About Your State Bar Profile - State Bar Of California: Fill & Download for Free

The answer by Andrew Tinker is right on!I’ve often answered many questions like this. Look in my profiles for similar answers.And like Andrew Tinker I’ve often many, many, many times included this great video from Regent Law Professor James Duane from Regents University School of Law. “Don’t talk to the Police”!Here are some tips! First and foremost you’ve probably heard this. “Ignorance” is not an excuse! So Empower yourself and know the law.Second, Presentation is everything.Who are you? Are you young, a teenager, do you dress like baggy pants, do you hang out with the questionable or wrong crowd.? Do you have any Gang Tat’s aka Tattoo’s, on your face, arms, neck? Do you have a Tear Drop tattoo or two near the outside corner of your eye?(BTW that Tattoo has meaning, the Tear Drop Tattoo means you’ve killed someone or committed a murder and shed a tear for killing them.)If you answered, “Yes”!You’re already at a disadvantage, because the cop will “Profile” you.Now, if your a normal average working stiff Joe, adult, average looking and not the above or don’t fit the above description! Then you’ve got some advantages!So here’s how you should reply back in this Conversation!Cop: “I will arrest you if you don’t answer my questions”?STEP 1:You: “I don’t consent to any Terry Stop, Terry v. Ohio” “which is an unlawful search and seizure; which includes any questioning”You: if you find that hard to remember, just say “I don’t consent to any Terry Stop or questioning”This was a Landmark case that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the police “may not unlawfully detain you, search you, seize your property in violation of your 4th Amendment rights!”There is an Exception: I should say there ARE some Exception(s) to this ruling: Called Exigent Circumstances; hot pursuit; crime in progress; OR your Consent.But since you said, You don’t consent above that eliminates that.STEP 2: Invoke your rights and there are TWO of them.Cop: “I will arrest you if you don’t answer my questions”?You: I don’t consent to a Terry Stop; I don’t answer questions.That’s my 5th Amendment rights!Right to remain silent and not answer any questions, and right against self-incrimination!Where the Cop replies: “oh you want to play that game huh!???” “or you think you know your rights???”You: “My rights are not a game to me?”Where the Cop replies: “why don’t you answer questions”You: I don’t consent to a Terry Stop; I don’t answer questions. (repeat this as many times as needed, andTIP: Do yourself a favor, COUNT how many times the Cop keeps trying to ask you a question, and remember because that will help you at Trial if it goes to that! you can respond: “I told the cop 8 times, 8 times I had to tell him I didn’t answer questions”STEP 3: Invoke your rights and this is the Second right!Cop: “I will arrest you if you don’t answer my questions”?You: I don’t consent to a Terry Stop; I don’t answer questions without my Attorney or my Legal Counsel present.BINGO! That one is the Charm. Now you’ve stopped him in his tracks.TIP: Do yourself a favor, COUNT how many times the Cop keeps trying to ask you a question, and remember because that will help you at Trial if it goes to that! you can respond: “I told the cop 8 times, 8 times I had to tell him I didn’t answer questions with out my attorney present”.And don’t ask him TELL HIM, YELL it if you have to, make a Scene! Don’t say this one in a Timid voice, like a little kid! Sound off like you got a Pair of Testicles!Practice it! “I DON’T ANSWER QUESTIONS WITH OUT MY LEGAL COUNSEL OR ATTORNEY PRESENT”; Say it over and over, and Count it, count how many times you had to tell him that; so you can tell the Judge and your attorney once you get one.Assume he’s going to detain you; Assume he’s going to handcuff you; assume you might spend a night in Jail! Assume he’s a CORRUPT BULLY COP who’s going to make a false arrest and false charges.Because here’s how it works.Once he arrests you, he’ll have to 1) File Charges; 2) Run those charges by his superior; 3) submit it to the DA (District Attorney) or (County Prosecutor) and he’ll have to answer, and the DA might drop all charges, at which time you can sue him for False Arrest; Especially Egregious “Under Color of Authority”!He in turn can also be arrested and fired from the police or as a deputy and charged with making a false arrest, submitting a false report, submitting a false report for prosecution!Here’s a Texas cop, who falsely arrested a Black motorist, and falsified his arrest report; she was found dead in her cell by self-hanging with a towel 3 feet off the ground; later and The Cop lied on the police report and was fired. He was also charged with “perjury” lying under oath on a police report. But they later dropped that charge.Sandra Bland death case: Trooper Brian Encinia formally fired - CNNTrooper fired for