors in Atlanta. Six of the victims were Asian.
Though police said that there was no evidence of a racial motive, advocates have claimed that the event is only the latest in a wave of anti-Asian-American hate crimes.
Democrats have also blamed former President Donald Trump, who took a tough stance against China and often referred to the coronavirus as the “China virus” (though he also praised and defended Asian-Americans.)
In her remarks, Harris hinted that Trump was to blame for attacks on Asian Americans: “For the last year, we’ve had people in positions of incredible power scapegoating Asian Americans, people with the biggest pulpits, spreading this kind of hate.”
When she was running for president, Harris touted herself as the first future Asian American president. Her mother is Indian-American.
President Biden called on Congress to pass the “COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act,” which would punish any crime motivated by “the actual or perceived relationship to the spread of COVID–19 of any person” due to the “race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability of any person.” Biden also told Americans that “we have to change our hearts.” The bill was proposed last year by Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY), but failed to advance in the House.
Biden went on to talk about the country’s progress in the coronavirus pandemic, and to attack Republican efforts at election reform, saying that Georgia’s voters “helped save our democracy” in 2020. Republicans have cited voting irregularities in the state in 2020 as reason to tighten rules against potential fraud — which Democrats call an attack on voting rights.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is How Not to Be a Sh!thole Country: Lessons from South Africa. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Pompeo: When China Sees Dems ‘Deeply Tied’ to BLM ‘They Sense That America May Well Be in Decline’ – Must Defend America’s Greatness
On Friday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reacted to the exchange between American and Chinese officials earlier in the week and said that Chinese officials “mentioned Black Lives Matter as part of the reason they think American democracy is in decline, those are running buddies of Marxist-Leninists all around the world. And so, when they see a Democrat Party that is so deeply tied to the Black Lives Matter movement, I think they sense that America may well be in decline.”
Pompeo said, “I would have called it out for exactly what it is, this idea somehow that America isn’t a beacon of democracy around the world, that’s just nonsense and it is crazy for them to make that attack. … They mentioned Black Lives Matter as part of the reason they think American democracy is in decline, those are running buddies of Marxist-Leninists all around the world. And so, when they see a Democrat Party that is so deeply tied to the Black Lives Matter movement, I think they sense that America may well be in decline. I would have made clear that America stands for protecting its own. I would have reiterated our views about America first. We would have talked about the greatness and the exceptionalism of our nation, and we would have called them out for what they did to the world with this virus that has destroyed millions of lives. We’ve lost millions of lives and billion dollars worth of wealth. It is unacceptable that the administration didn’t push back in that way.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
China Rebukes Biden’s Foreign Policy Team; Cites ‘Black Lives Matter’ on U.S. Human Rights Abuses
Chinese diplomat Yang Jiechi rebuked U.S. Secretary of State Tony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan during a meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, on Thursday, citing the Black Lives Matter movement on U.S. human rights abuses.
The summit was the first bilateral meeting between the two countries under President Joe Biden, who has traditionally been soft on Beijing, and has struggled to balance a desire to break with Trump’s tough policies with the need for a strong stance.
Ahead of the meeting, the White House boasted that it had successfully insisted that the summit happen on home soil. Press Secretary Jennifer Psaki also promised earlier Thursday that the U.S. would bring up concerns about human rights in China.
But when Blinken spoke of the “rules-based international order,” and expressed “deep concerns” with China’s behavior in “Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan, cyberattacks on the United States, economic coercion toward our allies,” Jiechi struck back.
He objected to what he called a violation of diplomatic protocol, and said the U.S. could not lecture China from a position of strength.
He also claimed that the U.S. had “deep-seated” human rights problems:
China is firmly opposed to U.S. interference in China’s internal affairs … On human rights, we hope the United States will do better on human rights. China has made steady progress in human rights, and the fact is that there are many problems within the United States regarding human rights, which is admitted by the U.S. itself as well. … The challenges facing the United States in human rights are deep-seated. They did not just emerge over the past four years, such as “Black Lives Matter.” It did not come up only recently.
Yang Jiechi, director of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission Office for China addresses the US delegation at the opening session of US-China talks at the Captain Cook Hotel in Anchorage, Alaska on March 18, 2021. – China’s actions “threaten the rules-based order that maintains global stability,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Thursday at the opening of a two-day meeting with Chinese counterparts in Alaska. (Photo by Frederic J. BROWN / POOL / AFP) (Photo by FREDERIC J. BROWN/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
Blinken countered that in his discussion with allies, he was hearing “deep satisfaction that the United States is back, that we’re re-engaged with our allies and partners,” and “deep concern about some of the actions your government is taking.”
He added that a “hallmark” of American “leadership” was that the U.S. was willing to admit its mistakes — that it was engaged in “a constant quest to form a more perfect union,” but confronted its challenges “openly” and “transparently.”
