Former corrupt California Attorney General turned US Senator, Kamala Harris (D-CA), told MSNBC Wednesday that allowing President Trump to choose a replacement for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy would mean the “destruction of the Constitution of the United States.”  What she fails to understand is that not only is her statement an attack on the Constitution, but her party has done nothing but attack the Constitution for decades.

Listen to this criminal.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?

  • Should Jim Acosta have gotten his press pass back?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

With the announcement of retirement by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, Harris was asked what she thought would happen with another Supreme Court pick by President Donald Trump would mean.

“We’re looking at a destruction of the Constitution of the United States as far as I can tell based on all the folks that he’s been appointing thus far for lifetime appointments,” Harris said on “Hardball” with Chris Matthews. “He’s been appointing ideologues, he’s been appointing people who have refused to agree that Brown v. Board of Education is settled law.”

Ideologues is not necessarily bad if their ideology is based on the law, something that Harris' is clearly not.

However, she does misrepresent Trump's appointment of Wendy Vitter.

Lauretta Brown writes:

Sen. Harris’s claim that one of Trump’s judicial nominees “refused to agree that Brown v. Board of Education is settled law” is an inaccurate characterization of judicial nominee Wendy Vitter’s confirmation hearing in April.

Vitter, the nominee for the Eastern District of Louisiana, in a manner not unusual for judicial nominees, declined to provide her personal views on Supreme Court precedent during her confirmation hearing. That meant that she declined to comment on Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, and other cases decided by the Supreme Court.

However, when asked if there were any cases that she could say “were correctly decided by the United States Supreme Court,” Vitter clearly praised the reasoning behind Brown v. Board of Education as “the right decision.”

Brown v. Board of Education is far from "settled law."  First, settled law is conducted by Congress, not the Judiciary Branch, and the fact of the matter is that education is not the business of the federal government.  Segregation for whatever reason is a right protected under the First Amendment.  Since Congress can "make no law... abridging... the right of the people peaceably to assemble," then there is no law to rule on by the Supreme Court regarding segregation.

Lest you are too squeamish to understand here, Congress has no more right to force the states or local schools to make Muslims and Christians attend the same school than they do those with different skin colors, and we've seen the result of forcing such actions on local school systems in terms of costs and certain cultural clashes.

Does that mean I'm racist?  Of course, not.  I have no problem with blacks and whites going to school together provided they go by their own choice to the same school, not be forced by government to do it.

Harris then took to Twitter to voice the same message.

"With fundamental rights in the balance, the American people, who vote in fewer than 4 months, deserve to have their voices heard on this SCOTUS vacancy. We should not vote on confirmation until they have voted at the ballot box," she tweeted, forgetting that the people just voted to put the current president in office less than two years ago.  Those people's voices were heard, she's just not listening.

"We've already seen the President's list of potential SCOTUS nominees. They are complete non-starters. The American people deserve a Supreme Court justice who will fight to protect their rights, not conservative ideologues," Harris added in a follow-up tweet.

No, the American people deserve a Supreme Court that upholds the Constitution, which was written to be followed so that rights would be protected.  They do not need a SCOTUS that protects made up rights such as Harris and her Communist friends in Congress believe in like redefining marriage to include sodomites, promoting sodomy, baby murder, infringements on the rights of gun owners and the list goes on and on.

Remember, this is a woman who advanced legislation to attack a man who exposed interstate crimes of Planned Parenthood and their partners for the unlawful sale of murdered babies' body parts.

In reporting on David Daleiden and the Center for Medical Progress and their motion to remove a corrupt judge from the case against them, I wrote:

[Judge William H.] Orrick was also behind introducing now-Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) at a fundraiser when she was seeking to be California's attorney general.

“I raised money and sponsored an event for the campaign of Kamala Harris for Attorney General in 2009, before I joined the Department of Justice," Orrick said.

What's interesting is that Harris defeated then-Los Angeles district attorney Steven Cooley, whose law firm, Steven Cooley & Associates, now represents Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, who are facing 15 felony counts under California's pretended law of protecting "confidential" conversations.

“Then-Attorney General, now U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris, wielded unprecedented police power against a true American journalist while civil suits were already pending in Federal District Court concerning the same video-recordings,” says Cooley. “Public Records Act requests filed by SCA reveal the Attorney General’s real interest, in this case, is entirely political, meant to manipulate the law to do the bidding of their benefactors at Planned Parenthood.”

We know that Harris and her office conspired with Planned Parenthood to introduce the legislation to attack Daleiden and his team for exposing their corruption and crimes via the means of undercover investigative videos, a clear attack on freedom of the press.

The charges against Daleiden and Merritt came on March 28, 2017 via the new California Attorney General, Xavier Becerra.

Both Becerra and Harris received contributions from Planned Parenthood and Harris took in a whopping $39,855 from the Abortion Policy/Pro-Abortion Rights lobby group, according to OpenSecrets.org.  She also garnered $15,000 from Planned Parenthoodfor her attorney general campaign.

Dalieden has already had charges against him dismissed in 2016.  Now, he is continually being harassed by the state of California.  These people have no shame.  They murder the most innocent among us in ways that would make the Islamic State blush, then hypocritically fear for the lives of their hitmen and women for simply letting them speak with their own mouths, and then seek to silence those who are exposing their crimes.

You see, Kamala Harris is nothing more than a common criminal.  She went after Daleiden at the behest of other criminal Democrats in Washington while covering for the hitmen of Planned Parenthood and their associates.  One could say she isn't even common since she has held offices in which she should have known the law, but broke it in order to further a criminal enterprise's agenda and to facilitate the continued murder of unborn Americans.

I have to pity for Ms. Harris.  Her attacks on the Constitution and law-abiding citizens like David Daleiden should result in her arrest, charges and justice being brought to bear on her, not her receiving a posh seat in the US Senate and pontificating on the Constitution, as though she knows what it says or means.  In fact, I'll bet she couldn't even recite from memory the first ten amendments, something that should be a requirement since her job is to uphold said Constitution.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.