Sandra Bland stop: "My safety was in jeopardy."Even though they dropped the charges against this Ex-Trooper at least he was charged.Perjury Charge Dropped Against Ex-Trooper in Sandra Bland CaseProsecutors drop charge against Brian Encinia, ex-Texas state trooper who arrested Sandra BlandHere’s another Famous, Famous case very recent. of these two corrupt Cops from Utah Salt Lake City PD who made a false arrest and told LIES to this Nurse!The cop (the Old guy) who arrested her was later Fired!His Lieutenant was Demoted in Rank!The story is This Semi-truck driver came in from a Heavy duty Accident that was the Fault of the other driver. But they wanted this Semi-Truck drivers blood sample to see if he was a DUI; The Nurse Stood her ground and wouldn’t give it to the Cop. Because the Accident victim was unconscious and could not give her consent. So the SLC PD cop arrested her.The Cop and his Lieutenant were both LIARS and LIED TO HER!Yes, Cops can be Morons! And Bullies, and try to Intimidate you!===========================================================Now let me back track a little bit!Back at the beginning:Cop: “I will arrest you if you don’t answer my questions”?You: I don’t consent to a Terry Stop; I don’t answer questions with out my Attorney or my Legal Counsel present.You: Am I being Detained or am I free to leave?Cop: “you’re being detained!”You: “for what Crime?, what crime have I committed or suspected of committing??? (repeat as needed, as many times needed until you get an answer and note that)(he must tell you, it’s the law) and you tell him that. ) I have a right to know what Crime I’m suspected of committing…Cop: now the cop will have to start to think, he’ll either fabricate something….(also Note the time: that’s important because the U.S. Supreme court ruled that 8 minutes, yes 8 minutes is the limit for an unlawful Stop, Absent a Terry Stop)(Note how long he’s stopped you; and if the Cop asks you, “you in a hurry you got to be some place”???You: “No, I’m timing you! I’m noting the time and how long your detaining me without charges. 8 Minutes is what the US Supreme court said is the limit that you can unlawfully detaine me; I can tell the DA and Judge that you exceeded that with out charges. “You: “Are you Finished with your unlawful questioning?”Cop: “yes”This is important, look at your watch, Note the time, because, once he’s said he’s done, he can’t legally question you any more!Don’t say anything, don’t say thank you just leave the area, and carry-on where ever you were going to go or do!==========================================================Now many times it’s a Game of Bluff!Here’s how that works!Cop: “I’m arresting your for resisting Arrest!”You: “Resisting arrest requires a requisite charge or crime; in other words what pre-requisite crime was I committing that I was resisting arrest for???” In California Resisting arrest is PC Penal Code 145, requires some crime for which you were resisting arrest!Now the cop will have to think!Because it’s the “Chicken-and-the-Egg”!!! or the “Horse-and-the-Carriage”;The Egg came first before the Chicken, it hatched and grew up to become a chicken;The Horse came first and went ahead of the Carriage and pulled the carriage not the other way around!So, He’ll have to LIE and make something up!!! or let you go!Bingo, Now you’ve got him! If he lies now you can get him in Court, if it comes to that! That’s Perjury and grounds for Firing and criminal prosecution of the Cop.So put him on the Spot! It’s a Bluff Game for him, to Bully you and intimidate you!You: “What Crime was I resisting arrest for?”You: “You know what they do to Cops in Jail right? for Making false arrest, and falsifying charges, right? That’s a Felony” ask him that again and again and again.Cop: might just reply, “the inmates will beat the Sh!t out of the Cop?”You: No, you’ll get murdered by a small knife or shank (small hand made knife made out of sharp piece of metal on the end of the tooth brush)Here’s one reality show about inmates, this guy Troy Krell stabbed the other guy 67 or 68 times with a Shank!Cops in Jail are treated as the lowest of Scum!==========================================================Keep questioning him back, with questions over and over, your answer should be a question. Never answer questions. Only questions or your rights.1. Questions You: “Am I being detained?” “or am I free to leave”???2. Questions You: “what crime am I being detained for”???3. Questions You: “Resisting arrest requires a crime, what crime was I resisting arrest for”???4. Statement You: “I don’t consent to any Terry Stop”!!!6. Statement You: “I don’t answer questions”!!!7. Statement You: “I don’t answer questions with out my Attorney or Legal Counsel present”!!!Statement You: yell this if you have to, raise your voice “I DON’T ANSWER QUESTIONS WITHOUT MY ATTORNEY OR LEGAL COUNSEL PRESENT”!!!IF COP ASKS: why are you yelling and raising your voice, because I want witnesses to hear that I’ve ASSERTED MY RIGHTS 8 times, and you’re VIOLATING MY RIGHTS!