Kamala Harris exposed
Aspects of her Fox News interview with Bret Baier
Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, was interviewed by Bret Baier / Fox News on Oct. 16th 2024.
Sure, Donald Trump did a lot of things wrong. First, when Trump became President in 2017, he should have fired Anthony Fauci before doing anything else. Remember: The slogan "Fire Fauci" is very old - the third "Plandemic" movie by Mikki Willis has some footage about such a movement. And it was *always* clear that there was no Corona Pandemic - there were only a computer model of some amino acids and a "test" which - according to its inventor Kary Mullis - "can find anything in anybody". There wasn't anything unusual concerning diseases or deaths - until the "corona measures" with lockdowns etc. started, and esp. after the vexxinations. And it was clear for centuries, that vaccinations, propagated mainly by the freemason Edward Jenner and now an important part of globalists' agenda (see WHO, "Rotary challenge" etc.), are neither safe nor effective regarding the prevention of any disease. On the contrary: While vexxines had no health advantage whatsoever, there were lot of "side effects", i. e. the true effects of vaccines. Nevertheless, Donald Trump initiated and praised "Operation Warp Speed". Pope Leo XII. called vaccines a "blasphemy", and Pope Leo XIII. consulted parish priest Sebastian Kneipp - a known anti-vaxxer. The German physician Carl Georg Gottlob Nittinger was the most prominent German anti-vaxxer of the 19th century. An English edition of "Dr. C.G.G. Nittinger's Evils of vaccination" published by Chr. Charles. Schieferdecker can be found on the "National Library of Medicine" (http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/64931290R). It begins:
##########################
»Vaccination belongs not to the "science," it is neither a "remedium," nor even a "remedium anceps." It rests "a priori" upon ignorance; should everything that happens afterwards in the world, in and on man, belong to Medicine? My scientific conscience is not so wide. What nobody understands, is for nobody a science. Vaccination is mere "usus." What nobody knows, so much knows everybody; in vaccination there are neither wise-men nor lay-men, but only vaccine practitioners and vaccine carriers ; everybody who has five senses, and perceives the consequences of vaccination, or feels them even on himself, has a perfect right to judge of it. It belongs therefore, more perhaps, than any other object, on the broadest basis of publicity, before that public which offers its skin for it, and lays at stake its welfare and life. While Medicine slept, vaccination has crept illegally into it; it has borrowed the mask of science, aud is neither founded in reason, for poison poisons the healthy, and kills the sickly; nor in nature, for the instinct abhors it.
##########################
Now, the recent Harris interview confirmed again what must have been already clearly known to all: Harris must be prevented. She is totally unsuited for the Presidency, and in my German sermon for Oct. 20th., I mention three aspects: 1. immigration, 2. transgender, 3. abortion. The video is German only, however a totally automatic translation (DeepL free) is added below.
Kamala Harris is completely unsuitable for the office of President of the USA, someone might think in view of her interview on October 16, 2024 with Bret Baier from Fox News. It is obvious that Harris is completely out of her depth - in an interview lasting less than half an hour, mind you. Harris repeatedly distracts from the actual topics at length, so that Baier has to help her get to the point again and again. And you have to expect self-control from heads of government, even in an interview. T-Online, otherwise not necessarily a mouthpiece for Donald Trump, quotes Trump's reaction in the report on the Harris interview: “Trump himself had hoped in advance that moderator Baier would not go easy on his rival. The ex-president was accordingly satisfied: “Great job by Bret Baier in the interview with the lying Kamala Harris,” the 78-year-old wrote on X. “She suffers from a massive and irreparable form of Trump Derangement Syndrome. So bad that she is barely able to talk about any subject other than the man who left the best economy ever...” The same T-Online article also quotes Carol Miller Swain, professor emeritus of political science and law: “Kamala Harris is committing suicide on national television right now. No editing in the world can save this disastrous interview.” A key sentence from Harris in the interview was, “We have an unworkable immigration system that needs to be fixed.” Well, the Democrat Party of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris had great opportunities for fixing it. So why is the system unworkable now? And what about the crimes committed by illegal immigrants? Harris refers to these as “tragic cases.” Is that helpful? If so, for whom? The truth is: In 2017, Harris had still proclaimed, “An undocumented immigrant is not a criminal.” In contrast, she