Kamala Harris has, on camera, admitted to possessing and smoking marijuana. She stressed that she even “inhaled,” apparently referencing Bill Clinton’s weak defense of his use of the substance. Regardless of what any of us think about whether it should or shouldn’t be legal, it is in fact a class 5 narcotic and it’s use ( other than in strictly controlled research ) is a felony according to federal law. Shouldn’t her admitted felony activity disqualify her for the office of (Vice) President?
Categories
11 replies on “Kamala ineligible for office?”
Marion Barry was reelected after serving time.
Cameltoe may or may not be lying to be cool.
A felony conviction, in a court of law, is required, not pillow talk with friendly journalists.
That’s the first time I’ve heard the nickname “camel toe” applied to “heels up harris”. I love camel toe, just not hers.
Marijuana is not a narcotic.
Just the thought of “heels up Harris” having any sort of authority over me or any body else in this country scares the crap out of me. Come on TRUMP legal team! Nail their asses to the wall.
I haven’t had a full night’s sleep for 2+ weeks! Genuinely concerned…!
Perhaps the statue of limitations would apply.
I’m on the side of those who think drugs should be legal. Unlike most of them, however, I also think that there should be no government involvement. No free needles, no rehab programs, no any of that. So I don’t hold her pot usage against Harris. Anyway, there are so many bigger reasons that disqualify her from holding any job higher than OnlyFans model – and by now she’d fail even at that – that the pot thing isn’t necessary.
I’m not sure about the statute of limitation. I guess I was just hoping there would be some legal way to deny her access to any more power.
As far as I know the only qualifications for VP are the same ones for P found in the Constitution itself. I don’t recall anything in there about felonies being a disqualification for office. I’m not even sure if they’re enough to impeach. (Not that those rules apply anymore thanks to the Democrats.)
There may be a federal statute somewhere which lays out disqualifications for the Executive, but that would require me to do some research, sorry. 🙂
The real answer to your question though is that of course it should disqualify her. It should also have disqualified her for her office as a prosecutor, and possibly for her law license altogether.
But this particular felony is, unfortunately, a non-starter. Attitudes have changed, laws have changed, and almost no one would perceive that as fair.
It would be a delicious poetic justice, though, given how many people she locked up for small drug possessions.
Agreed!
I definitely agree about changing attitudes; mine have changed a lot as well. And I’m sure the Dems wouldn’t hold her to the Rule of Law anyway.