Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris: Drug Warrior, Vice Cop, Draconian Prosecutor

Biden picked a V.P. candidate whose record on police and criminal justice reform is as terrible as his own.


HD Download

Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden has picked Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) as his running mate, making her the first African American vice-presidential candidate in U.S. history.

Harris had positioned herself during the primary campaign as a reformer who has tirelessly worked to correct the abuses of the criminal justice system, and she confronted Biden in the debates about his atrocious record on race and law-and-order policies. 

Biden will rely on Harris to energize the ticket and win over the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. The irony of Biden's decision, particularly in the wake of widespread protests against police misconduct and racial injustice, is that Harris has her own troubling record on criminal justice issues. 

Like Biden, Harris deserves credit for endorsing vital reforms even at this stage in her career, but it's worth setting the record straight about her priorities over the course of her 16 years in public life, before criminal justice reform became front and center for the Democratic Party. 

Harris' record is that of a 1980s-style drug warrior, a defender of dirty prosecutors, and a political opportunist who made life more dangerous for sex workers. 

Sex Work

Harris's political rise has been propelled by a yearslong, high-profile campaign against alleged sex traffickers. What she's actually done is help throw women in jail for having consensual sex, while trampling on the rule of law to advance her own political ambitions.

Ignoring the pleas of sex workers and human rights advocates for over a decade, she fought campaigns to decriminalize consensual adult prostitution in California. As California's attorney general, she helped lead a statewide program to get truckers to report suspected sex workers to police. These policies didn't stop traffickers, but they did land plenty of sex workers behind bars.

Harris fought to destroy Backpage.com, a classified ads site that sex workers used to find and screen clients, even though she publicly admitted that the site's founders, Michael Lacey and James Larkin, were protected from prosecution under federal speech law. But a month before Election Day while running for Senate, Harris went ahead and had them arrested anyway, parading them before cameras on pimping charges, which were then promptly dismissed by a judge.

When Harris got to Congress, she kept up her crusade, becoming a big proponent of the 2018 law known as FOSTA-SESTA. The result was that many sex workers had no choice but to return to the streets, where soliciting clients is considerably more dangerous.

Meanwhile, Harris declined to intervene in a real underage sex-trafficking scandal that involved dozens of police and other local authorities in the Bay Area.

Prosecutorial Misconduct

In her memoir, Harris decries America's "deep and dark history" of "people using the power of the prosecutor as an instrument of injustice," by framing innocent men or hiding exculpatory evidence. But during her time as California's top cop, she contributed to that history by repeatedly going to bat for dirty prosecutors.

Her office appealed the dismissal of a case in which a prosecutor had fabricated a confession to secure a conviction and fought an appeal in a case where the prosecutor lied to a jury during trial. In 2015, Harris tried to stop the removal of the Orange County District Attorney's office from a murder trial after it repeatedly failed to turn over evidence to the defense.

Her office even tried to keep a man in jail who had been wrongfully incarcerated for 13 years—even after a judge ruled he had proven himself innocent—because the man hadn't delivered the proof fast enough.

And as San Francisco District Attorney, Harris hid known misconduct by a crime lab technician who admitted to deliberately tainting evidence. The debacle has since led to the dismissal of hundreds of criminal cases.

The War on Drugs

Harris is a former drug warrior who is now refashioning herself as pro-legalization. That's a positive shift—but not a reason to rewrite the past or ignore the patterns it reveals in her judgment. For years after the cultural tide had turned in support of criminal justice reforms, Harris continued to support lock-'em-up policies that disproportionately hurt minorities.

As California's attorney general, Harris opposed marijuana legalization as late as 2014, promoted civil asset forfeiture without a conviction as a way to fight drug rings, and sought to more aggressively police prescription drug use.

In her recent book, The Truths We Hold: An American Journey, Harris reveals that her drug warrior mentality hasn't changed; it's just that her emphasis has shifted. Now she's hoping to funnel even more funds to law enforcement to "cut off the supply of fentanyl from China," and to "reinstate the DEA's [Drug Enforcement Administration] authority to go after the major pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors."

Mass Incarceration

Harris is now an outspoken critic of America's system of mass incarceration, but she's worked hard over the years to lock more people up, for longer. And once these people were in prison, Harris saw to it that they'd have a hell of a time getting out.

Before her recent about-face, Harris chose not to endorse proposed sentencing reforms on the California ballot in 2012 and 2014, and she defended the constitutionality of cash bail until 2016.

