Dissecting Kamala Harris's Closing Argument Speech

Tuesday night, VP Kamala Harris gave the most divisive speech by a presidential candidate since I started voting in 1974. (That's 50 years ago for those of you in Rio Linda.) According to this transcript, her first mention of Donald Trump came in a sentence where she said "He is the person who stood at this very spot nearly four years ago and sent an armed mob to the United States Capitol to overturn the will of the people in a free and fair election – an election that he knew he lost."

That's an outright lie. Yes, it was roughly 4 years ago that Trump spoke at the Ellipse. That's the most accurate part of the sentence. After that, it goes downhill fast. For instance, he didn't send "an armed mob" to Capitol Hill. None of the people charged with entering Capitol Hill on Jan. 6, 2021 had a gun. None of the people convicted of their charges was charged with a gun crime. How can President Trump be guilty of sending an armed mob "to overturn the will of the people in a free and fair election" when nobody had a gun?

That was the first of many of VP Harris's lies. Here's another Kamala's lies:

Donald Trump has told us his priorities for a second term. He has an enemies list of people he intends to prosecute. He says that one of his highest priorities is to set free the violent extremists who insulted those law enforcement officers on January 6.
I've never heard of anyone having proof of this enemies list. I've heard the Democrats' accusation of the existence of the list but I haven't seen proof of the existence of this llst. Without the existence of the list, who is there to prosecute?

Kamala's biggest whopper

Donald Trump intends to use the United States military against American citizens who simply disagree with him, people he calls, quote, “the enemy from within.”
That tells you what VP Harris thinks of the military. When soldiers enlist, they take an oath to protect the U.S. Constitution. People who disagree with each other without committing violence against each other are protected by the First Amendment. Any attorney general, with the possible exception of thosoe from California, knows that orders that are unconstitutional are unenforceable!

As for "the enemy from within," President Trump was talking ultra-specifically about the leaders of the Deep State, not citizens who attend school board meetings to protect their children. A perfect example of how morally bankrupt VP Harris and President Biden are is found in the story of Mark Hauck, a Catholic pro-life activist. A Planned Parenthood employee pushed Hauck's son, who was praying on the sidewalk across the street from a Planned Parenthood office.

Hauck pushed the Planned Parenthood employee in defense of his son. The Biden-Harris-Garland DOJ visited Hauck's rural home at 6:00 am. Actually, a 20-man SWAT team showed up with long guns to arrest Hauck at his home. The DOJ tried the case. When the case went to the jury, the jury deliberated for less than an hour before returning a not guilty verdict against Mr. Hauck.

Did VP Harris criticize the DOJ's excessive force in arresting Mr. Hauck? No, she didn't. Apparently, she didn't think it was that big a deal. The president should be both the chief law enforcement officer in the nation as well as the person who upholds our values. Mark Hauck explains the arrest experience in this interview:

In this instance, the FBI was the enemy from within. Arresting a man while covering him with SWAT rifles is excessive. Donald Trump supposedly has an enemies list. VP Harris wants him to never serve our nation again. The FBI threatens a pro-life activist, arrests and prosecutes him, the man is found not guilty but VP Harris hasn't said a thing.

Harris wants to Unite Us?

VP Harris will say anything to anyone at any time to get elected. She's as into uniting the U.S. as Joe Biden was at his inaugural speech. VP Harris needs to be fired.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue...
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp...
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio...
Read more