(Repeat 1–7 in that order)In THAT ORDER: Over and over and over Repeat as needed, and count keep track of how many times. So the Cop can be “Impeached” at trial for Perjury!Keep track of how long you were being detained.==========================================================NOW HERE’S THE KEY: You MUST, MUST, MUST! Follow-up! Show him you’ve got balls!Then follow up and file Complaint(s) against him.File a Complaint with his Department!File a Complaint with the State Attorney General!File a Complaint with in Civil Court!File a Complaint with in Federal Court for violating your Civil Rights!Teach him back the law he violated, and of course obtain an Attorney to do this!In California there are various statutes you can nail him for, Get him Fired, then Sue the F out of him!CA PENAL CODE 118.1 Perjury at Trial 3 years in jail and a FelonyCA PENAL CODE 118.2 Perjury putting false information in a complaint 3 years in jail and a FelonyCA PENAL CODE 148.5 Perjury filing a False complaint 3 years in jail and a FelonyCA PENAL CODE 141 Knowingly filing a false complaint, withholding Exculpatory information or facts Perjury 5 years in jail and a Felony; signed into law Sept. 30th, 2017 effective immediately; and a Felony not misdemeanor, before it was a misdemeanor and a slap on the hand, and it applies to Prosecutors or DA’s as well for false prosecuting defendants they know are not guilty and withholding facts of their innocencePitchess Motion, subpoena the cops records that he is a dirty cop and has done this beforeBrady List - this is a list of Problem LA County Sheriff’s deputies who lied or prosecuted for crimes or falsified police reportsSerna motion" is a motion to dismiss California misdemeanor or felony charges because the defendant was denied his / her constitutional right to a speedy trial, in violation of California's fast and speedy trial law.”Read this Article! It’s not just the cops, it’s the Prosecutors who are CORRUPT!http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/23/confessions-of-an-ex-prosecutorhttp://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-prosecutor-misconduct-20161003-snap-story.htmlThis year, CACJ is sponsoring AB 1909, authored by Assemblywoman Patty Lopez, which aims to create a felony for prosecuting attorneys who intentionally and in bad faith withhold exculpatory evidence. This bill is in response to the OC scandal and the growing epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.Last year CACJ-sponsored AB 1328, authored by Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, which added Penal Code 1424.5 to require a court to notify the state bar of a knowing and intentional Brady violation. However, even with this accountability tool, many bad-acting prosecutors fail to follow their constitutional duties and do not face any consequences for these intentional actions.https://www.ocregister.com/2016/08/11/prosecutors-who-falsify-or-withhold-evidence-could-become-felons-under-proposed-state-legislation/Prosecutors who falsify or withhold evidence could become felons under proposed state legislation==========================================================Print this out if you have to, or hand write in on 5x3″ cards, Memorize it!Study it, while your walking, during breaks at work, while riding the bus, while in School between classes, while you have free time, what ever. You get the message!It’s your rights to stand up to a Bully Cop, who’s trying to intimidate you! So know your rights!He/She took and oath to protect and defend the State and U.S. Constitutions! Not to violate them.To Protect and to serve the Constitutions.He/She works for you, not the other way around, just because their wearing a badge, they don’t get to Punk you! You may not be his supervisor, but your property taxes, sales tax, and if your state has income taxes that’s what pays their salary, Remind them of that!===========================================================Don't Talk to the Police:by “Regent Law Professor James Duane from Regents University School of Law.”If you like this answer: please give me an upvote below, Thanks