Harris's office also fought an order to reduce California prison populations after the U.S. Supreme Court determined the conditions amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. Though she later claimed to be "shocked" at what they had done, Harris's attorneys argued that nonviolent offenders should stay behind bars because the state needed their cheap labor.

As she tries to convince voters to put her a heartbeat away from the presidency, Kamala Harris is trying to rewrite her last chapter. But her record is yet another reminder of the terrible choice voters face in the 2020 election.

Hosted by Katherine Mangu-Ward, written and edited by Justin Monticello, shot by Austin Bragg and Meredith Bragg, additional graphics by Joshua Swain and Isaac Reese

Music: Futuremono and Marco Martini

Photos: Jonathan Ernst/REUTERS/Newscom; Kenneth Song/News-Press/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Chris Kleponis/CNP/AdMedia/Newscom; Yichuan Cao/Sipa USA/Newscom; ELIJAH NOUVELAGE/REUTERS/Newscom; Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call/Newscom; Hector Amezcua/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Ron Sachs—CNP / MEGA / Newscom, imageSPACEimageSPACE/Sipa USA/Newscom; Jeff Malet Photography/Newscom; AURELIA VENTURA/LA OPINION/Newscom (2); imageSPACEimageSPACE/Sipa USA/Newscom; Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMA Press/Newscom (2); KEVIN DIETSCH/UPI/Newscom; Lucas Jackson/REUTERS/Newscom; AURELIA VENTURA/LA OPINION/Newscom

NEXT: Teachers Unions Try To Protect Their Monopoly as Parents Flee Traditional Schools

HD Download

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Good takedown. Don’t believe a word Kamala says she is lying.

    1. “According to the California secretary of state’s website, the Trumps donated a total of $8,000 to Harris’s campaigns from 2011-2014. Trump, a former real estate tycoon and television personality, announced his candidacy for president in 2015, and had not held public office before that. ”

      This isn’t the first time Trump’s political “opponents” were people he supported for election. Trump famously praised Hillary Clinton’s term as Sec of State, and donated money to the Clinton Foundation.

      Does anyone find it strange that all of these “opponents” go to each others’ weddings, contribute to each others’ campaigns, and go to the same parties? Politics is like WWF, where good friends pretend to be sworn enemies in order to get gullible people to buy tickets to the show.

      1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new…DFr after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

        Here’s what I do………► Cash Mony System

      2. I’m glad it’s like that. I’m that way with my friends, aren’t you? I wouldn’t want to lose friends over mere politics.

  2. I’m surprised she wants to work with a racist.

    1. Her thirst for power will get her to do a lot of disgusting things, like sleep with Willie Brown.

      1. My conspiracy theorist side has a question, once Biden is the official Dem candidate and she is his VP candidate what would happen if for some reason Biden could not continue with the election? Say he catches the Corona/Wuhan and dies, would Harris then become the Dem candidate and she would be free to pick her VP? Say Michelle Obama? What is the law in this area?

        1. I’ve been thinking for months that they plan to pull Joe st the last minute.
          I don’t know that picking Harris changes anything, but she is an establishment pet

        2. If Kanye can’t suddenly get on the ballot, I dunno why Harris could. We put candidates, not parties, on the ballot.

          That’s at least in theory how it works, I have no doubt all the rules get thrown out the window if Biden doesn’t make it to election day.

        3. From my POV they would be able to replace either slot. Harris could say she signed up for VP, and they could let Hillary be the presidential candidate. Or Harris could be president and she (aka the DNC) could pick another VP candidate.

          And we end up with a ticket nobody voted for, because democracy is super important!

      2. What a surprise to see the cheapest misogyny here. She was in her early 20s at the time. Let’s examine your record, shall we? Oh, no, you’re a white male, so that’s not “relevant.” As for the description of her record, any article that uses words like “atrocious” and “drug warrior” simply concedes it’s a hit piece.
        You attack Harris for enforcing the laws on the books in California.
        She was not a legislator at the time, and was hardly free to rewrite them or ignore them. As for Backpage, it was clearly used as a trafficking center, and sex work was illegal. Finally, the terms “prosecutorial discretion” have meaning for a reason. I suppose we can sit down and go over each of these cases to consider whether it warranted a particular result. But that would require presenting both sides. It is somewhat amusing for the right to accuse her of being a far-leftist and for the left to accuse her of being a right-wing oriented “cop,” but I expected more of Reason. Look to your comments for the classic “ambitious” and even more offensive tropes used against women candidates.

        1. Fuck off, slaver.

          1. No, thank you. How does Eugene Volokh still publish here??

        2. “…You attack Harris for enforcing the laws on the books in California…”

          Doesn’t all that spinning make you dizzy, you smelly piece of lefty shit?