said in the current interview: “I don't believe in decriminalizing border crossings, and I didn't do that as vice president either. I won't do it as president either.” How credible is Harris? Can Harris be trusted, can she be trusted? Another main topic of the interview was: “Gender reassignment of prisoners at taxpayers' expense.” Harris says she would follow the law in doing so. In 2022, Judge Nancy Jo Rosenstengel had claimed in a ruling that the “transgender rights of Cristina Nichole Iglesias” had been violated. The prison or taxpayers would therefore have to pay for transgender operations. But the Catholic Church unwaveringly upholds the principle: “God created man as male and female.” It may be that this quote from the Bible is being punished. Nevertheless, this is a very fundamental question: is the state allowed to do everything? Is the state above God? Do we have to obey people more than God? Do we have to give to the emperor what is God's? It is true that the Federal Republic of Germany explicitly and stubbornly disregards the opening words, the basis of its own Basic Law: “Conscious of its responsibility before God”. This is documented in great detail in a major criminal case that the FRG opened in 2011 with the support of the group of the so-called Second Vatican Council with the obviously absolutely false and, moreover, completely unfounded accusation of “abuse of titles” in the so-called indictment (Dorsten District Court - 7 Ls-29 Js 74/08-43/11). After all, the judge himself - albeit only at the instigation of the innocent defendant - later expressly confessed that it was “completely irrelevant to the trial whether the defendant was right or wrong.” But many decades earlier, in 1958, Klaus Mörsdorf, the most important German canon lawyer at the time, had already commented in detail on both the breach of the concordat and the forced civil marriage of the FRG. Another terrible low point for the FRG was the Federal Constitutional Court's approval of the impunity of abortions. Constitutional judge Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde wrote in the Vatican II magazine “Konradsblatt” (March 2001): “As a Catholic, I have a clear position on abortion, which is almost entirely in line with the teachings of the Church. But my conscience did not urge me to assert this view with all my strength in the Senate's deliberations, but rather to ask about it independently of this view and to stand up for what the Basic Law itself says in its various guarantees on this problem or can be inferred from it, even if this falls short of my Catholic conviction, possibly even contradicts it. Why did my conscience speak out in this way and not otherwise? When I took on the office of judge, I swore to uphold the constitution and the law as a just judge and to do justice to everyone. This and this alone was my task and duty in this office, not the representation of Catholic interests. And I had taken this oath with the religious affirmation 'so help me God'.” So according to the FRG, you are not allowed to act in accordance with the Basic Law, i.e. “in the awareness of your responsibility before God”, and then perhaps you say “so help me God” in mockery and derision of God. Although abortion was not discussed in the current Fox interview with Kamala Harris, the Tagesschau reported on July 30, 2024: “In fact, Vice President Kamala Harris is putting pressure on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in the US election campaign with the issue of abortion. In her first campaign appearance as the likely Democratic presidential candidate, she stated that she trusts women to make decisions about their own bodies and that the government should not dictate what they should do. And in her official campaign ad, she also makes the issue one of her main concerns. Her advantage: she can credibly assure that women's rights are close to her heart. According to the White House, she was the first female vice president to visit an abortion clinic. During her time as a US senator, she consistently campaigned for abortion rights.” Can Harris be trusted to defend the right to life, that she also cares about the rights of defenceless, innocent children? Pope Pius XI wrote in 1930 in the Encyclical on Marriage Casti Connubii: “Finally, rulers and legislators must not forget that it is for the state authority to protect the lives of the innocent by appropriate laws and penalties, and all the more so the less the endangered life can protect itself. And here the children, whom the mother still carries under her heart, come first.” Voters must not forget that they can only vote for suitable candidates. But whatever the outcome of the election in America, the law of God remains absolutely binding for everyone, without exception, as the inviolable supreme norm. Anyone who disregards the rights of God also disregards the rights of man, because man only develops properly as a human being when he acts “in the awareness of his responsibility before God”. Amen.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)