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is How Not to Be a Sh!thole Country: Lessons from South Africa. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
National SecurityPoliticsBlack Lives MatterChinahuman rightsJake SullivanTony Blinken
"We must never substitute a doctrine of Black supremacy for white supremacy. For the doctrine of Black supremacy is as dangerous as white supremacy," King had argued.
The Democrats, the media, and the Southern Poverty Law Center have adopted Muhammad’s position over King’s position, rejecting the wrongness of black supremacism.
Southern Poverty Law Center Stops Monitoring Black Hate Groups Because of ‘Equity’
Giving racists a pass in the name of anti-racism.
Tue Feb 9, 2021
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
The Southern Poverty Law Center claims it’s dedicated to fighting hate. But some things are more important than fighting hate.
Like “equity”.
In the name of equity, the SPLC announced that it’s shutting down its black nationalist hate groups category like the Nation of Islam. After “doing the internal work of anti-racism”, the SPLC will no longer list black racist hate groups because “the hate is not equal”.
Even racism requires its own equity.
The SPLC’s move dismantles the last remaining shred of credibility of the organization, but it also comes after Democrat politicians and activists, including Senator Cory Booker and Kamala Harris pressured the FBI to stop monitoring black nationalist hate groups before several murderous antisemitic attacks by members of the Black Hebrew Israelite hate group.
Despite these terrorist attacks, the pressure is still on in the media and among Democrat activists to keep the FBI from monitoring black supremacist and nationalist hate groups.
Activists had targeted the SPLC because, despite its bias, untrustworthiness, and sloppiness, its listings are widely used by law enforcement and by internet platforms deciding what qualifies as a hate group. The SPLC’s statement mainstreaming black supremacist hate groups repeatedly attacks the FBI and claims that these groups are actually the victims of law enforcement.
It also argues that black nationalist hate groups “are not made up of only Black individuals”.
“We reject federal law enforcement’s false and misleading contention regarding threats from Black separatists,” the SPLC statement insists. It pads this out with woke buzzwords and intersectional jargon to dodge the simple fact that it’s legitimizing black racist hate groups.
The SPLC had formerly tracked black nationalist hate groups through a ‘separatist’ category because a number of them, including the Nation of Islam, have wanted their own apartheid state. In its statement, the SPLC insists that there’s nothing wrong with racial secessionism.
“Black separatism was born out of valid anger against very real historical and systemic oppression” the SPLC argues. In Elijah Muhammad’s Message to the Blackman in America, the Nation of Islam leader explained that separatism was needed because white people were racially inferior “devils” and that "separation must come between god's people and the devil".
"Reverend King has made it clear that he never wants the black man to rule, because he knows it will be 'just as dangerous as white supremacy,'" Muhammad ranted. "This shows that all black people should disregard anything that a man like that says.”
"We must never substitute a doctrine of Black supremacy for white supremacy. For the doctrine of Black supremacy is as dangerous as white supremacy," King had argued.
The Democrats, the media, and the Southern Poverty Law Center have adopted Muhammad’s position over King’s position, rejecting the wrongness of black supremacism.
Democrat politicians like Senator Booker have insisted that black nationalist violence doesn’t exist. “You said both ends of the spectrum, as if there actually is a movement of black identity extremism: it's almost creating this reality,” Booker had berated the head of the FBI.
Even the Southern Poverty Law Center isn’t ready to adopt Booker’s imaginary woke world in which a century of violence never happened and the Black Liberation Army, the Black Hebrew Israelite terror attack in Booker’s own state, the murder of 5 police officers in Dallas, the NOI and its splinter groups, like YBMB, and the murder of Malcolm X, never actually existed.
We live in a time when the murders of 8 people, the assaults on hundreds more, and the wrecking of communities to the tune of $2 billion by Black Lives Matter can be described as “mostly peaceful”. But even the SPLC’s new antiracist equity mandate hasn’t made the leap.
The SPLC admits that “some Black nationalists have committed violence against Jewish communities, but those are fueled by antisemitism, not separatism”. And it will stop listing black nationalist groups by race, but class them under antisemitism and homophobia. But racial separatism and antisemitism are symptoms of the racist beliefs of black nationalism.
“The Jew is behind the integration movement, using the Negro as a tool,” Malcolm X, Muhammad’s disciple, had told the head of a local KKK group and a Democrat candidate.
The NOI’s racialist texts insist that America is evil because its immigrants “came from the lower class of European people” followed by Asian immigrants who created “one of the most mixed people” because they had “freedom to worship” and were not compelled to be Muslims.
Black nationalists copied white nationalist beliefs and just flipped the races. That’s why the Nation of Islam and other black nationalist groups have worked with the KKK and Neo-Nazis.
The racism revisionists insist that black supremacists are fundamentally different than white supremacists, but they never explain how they’re different in their beliefs, only their root causes.