        3. Protecting crooked cops and prosecutors is NOT upholding the law.

      3. How about something more disgusting, sleep with Donald Trump.

  3. The Dotard has invested millions in campaign ads saying Democrats want to eliminate all cops.

    Now what will he do with Harris’ track record as overzealous prosecuter?

    1. I’m pretty sure we kiss any hope for serious criminal justice goodbye. But hey: Trump.

    2. Whatever her past positions may have been, she is fully on board with the anti-police wing of the Democrats now. Harris is an opportunist who will do and say whatever she thinks serves her interests right now. She’s hoping people won’t notice.

      1. Fully on board? No, she’s just good at saying the right things. She’ll abandon the anti-police wing as soon as it’s convenient.

        1. You mean as soon as she is President – – – – – – –

      2. You are indeed very naive. There is no difference between democrats and republicans. Joe Biden created Homeland Security, the now Trump storm troopers. You don’t make it to DC unless you are a team player and the democrats and republicans are one and the same team with different colors to make you believe you actually have a choice. There is a sign outside the capital building it reads, no honest persons need apply.

    3. The Dotard has invested millions in campaign ads saying Democrats want to eliminate all cops.

      After Russian Facebook Ads won him the 2016 election, why wouldn’t he spend the money?

    4. I see you got banned again.

      And Democrats in Seattle, Minneapolis, Portland have all pledged to eliminate their police departments. Not a single national figure in the Democratic Party has repudiated this position or the people taking it.

      Yes, Democrats do want to “de-fund” the police and are doing so in several places where they have the power to do it. Trump is investing in campaign ads that tell the truth. If the Democrats don’t like that, they should stop defunding the police in the cities they control. As it is, no amount of lying by idiots like you changes reality or prevents the public from seeing the truth with their own eyes.

      So, did you post child porn links again?

      1. Biden wrote an op-ed opposing defunding the police you liar (big surprise, he actually wants to increase their funding). Stop assuming everyone here is as dumb and gullible as you are.


        1. He said he didn’t support it. He doesn’t say who is doing it or repudiate those who are.

          Thanks for proving my point for me. You just gave a link showing Biden doing what I said he was.

      2. Defunding the police, in any event, is not the solution to the problem of police brutality and qualified immunity, both of which are rampant in the police culture here in the United States. The solution is to de-militarize the police and to get rid of Qualified Immunity, both of which are rampant in the United States’ cop culture.

      3. Seriously? Seattle, Minneapolis and Portland have all pledged to eliminate their police departments? When was this? I will grant you that “Defund police” is about the dumbest slogan to come out almost any campaign, given that it does not represent the thrust of the majority of protesters, but it never meant eliminating enforcement. And, gee, Biden snuck a piece into the little-known N. Y. Times opposing the concept.
        The ads for jobs here are more informative than your posts.

    5. He needs to accuse her of being pro-riots and wanting to de-fund cops. Her knee jerk reaction would be to rattle off her top cop bona fides. She might be able to resist that, but anything else will be a very long non-soundbyte explanation, which is usually pretty terrible in politics.

      1. Yup. If she rattles off her cop bonifides, she alienates the activist base of the party and reminds them why she only got 2% in the primaries. If she doesn’t do that and gives some elaborate non answer answer, the public will tune out and assume the charge is true.

      2. He hasn’t spent millions. Or he hasn’t committed resources of any consequence. SPB2 needs this election to hang on the straw man he’s created.

        Trump spent millions foolishly portraying Biden as anti-SJW and Biden chose Elizabeth Warren as VP! Success is within our grasp!

        Trump spent millions foolishly portraying Biden as ant-environment and Biden chose AOC as VP! Success is within our grasp!

        Trump spent millions foolishly portraying Biden as anit-socialist and Biden chose Sanders as VP! Success is within our grasp!

        Trump spent millions foolishly portraying Biden as anti-gay and Biden chose Buttigieg as VP! Success is within our grasp!

        It’s easier than acknowledging that Biden had the choice between a handful of turds that even his own party recognized as stinking and is now forced to polish the one he chose (or let people like SPB2 do it for him).

        1. Tony last night stated all criticism 2as just sexism and racism. Coincidentally enough a Democratic ally last week sent a memo to the majority of media outlets specifically asking (more like demanding) them to call out any criticism of any Democratic VP candidate as racist and or sexist. This was long before the nominee was named and ignored the possibility of real criticism. And low and behold we have Tony and MTrueman and Mod4ever doing exactly that yesterday.