While I get the logic behind it I think it’s a fundamental misreading of Vice Presidential criteria and selection. This would be a divisive and dysfunctional ticket and either one would be saddled with a VP who largely inhibited their respective priorities. This also overlooks the fact that if Harris led the ticket Bernie Sanders would be 86 years old by the time she had completed two terms (if twice elected).In my previous answers on theoretical VP choices for Jay Inslee and Pete Buttigieg I laid out a general theory of case for effective VP selection as I see it:Cole Meyers's answer to Who should Gov Jay Inslee pick as his V.P. if he secures the Democratic nomination?Cole Meyers's answer to Who should Pete Buttigieg pick as his running mate if he wins the Democratic nomination?So I’m going to take this one as a twofer and try to who might be effective choices to balance a Harris ticket and a Sanders ticket.Regional Balance - As I laid out in the Inslee analysis it is almost always the case that a presidential candidate is best served selecting a running mate from a different part of the country than them. What this means for each candidate is:Kamala Harris - Should select a running mate from the Deep South, Southwest, Midwest or Northeast. Senator Harris would be unwise to select a running mate from the West Coast, Northern Great Plains states and AK/HI. In fact she would be legally prohibited from selecting a fellow Californian, as would Senator Sanders be prohibited from picking a running mate from Vermont. For her this disqualifies competitors Jay Inslee, Tulsi Gabbard, Tom Steyer, Marianne Williamson and Steve Bullock as well as otherwise solid choices not in the race such as HI Senator Brian Schatz, CA Governor Gavin Newsom, Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley (who would otherwise be an ideal running mate) and many others.Bernie Sanders- Should select a running mate from the West Coast, Midwest, Southwest or Deep South. It would be a very poor decision for him to run with a fellow Northeasterner. This eliminates competitors such as Elizabeth Warren, Andrew Yang, Bill de Blasio, Cory Booker and Seth Moulton as well as otherwise solid picks like Massachusetts Representative Joe Kennedy III, Maine Governor Janet Mills, Massachusetts Representative Ayanna Pressley and various New Yorkers and Pennsylvanians who could otherwise add a lot to the ticket.Demographic Balance - Issues of identity are going to be vital here, particularly for Senator Sanders whose primary loss in 2016 is largely attributed to his struggles making inroads with black voters and his perceived lack of depth on racial and gender issues. Senator Harris faces the opposite issue: she would likely find more inroads to reach out to people with apprehensions about a female and non-white nominee by selecting a white male VP. This isn’t a firm rule but for the purposes of this exercise I’m going to say a Sanders running mate needs to be a woman of color and a Harris running mate needs to be a white man. How this winnows the pool is as such:Kamala Harris - This criteria would eliminate competitors Elizabeth Warren, Julian Castro, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar (who would otherwise be a very wise choice), Tulsi Gabbard and Kirsten Gillibrand as well as non-competitors like Former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, Georgia Gubernatorial Candidate Stacey Abrams, Massachusetts Representative Ayanna Pressley and many others.Bernie Sanders - His criteria eliminate competitors Michael Bennet, Pete Buttigieg, Steve Bullock, Julian Castro, John Delaney, John Hickenlooper, Jay Inslee, Amy Klobuchar, Wayne Messam, Beto O’Rourke, Tim Ryan, Joe Sestak, Tom Steyer and Marianne Williamson. This also removes potentially formidable non-candidates like California Representative Ro Khanna, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, Oregon Governor Kate Brown, Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, California Governor Gavin Newsom, Florida Gubernatorial Candidate Andrew Gillum, Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, West Virginia State Senator Richard Ojeda and numerous others.Shared Ideological Priorities - Generally presidential candidates select VP nominees who have a similar political bent. This is demonstrated historically in my Jay Inslee analysis. What this would mean for Bernie Sanders is that he would want a similarly progressive/Democratic Socialist running mate or at least someone on the left flank of the party. What it means for Kamala Harris is that she would want someone who straddles the moderate and progressive lanes like she does. This further narrows the search in this way:Kamala Harris - Given her “big tent” coalition Senator Harris has more leeway here than Senator Sanders. This, however, cuts both ways. It eliminates opponents too far to her right such as John Delaney, Michael Bennet, John Hickenlooper, Tim Ryan, Seth Moulton and Joe Sestak as well as opponents too far to her left such as Bernie Sanders and Bill de Blasio . This also shuts down the otherwise formidable choices of Alabama Senator Doug Jones, Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards and West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin who are all very much in the right wing of the Democratic Party. Given her versatility here there is a decent amount of wiggle room but for the purposes of this exercise I’m going to eliminate anyone on the further right wing of the party and anyone in the further left wing of the party.Bernie Sanders - This one is especially relevant for Senator Sanders given that much