The Left swears by its sociology of root causes, but root excuses don't change beliefs.
White supremacists and black supremacists have the same basic beliefs, they’ve worked together, and they have the same apartheid state goals. The only difference is that the Southern Poverty Law Center excuses one and attacks the other. That’s only defensible if you believe that some kinds of racism are justified while others are not, and that the only real racism is power.
And that’s what the SPLC falsely claims, “in our endeavor for racial justice and equity, it is imperative that we adopt an understanding of racism grounded in nuance and the realities of racial power dynamics. Racism in America is historical, systemic and structural.”
Spot the nuance and racial power dynamics in black nationalist Stokely Carmichael declaring that, “I’ve never admired a white man, but the greatest of them, to my mind, was Hitler.”
Or Farrakhan calling Hitler ''a very great man.''
The SPLC’s Marxist critical race theory analysis of racism reduces it to power dynamics. Redefining racism as a “systemic” phenomenon replaces actual racism with renaming San Francisco schools that have acronyms to fight “white supremacy”. And then the SPLC can’t even pretend to be tracking hate groups, only those groups that it deems part of the system.
The absurdity of one of the wealthiest non-profits in the country (that has “poverty” in its name) pretending that the trailer park dwellers of the Klan represent “systemic racism” while insisting that Farrakhan, who got his photo taken with Obama at a Congressional Black Caucus event, is a helpless victim, takes the discrediting of what’s left the SPLC’s credibility to a new level.
The SPLC refuses to use the term “black nationalist” or “black supremacist” to describe black supremacist hate groups like the NOI which, literally, insist that they are the master race.
Elijah Muhammad’s Message to the Blackman in America laid out the creation story of the “white race” as coming from a mad scientist named Yakub who discovered there were "two people in him, and that one was black, the other brown" and "he could make the white, which he discovered was the weaker of the black germ" in a breeding program to make "brown” people.
Nation of Islam theology claims that "after the first 200 years, Mr. Yakub had done away with the black people, and all were brown. After another 200 years, he had us all yellow or red" and then finally "an all-pale white race of people" who were “made by nature a liar and a murderer”.
White people, Asians, and Indians, and most black people, according to black nationalists are illegitimate races, with white people, who are the least black, being the most evil.
This isn’t mere separatism. If that’s not racial supremacism, what is?
The Southern Poverty Law Center, founded by a Klansman’s lawyer, which has falsely accused many conservative organizations, including the David Horowitz Freedom Center, of racism has finally made its peace with racism in the name of antiracism.
Analyzing Kamala's handwriting: A bigger ego than Obama?
Kamala Harris, she of the never-far cackle and the constant pantsuit affectation, is a few heartbeats away from the presidency, after all. Her inner workings, as manifested in her day-to-day penmanship, are thus of more than interest.
While her cursive writing, excerpted here and there from documents scribbled during or after meetings in her past affiliations in California, indicate a grounded, mindful person, her swooping descenders show a flair and exuberance that indicate an appetitive person, someone given to emotional excess and sexual interest. Her hard-inked words indicate a forceful, no shilly-shallying personality who wants to be understood, without any doubt of what she wants.
She does not appear as tentative as her W.H. mate does in his wavering, weak, tentative pennings, for which we're not quite sure we're grateful, because neither person in the people's House is ideal, as the first fortnight regrettably demonstrates in spades.
This pairing has not brought about anything remotely like "unity," although it is true that Kamala Harris, the unliked first candidate to drop out of the presidential sweepstakes, has never made that great a declaration about unity, either for or against, though Ms. Harris's announcement on the Colbert program over a year ago did seem to support the continuation of violence and rioting in our major cities, which, she announced with careful enunciation to a shocked audience, "will continue, even after the election." "And they should," she ended ominously, putting to nuanced rest any thought that she might be in favor of riot cessation and the turbulence, arson, maiming, and destruction these her supporters were "parenting" in city after city, some hundreds of such violent explosions in one year, unstoppered by any Democrat, unstemmed by Ms. Harris.
In fact, Ms Harris was on record raising millions to bail out the functionally terroristic brutes of BLM and unstopped fascistic Antifa. For the small businesses razed, burnt to the ground, perhaps never to rebuild, she had not a syllable of empathy or remorse.
Not really a recommendation for sympathetic next-but-one country leader.
Her signature, however, indicates a wild sense of her own privilege, inimitable value, and ego.
In her regular script, though, her initial "K" is beyond histrionic, swelling and swooping all over the page, bearing little resemblance to the lessons taught in grade school on how to formulate a capital "K" or, for that matter, the letter "H."
If you did not know initially that her name is Kamala, you would not be able to discern in fact what her name was, since it in no way resembles a "K." In that it reveals a proclivity for drama, as the woman does in real life; it demonstrates that this is an overweening ambitious person. The residual "H" is also indecipherable, as the writer clearly has a well developed sense of who cares what you think? in her critically important signature.