        2. I’m wondering which candidates you thought were pearls? Because I think most of the people being considered by Biden were just fine. And the Dem’s memo didn’t say to call out any opposition as sexist and racist. It said to call out any racist and sexist opposition. Like the “slept her way to the top” or “too ambitious” BS we see here. Or not Black enough. It is fun to see the heads spinning trying to decide whether to call her too law-and-order or too criminal-friendly.

  4. Like Biden, Harris deserves credit for endorsing vital reforms even at this stage in her career

    No, they really don’t deserve credit for seeing which way the wind is blowing now and pretending to change their positions. Both Biden and Harris’ records are awful enough to call into question anything they say now.

    1. I agree. And let’s be clear why: we live in a representative form of government, meaning that we should elect people not because they will advance specific positions we hold right now, but because we trust them to exercise good judgment.

      Biden’s and Harris’s past horribly poor judgment and willingness to destroy millions of American lives means they are unsuitable for the job, no matter what positions they take now.

      Hillary had a similar problem when she said that she always believed gay marriage was the right thing but voted against it and lied about her position because it would have been unpopular. Regardless of what you think about gay marriage, that’s not the way politicians should act.

      1. Regarding “gay” marriage – what Hillary did is pretty much what every politician did. At least she’s honest about her cowardice?

        1. That’s incorrect. A lot of conservatives still oppose gay marriage in principle, but accept it as a legal reality and not worth challenging. That’s a position I can respect.

          Hillary, on the other hand, portrayed herself as always being for gay marriage but lying about it in order to gain power. That is a completely different position, and one I find deplorable.

      2. Both Biden and Harris put people in cages by the thousands for inordinate amounts of time to advance their own careers. They traded bodies for votes (at least in Biden’s case it really was the style at the time). That’s not an abstract. Biden wrote the laws, Harris enforced them, people were robbed of their freedom and lives were ruined.

    2. Awful? Trump, Pence, Barr, Pompeo, Kudlow, the trade idiot whose name I repress, these are the bar and she fails?

  5. It’s a little embarrassing to watch libertarians on Twitter hating on Jo Jorgenson for her tweet:

    I’m glad that Joe Biden has brought another woman into the race; the vice presidency shouldn’t be a boys’ club. When I think about the millions of girls and young women across America, I think they deserve a voice this year when it comes to the top job in the country. #elections

    It’s sarcastic, but she just did a bad job of making that clear. Also, it was not very well worded to make the point she was trying to make. I think people just expect the worst from her ever since her anti-racism tweet, which was not sarcastic and pretty tone deaf. Anyway, I think she got the message, because several subsequent tweets leave no room for imagination.

    1. What makes you think that her comment was sarcastic?

      1. When I think about the millions of girls and young women across America, I think they deserve a voice this year when it comes to the top job in the country.

        Apparently Jo has forgotten that she’s (a) running for President, and (b) she’s a woman.

        1. Well there are no libertarian women so you can see how she got confused.

        2. So she’s on par with Biden then.

        3. For practical purposes, Harris is still the only visible female contender on the national stage, and Jo knows it. Jo doesn’t “have a voice”. So, I still don’t seeing the sarcasm. If her comment was meant sarcastically, she really lacks self-awareness.

          1. she really lacks self-awareness


        4. Now read that as if she does know it. (Let’s put aside the fact that one woman cannot speak for “millions of girls and young women.”)

          1. I see what you’re saying.

            Poorly executed though, and a stupid tactic to go with

      2. What makes you think that her comment was sarcastic?

        Read it like this: “Biden picked a woman as a running mate. That’s nice. There are too many dudes in the race anyway. Girls and women need a voice when it comes to the top job. That’s me.”

        I’m being generous here and I could be wrong. Just putting that tweet next to the others about Harris and trying to make sense of it, which might be pointless.

    2. I will admit I am terrible at picking up sarcasm in written prose. But, I honestly don’t see anything about that statement that indicates it is sarcasm. Did she later say she meant it as sarcasm? What evidence is there that that statement means anything other than what it says?

      1. I took it at face value at first too, then she tweeted the other things, so I looked at that tweet as some kind of failure at sarcasm. I think (and I could be wrong) that she was trying, and failing, to subtly contrast the fact that the Dems have a woman in the VP spot while she’s in the “top job” spot with a man as the VP candidate. Or, she wrote that tweet sincerely like a dumbass and the other tweets were ass covering. I guess I’m just trying to make sense of why she tweeted that and then followed it up with harsh criticism.