of his appeal comes from his perceived sincerity and deeply held convictions. Choosing a running mate who doesn’t share most of his political beliefs would likely engender a lot of cynicism and paint him as a “sellout”. Pretty much anyone who doesn’t occupy the progressive/Democratic Socialist lane or somewhere near to it is eliminated here. For remaining primary opponents this eliminates Kamala Harris from consideration as well as those not running such as Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth, Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto and others who might otherwise bring a lot to the ticket. At this point the viable choices become very narrow for Senator Sanders as I will address further down the line.Not A Serious Competitor For the Nomination - This is a pretty consistent trend although I am making a couple of notable exceptions in my selections this time. In the last fifty years only two running mates have been competitive enough to win at least one state in the primary cycle: 2004 Democratic VP Nominee John Edwards and 1980/1984 Republican VP George HW Bush. The logic here is pretty sound: a protracted primary battle can weaken the eventual nominee and create bad blood between candidates.My caveat here is who is and isn’t a serious competitor by my metric. I’m going to make a broad leap here and guess that field winnows significantly by the time voting begins. The only candidates I am considering truly serious candidates here are Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Buttigieg and O’Rourke, although beneficiaries to a lot of hype, seem like long-shots to me. At this point there is no one to eliminate from either candidate’s pool as Elizabeth Warren is already not a viable running mate for either and Joe Biden is ineligible for the vice presidency and would likely reject the offer even if he could take the position.So where does this leave us now? Kamala Harris has more space to select from than Bernie Sanders at this point, whose selection process would need to be from a very limited field at this point. There is also another factor to consider for him that isn’t an issue for Kamala Harris:Age - Bernie Sanders, although largely admired by young people, is nearly 80 years old himself. I hate to be morbid but in the event of his plausible death in office it would be unwise to have an elderly VP as well. Beyond the optics of it (I can just see all the lines about the White House being more like an assisted living facility now) this could potentially result in both the President and his VP/successor dying in office with the result of an unelected VP a la Gerald Ford ascending to the presidency. Ford was unpopular for this among many other reasons and given that we live in a similar climate of perceived electoral corruption (with the Russian collusion allegations/Mueller Report findings) this scenario would likely erode public faith in the office. So I’m going to stipulate that a Sanders VP should be no older than 60 or so and ideally younger than that. For the purposes of Kamala Harris I will eliminate anyone near or beyond their 70s as they would presumably want to be prepared for a run of their own in eight years provided she secured a second term.So now that I’ve established criteria for each shortlist I’ll break down who I think would be the best potential running mates for each candidate. I’ll start with Senator Harris.Kamala Harris - At this point the rules for her shortlist have been set: White guy younger than 70, neither too centrist nor too leftist, not from the West Coast/Great Plains/Alaska & Hawaii who is unlikely to be a serious contender for the nomination himself. I am also going to remove from contention nominees with high unfavorable impressions and/or with scandals in their background. We now lose Virginia Governor Ralph Northam (who, barring the blackface scandal, would have been a perfect VP pick for Harris) and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (who has many enemies within the Democratic Party and would likely hinder more than help the ticket). As all potential choices would still comprise a long list of candidates I’m going to only highlight who particularly stands out within these metrics. With that in mind my shortlist would look something like this:South Bend, Indiana Mayor and 2020 Presidential Candidate Pete ButtigiegThis is where my caveat about “serious” primary challengers comes into play. Mayor Buttigieg has been running near the top of the Democratic pack for a little while now but in all likelihood is unlikely to secure the nomination. If this ended up being an especially contentious primary and he ran well into the voting cycle I would likely rescind this pick but for now I will include him. Breaking it down a Harris/Buttigieg ticket has a number of positives.Buttigieg would inevitably attract a major contingent of top-tier donors, as he has been successfully