Kamala Harris advocates prosecuting Trump!

[real Cannabis calm]

CNN anchor Don Lemon confronted Kamala Harris at the Democratic debate over her previous statements saying that if she's president, she'll have the DOJ prosecute Trump

CNN anchor Don Lemon confronted Sen. Kamala Harris of California during night two of the second Democratic debate about previous statements she's made suggesting that if she's president, she would have the Justice Department prosecute President Donald Trump.

Harris said last month that the DOJ would have "no choice" but to charge Trump with obstruction-of-justice if she wins the 2020 election.
https://www.businessinsider.com/don-lemon-kamala-harris-doj-would-prosecute-trump-democratic-debate-2019-8


While slightly toned down, in her more recent comment, Senator Harris still endorses holding Trump accountable for 10 counts of Obstruction of Justice:

"I would never direct the Department of Justice to do whatever it believes it should do," Harris said. "Listen, we all watched [the former special counsel Robert Mueller's] testimony. I read the report. There are ten clear incidents of obstruction of justice by this president and he needs to be held accountable."

[redstatebluegirl]

1. I sent her money early on but no more.

I do not understand the "strategy" of going after Biden by badmouthing Obama. I'm done with her and a few of the others after last night.

[mr_lebowski]

2. Not really what she said, esp. since she's a prosecutor by trade

but most definitely will NOT be doing the 'prosecuting' personally, if she is President.

Also, she actually made clear she wouldn't tell DoJ how to conduct their biz (unlike the F****** CRIMINAL now squatting in the WH).

As such, the headline is wrong.

[real Cannabis calm]

5. you're correct, I'll change the headline. thanks

[mr_lebowski]

9. There you go! Well done :) nt

[real Cannabis calm]

11. The headline change also explains the accurate question by stonecutter357

[stonecutter357]

3. As president, Kamala Harris will prosecute Trump ?

[redstateblues]

4. She peaked at the first debate. She is sliding backward since then

The more I hear her the less I like.

[lapfog_1]

6. As President she should not say a word...

nominate a fair and qualified AG, and if that person wants to prosecute Trump based on the evidence, that's fine.

I know we all hate the Orange Shitler... but we can't do what Trump and his moronic deplorables want to do... prosecute their political enemies.

Harris can vote for removal if the House impeaches the bastard.

She can talk all she wants about why she thinks he has committed criminal acts... but only while she is a candidate and Senator. She should NOT say (no matter how it is red meat for the base) "As PRESIDENT I will prosecute Donald J Trump."

[berksdem]

7. After her performance last

night she lost my vote.

[Kahuna7]

8. Totally improper to say that. AS a former AG, she should know better.

This is why I can't get behind her even as VP. She says things that will come back to bite not only her, but the party at large.

[mr_lebowski]

10. She didn't actually say that per the quote in the OP ...

OP has updated the headline to more accurately reflect this ...

Though even the quote (if accurate) is a gaffe:

"I would never direct the Department of Justice to do whatever it believes it should do"

The word 'never' should in fact be absent, or replaced with 'always'.

[Kahuna7]

13. I'm not relying on the OP. I'm relying on comments she made in June..

that had KHivers high fiving and exclaiming was a bad ass she is. I even got flamed on DU last week when I pointed out no candidate should be calling for trump's prosecution for that is the job of the justice department. Period.

While Democrats in Congress are at loggerheads over whether to begin impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump, Democrats on the campaign trail have been less constrained in their opinion that the president has committed crimes—and should be charged as soon as he is out of office. Jumping on the Lock Him Up bandwagon is California senator Kamala Harris, who told the NPR Politics Podcast in an interview that aired Wednesday that the Department of Justice would have “no choice” but to prosecute Trump once he is no longer president.

“I believe that they would have no choice and that they should, yes,” the former California attorney general said, outlining episodes of apparent obstruction of justice described in the Mueller report. The special counsel declined to recommend charges against Trump, citing Justice Department guidelines. But, Harris said, the Justice Department should not hesitate to charge a former president. “The facts and the evidence will take the process where it leads,” she said. “I do believe that we should believe Bob Mueller when he tells us essentially that the only reason an indictment was not returned is because of a memo in the Department of Justice that suggests you cannot indict a sitting president. But I’ve seen prosecution of cases on much less evidence.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/kamala-harris-prosecuting-donald-trump

[real Cannabis calm]

14. "Always" and "never" are both dangerous words...

In reality, those words only apply to the laws of science.

[Kahuna7]

17. I don't accept her attempt to for yet another...

Last edited Fri Aug 2, 2019, 06:44 AM - Edit history (1)

clean up on aisle 6. As I stated, as an former AG she knows better than to even suggest that she would urge in any way an investigation or prosecution of any private citizen.

[onetexan]

12. Mueller did say he thinks the Idiot can be indicted after he leaves office

so the DoJ of the new administration SHOULD prosecute him for obstruction & other crimes since these are quite serious. I don't get why people are upset at her. I'm not a big Kamala fan but what she said isn't wrong.

[uponit7771]

15. +1,

[Princetonian]

16. More evidence that Harris is not ready for prime time.

Bad move. Again.