She is unwilling to relinquish her place on the paper, as evidenced by her peculiar scrawled "H" — or whatever that line drawing represents. The final touch is the strongly aggressive dot or smudged point as the act of aggressive finish.
The body of her script, however, shows someone with firm grip on her wants and wishes. She does not drift from the center line, neither above nor below, in the grouping of her letters.
In her "f" formations, moreover, we see the makings of a writer, as she forms figure eights with each "f" formed. As she underlines, crowds words together in notes, she indicates opportunism, parsimony, a willingness to skip steps and make things easier for herself, not something most people would argue with, incidentally, but also not something all persons manifest so obviously in their writing.
Her "t" crossings show a relatively balanced ego (contrasting with her actual signature) but show a tendency to dictatorial behavior. Many of her "t" crossings have barely any tail to the left, and much firm extension to the right. A bit of pushiness, dictatorial impulse.
In that her letters are smoothly formed, she shows a healthy physiognomy as reflected in the arches and garlands of her words. On the other hand, her margins are niggardly to left, a little better to right, indicating she is limited in her generosity instincts. Spaces between words are larger than usual, showing that Kamala's thought processes are orderly but not blizzard-fast. Her straight up-and-down slant gives us the telltale that she is not overly emotional, takes herself as independent, not given to bending over backwards in circumstances others might yield.
All in all, she does not appear to be a psychopath, which is one worry people could entertain in observing her ambition. She seems stable on the whole, though a drama queen in the clinch, shown by her assertive, no-holds-barred signature flourishes.
Would she be the ideal choice for president, should anything happen to the current disturbing White house occupant?
Not really.
But then, neither would we have selected the octogenarian-manque occupant, himself, based on his handwriting — and dictatorial behavior and orders since his heedless ascent to the people's House in January 2021.
And hearkening back to Obama's space-cadet egotistical hand, we see how that egotist worked out, just as his clarion cursive suggested would be the case.
Ted Cruz Asks Impeachment Managers if Kamala Harris Incited Riots from Black Lives Matter Protests
U.S. Senate
Volume 90%
12 Feb 20212,841
3:33
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) submitted a question during the fourth day of the Senate impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump asking if language Vice President Kamala Harris used in 2020 regarding Black Lives Matter protests is considered incitement given the impeachment managers’ “proposed standard” for incitement.
Cruz’s question began, “While violent riots were raging, Kamala Harris said on national TV, ‘They’re not gonna let up, and they should not,’” quoting viral comments then-Sen. Harris (D-CA) made on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert last June in reference to nationwide Black Lives Matter protests.
The protests, which were sparked by the death of George Floyd at the hands of police in May, were largely peaceful but, in many instances, ended up devolving into destructive riots throughout the country that included vandalism, looting, fires, violence, injury, and in some cases even death over the course of several months in 2020.
“And she also raised money to bail out violent rioters,” Cruz’s question continued in reference to the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF) Harris urged her Facebook and Twitter followers to support in June 2020.
If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota. https://t.co/t8LXowKIbw
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) June 1, 2020
The MFF is an organization that seeks to combat cash bail by posting bail for detained individuals. The fund received a massive influx of donations amid last year’s protests and promoted its mission as many arrests were being made of those who went beyond protesting to allegedly violate the law.
Although Harris asked her followers to “help post bail for those protesting,” the fund’s website states that it does “not make determinations of bail support based on the crimes that individuals are alleged to have committed,” and furthermore, the fund has set free from jail individuals accused of egregious crimes. Last year, the MFF posted bail for a father accused of molesting his teenage daughter, a man accused of sexually assaulting his teenage niece, a man accused of sexually assaulting an eight-year-old, and a woman accused of stabbing her aunt, as the Daily Caller reported in November.
Cruz’s question continued, “Using the manager’s proposed standard, is there any coherent way for Donald Trump’s words to be incitement and Kamala Harris’s words not to be incitement?”
Lead House impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) responded to the question by saying on the chamber floor that he was “not familiar” with the quote from Harris that Cruz had referenced; however, Trump attorney Michael T. van der Veek rejected that notion during his own response to Cruz, saying his team had given video to the House’s team of Harris’s quote and that they had played the video three times that day.
Raskin also said that despite not recognizing the quote, he finds it “absolutely unimaginable that Vice President Harris would ever incite violence or encourage or promote violence. Obviously, it’s completely irrelevant to the proceeding at hand, and I will allow her to defend herself.”
In a related question during the trial, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked on behalf of himself, Cruz, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS), and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND), “Does a politician raising bail for rioters encourage more rioting?” A representative from Trump’s legal team replied, “Yes.”
Watch:
U.S. Senate
Volume 90%
Write to Ashley Oliver at aoliver@breitbart.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment