“You know what he says he’ll do? Terminate the Constitution United States. Let me remind folks: You know what’s in the Constitution of United States? The Fourth Amendment, which protects you against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Fifth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment. And he’s going to terminate the Constitution of the United States? Which in most of those amendments, one thing or another, was about a movement spurred by black people to ensure that we would be equally protected under the law. Come on.”
—Kamala Harris, lying her metaphorical head off, fearmongering and generally demonstrating why those voting for this unprincipled demagogue should wear bags over their heads forever more.
If I have to explain all that is wrong with that idiotic statement, you’re not smart enough to be coming here. Try this instead.
Althouse retrieved the Trump riff that spawned this Big Lie, #3,761 by my count, Trump’s use of “termination” and “Constitution” in the context of dealing with a “false and fraudulent election”while ranting on Truth Social:
“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”
[Did you ever think you would see the headline “Five takeaways from Kamala Harris’s interview with Charlamagne Tha God“in the New York Times during a Presidential campaign?]
Ethics Alarms 
Aside from the general nonsense of her blather, does anyone think it accidental that she skipped the First & Second?
Does she know what they are to be able to accidentally skip them?
A valid question, considering the ignorance exhibited in her bizarre claim that most of the ones she mentioned were about “a movement spurred by black people“. It would be a stretch to even assign that to the 14th.
That is especially obtuse on her part, considering that the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791, and the 14th and 15th Amendments were ratified in 1868 and 1870, respectively. both of which had nothing to do with the Civil Rights Movement, notwithstanding the President’s complete lack of political and constitutional authority to terminate the Constitution.
jvb
Who was it that denied that the Second Amemdment was absolute?
Hilariously on point, the lead page of nick.com is “Kids pick the president”
Remember, this is Democrat-speak for “WE are going to terminate the Constitution of the United States”. This is just like they say that Trump will weaponize the DOJ, well, who weaponized the DOJ? They did! Now they are saying that ‘Trump’ will use the military on the public. Well, who just changed the military’s protocols to allow them the kill US citizens when ‘assisting law enforcement’?
I just heard Harris tell a Pennsylvania crowd that “even those who worked for Trump” say he’s “unfit to be President.” They really and truly have nothing. Imagine the brass to use that attack when you enabled a President for a full term who was (and is) literally unfit according the the standards of the 25th Amendment—and referring to someone who already has a full term of apparently fit service as POTUS. Trump is Vlad Tepes, and we need to be able to kill unborn babies. That’s it. That’s the entire Democratic platform. Astounding.
I think the approved Dem response would be along the lines of, “Joe was simply demented. Trump’s unstable!”
Nobody just changed the military’s protocols to allow them the kill US citizens when ‘assisting law enforcement’. Took a bit of digging, but I found what RFK Jr. said gave the Pentagon power — for the first time in history — to use lethal force to kill Americans on U.S. soil who protest government policies. It’s DoD Directive 5240.01. Nothing in that directive is new. Use of lethal force is mentioned, but it refers the reader to DoD Directive 5210.56. Covers a lot of things, including the use of lethal force. It’s very, very narrow. Basically, lethal force is only authorized if any less than lethal force would unreasonably increase the danger to DoD personnel.
Finding and reading these directives is more difficult than just reading a tweet saying something you’d rather be true, because it’s an easy talking point to use against your opponents. However, we’re still the underdog. We have to have everything in order to minimize anything that the left can leverage against us. We can’t get away with being sloppy. It’s not easy to check every claim, but it’s necessary work.
Of course, the opposing viewpoint is “Incompetent people that Trump fired feel he is unfit to be President” and “Senile President didn’t fire anyone even after disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal and humiliating domestic disaster responses and incompetent Vice-President didn’t notice anything wrong”.
I can imagine a very good campaign ad coming out of that statement.
Apparently, when it comes to political rhetoric, the Democrats in general and Harris in particular have not only crossed the Rubicon, but dammed it up and surrounded the resulting impoundment with condominiums and abortion clinics.
This is not directly related to the current post, but does concern the Harris-Trump cage match.
You will recall that after their debate in September, there was a tweet from an alleged whistleblower and an affidavit that ABC & Harris rigged the debate.
I just watched an update on this on the Megyn Kelly show — she had covered this story in some detail back in September.
You will recall that the whistleblower stated he had sent a copy of the affidavit, certified mail, to Speaker Mike Johnson. He had also sent himself a copy also by certified mail to have verified evidence that he had sent it before the debate actually happened.
Well, Kelly has been in contact with the Speaker’s office. They have told her that they did not receive a copy of this affidavit. There were one or two other items she cited, but the bottom line is that the alleged whistleblower has dropped off the face of the earth.
It was a potentially explosive story, but apparently it has turned out to be a nothing burger.
I applaud Megyn Kelly for being forthright with her listeners. It would have been an exceptionally juicy story, but ….. it was not to be.
Unless the whistleblower is wearing concrete shoes at the bottom of Lake Michigan.
Well, there is always that.
Of course, then they would’ve had to send someone to burgle Mike Johnson’s office to get that affidavit.
Hmm, it would be asking too much for the Speaker’s office to be located in the Watergate hotel….