courting wealthy backers through the cycle. His background as a veteran representing a working-class Rust Belt constituency is a perfect contrast to Harris’ deep-blue California bona fides. There is also the fact that a Buttigieg/Pence debate would be a thematic boon: no one seems better qualified to take on the homophobic evangelical former Indiana Governor than a young, gay, erudite Democrat from Indiana.His technocratic blend of progressive social views and more moderate economic and policy views also aligns perfectly with the somewhat moderate policy planks of Kamala Harris. It would likely be the perfect role for Buttigieg as well: many feel that he is a rising star who is too young and green to be president this time around.Eight years as VP would likely make him a far more palatable presidential candidate if Harris secured two terms. There are many positives here and, barring a massive sea change in the political field, it would likely end up being a tough call between Buttigieg and Representative Joe Kennedy III (more on that below).Massachusetts Representative Joe Kennedy IIIEven in 2019 the Kennedy name has quite a lot of clout. Joe Kennedy III has been a rising star in the Democratic Party for some time now following his scathing rebuke of the Trump Administration’s immigration policies in the Democratic Response to the 2018 State of the Union address. His resume and policy priorities are a perfect match for Senator Harris: openly progressive on racial and social issues but somewhat less so with issues of civil liberties, having voted to support an expansion of the Patriot Act.Although this is somewhat anathema to the progressive plank of the party it is in keeping with the outlooks of both Senator Harris (who was criticized for an overly punitive approach as Californian Attorney General) and the tenor of the party under Obama (who expanded drone warfare and surveillance efforts). If the Kennedy name really does have anywhere near the clout it used to he could be a formidable choice.Connecticut Senator Chris MurphyMurphy cuts a relatively unassuming national profile compared to Buttigieg and Kennedy but has assembled a profile very conducive to a Harris administration post. Beyond being young enough (45 years old) to mount a presidential run of his own after a potential two Harris terms, his policy background is highly simpatico with Harris.He has been progressive in many of the same areas as Harris (Immigration, gun control, marijuana legalization), moderate on health care as she is (both have expressed support for a public option) and both cut a “tough on crime” profile: Harris as California Attorney General and Murphy with his push for more punitive home-invasion laws. Although somewhat low-profile Senator Murphy could be an ideal choice as a quiet second-in-command for a President Harris.Ohio Senator Sherrod BrownSenator Sherrod Brown exists in a very opportune place: at once a populist icon and consistent winner in an increasingly conservative state, Senator Brown has the same coalition-building potential as Senator Harris herself. A Harris/Brown ticket casts one of the broadest nets of any of these combinations and has the potential to lure back vital Rust Belt voters who flipped to Trump in 2016.The biggest caveat here is that if Brown became Vice President his Senate replacement would be appointed by a Republican Governor, losing the Democratic Party a vital seat in the process.Bernie Sanders - He’s pretty limited at this point. An ideal Sanders running mate by my estimation would be a progressive woman of color younger than 60 from the Deep South, Southwest, Midwest, West Coast or AK/HI. For Sanders my shortlist is therefore very short. If there were no law prohibiting immigrants from holding the presidency I would absolutely include Washington Representative Pramila Jayapal in this list.I have to admit that in order to find a nominee who would work well with Sanders in this set of rules I have likely selected a ticket that would hew too far to the left for a majority of Americans. This could potentially create a George McGovern scenario in which the Democratic ticket is steamrolled in the general election. The nomination of Bernie Sanders would already be an implicit indication that many voters ARE ready for an uncompromisingly progressive administration and this is operating under the same logic.With that being said my shortlist for Sanders casts a wide net within the narrow parameters. Were I running the search I would in all likelihood select a black running mate, given Senator Sanders’ deficiencies with that electorate, but this is not a requirement for this list. In all I have narrowed it down to five candidates who, in my assessment, would be ideal running mates for Bernie Sanders:Georgia Gubernatorial Candidate Stacey Abrams (also appears on my Jay Inslee shortlist)A rising star in the Democratic Party, Stacey Abrams is best known for her astonishingly successful Gubernatorial run in heavily Republican Georgia. Many allege that if not for vote tampering from the opposition Abrams would have secured the governorship. This works as a shared narrative with Sanders, who has many supporters who believe the 2016 Democratic Nomination was stolen from him (although the data doesn’t really support that idea).Abrams fundamentally fills a number of weaknesses in Sanders’ coalition: as a Southern progressive Democrat with a largely black constituency she would bring in a demographic that Sanders has struggled to make inroads with. The biggest hurdles for an Abrams VP pick are that she may decline an offer (purported to have rejected a VP slot with Biden) and lost her only major election.Hawaii Representative and 2020 Presidential Candidate Tulsi GabbardThis one has been the somewhat pie-in-the-sky fantasy of a certain subset of devout Bernie supporters for a while now but a Sanders/Gabbard ticket makes more sense than it may initially seem. Tulsi Gabbard, with her somewhat heterodox blend of political positions, probably expands a Bernie coalition slightly more than most of these other options. Her non-interventionist foreign policy platform has even drawn some (still kind of inexplicable) praise from a number of Libertarian-leaning Republicans.The flip side of this, however, is that Representative Gabbard brings in her own unique assortment of political baggage. Although she expressed sincere-seeming contrition for her prior homophobic viewpoints this is still something that could be a liability for many supporters on the left. Nonetheless pairing Sanders with a young Hawaiian Hindu rising star presents a front of mass unity behind a Democratic Socialist agenda. Representative Gabbard would not necessarily be my first choice but she undeniably brings more star power to the ticket than any of my other selections.Texas Representative Veronica EscobarAlthough she is something of a political neophyte (having filled Beto O’Rourke’s old seat at the beginning of 2019) in all likelihood Representative Escobar would be my top choice from this list. As a progressive Latina hailing from one of the most right-wing states in the country she would likely make a Sanders ticket appear more politically viable in the eyes of DNC brass and the general public.In addition to this her aggressive, vocal opposition to the draconian immigration policies of the Trump Administration would bring in supporters from the Latinx and leftist communities who may otherwise be hesitant about Sanders’ singular focus on economic issues.The only real hurdle for Escobar would be her relative inexperience but, given that the sitting president had never held political office before his victory, this can potentially be made a non-issue.San Francisco Mayor London BreedNow we’re getting into some deep cuts. The Mayoralty of San Francisco is not typically a White House stepping stone but this is an election that has been kind to unconventional backgrounds. As mayor of a large urban center with a diverse populace, rapid gentrification and tech industry innovation London Breed has a solid background dealing with issues of income inequality and appealing to a wide swath of voters.With a progressive record of mayoral accomplishment she would be a fitting running mate for Senator Sanders. The biggest hurdle Mayor Breed would likely face is a lack of national name recognition.Michigan Representative Rashida TlaibAs the only qualifying member of the House progressive “squad” (AOC is both too young and from the Northeast, Ayanna Pressley is from New England and Ilhan Omar is legally ineligible for the presidency as she was born in Somalia) Rashida Tlaib is a natural fit to run with the man who pushed the Democratic Party mainstream to the left.Representative Tlaib has forged a prominent national profile as an aggressive reformer and social justice advocate, frequently calling for Trump’s impeachment, promoting immigration reform, showing solidarity with the Palestinian people and criticizing the human rights violations of the Saudi regime.Tlaib has faced unsubstantiated allegations of anti-Semitism for her vocal criticism of the Netanyahu government in Israel but this would be unlikely to be a major issue as the running mate for a Jewish candidate. The biggest liability presented by her addition to the ticket is an unfortunate truth of the contemporary United States: many voters, even outspoken leftists, have apprehension or even outright hostility toward Muslims. As much as I don’t want this to be a factor it absolutely is. Then again once you have a ticket with Bernie Sanders and a young Democratic Socialist woman you’ve likely lost those folks already so why not?There are surely other potential contenders but by my estimation these would be ideal running mates for Harris and Sanders respectively. They would NOT be ideal running mates for each other.