        1. I can see that. If she says she meant it as sarcasm, I see no reason not to take her word for it. Even if she didn’t, I don’t see why it is any reason to be angry. Her praising the idiot who got shot after pointing a gun as someone is something to be angry about. This, sarcasm or not, isn’t.

    3. Jo Jorgensen has made it clear with just 3 tweets that she is a terrible candidate

      1. Who is Jo Jorgensen again?

  6. So are you voting for Biden or not?

    1. Waiting on Joe’s other woman pick; a threesome POTUS and VPOTUS and BFF will be awe-some.

      1. And the 11 women he’s going to put on the new and improved supreme court

        1. Query: did this comment section ALWAYS sound like the one on Breitbart? Because I used to swing by and it seemed almost rational.

          1. Apparently you missed the guy that’s been advocating court packing here ever since Trump was sworn in.

  7. Presumably, Biden’s handlers looked at all of Harris’ unsavory background and decided she was still the one to help Biden unseat Trump in vital swing states. What is their reasoning?

    1. She identifies as “she”; the only announced qualification to be Biden’s VP.

      1. Identifies as “she” and > 1/1024 not-white.

        1. Ah, she’s not really Black. Her great great grandmother appears to have been a slave raped by her white slave-owning great great grandfather, is that it? So, it’s her fault who her ancestors were, and you think she never was treated as lesser for being Black and Indian? Breathtaking.

          1. Her family, in Jamaica, apparently were slave OWNERS.
            But she’s “down with the cause”, amirite?

    2. They’re trying to out-Trump Trump, so they’re running the biggest piece of shit they can find.

  8. So the socialist picks a fascist; where is the news?

    1. Shhhh… the fact that socialists and fascists are nearly the same is something that you aren’t supposed to say out aloud.

      1. Q: What is the difference between a socialist and a fascist?
        A: How much red and black they have in their arm bands.

  9. Remember when all the Democrats cheered when Trump got the nomination? Now all the Republicans (et al.) are cheering that Harris got the VP spot. Hmm.

    1. Yeah, I do.

      Trump won the primary despite the strong opposition of the nomenklatura.

      Harris was widely despised by primary voters while being one of the favorites of the Democratic party elite.

      Not the analogy you’re looking for.

      1. I don’t get this “Two can play this game!” line of thinking. It’s like they watched The Princess Bride and got the idea that if Vizzini had just switched the chalices one more time, he wouldn’t have drank the iocane.

        1. Well played, sir.

  10. Let’s add to that: very privileged daughter of two academics, not African American in any meaningful sense.

    1. Or at all, really. She’s Jamaican/Indian (not Cherokee, though).

      1. And apparently was schooled in Canada and apparently a high school graduate. But that’s Canada though. Gr 12 in Canada is like Gr 11 in the US.

      2. My Jeep is more Cherokee than Elizabeth Warren, and it’s a CJ-5.

  11. Fun fact: in Finnish “kamala” means “horrible.”

    1. So she is Horrible Harris, too perfect.

    2. Google Translate is already on the case: unless you specifically request Finnish, they refuse to translate “kamala”.

      That seems to be a special case since they automatically identify Finnish as the language for similar terms.

      1. Perkele!

    3. It means that in English, too.

  12. I don’t think we should let Harris’ horrible stances on wedge issues in the past distract us from going after Biden for the horrible things that he’s advocating right now.

    Here’s his title for the Green New Deal:

    “The Biden Plan to Secure Environmental Justice and Equitable Economic Opportunity in a Clear Energy Future”


    The proposals itself is even worse than the title.

    Biden wants us to focus on Kamala Harris’ stance on sex workers. We can choose not to take the bait.

    1. Biden wants us to focus on Kamala Harris’ stance on sex workers. We can choose not to take the bait.

      I’m fine with people not voting for the Biden/Harris ticket for either the Biden or the Harris reason. It seems odd that you would care one way or the other.

      1. I suspect there are more swing voters who will vote against Biden because of the Green New Deal than there are swing voters who will vote against Harris because she’s against prostitution, and if that is correct, there are conclusions to be drawn. One of those conclusions might be about distractions. We’ll probably have laws against prostitution in this country regardless of who wins in November. If Biden wins, we’re probably retooling the economy into a fossil fuel free socialist paradise–at least until the midterms.

        1. We’ll probably have laws against prostitution in this country regardless of who wins in November.

          We’ll probably still have an EPA regardless of who wins in November either.

          Whether we end up without a fossil fuel free socialist paradise because of Harris’ stance on prostitution and weed or without an anti-weed, anti-prostitution socialist paradise because of Biden’s stance on fossil fuel, how does that make the other a distraction?

          It’s like saying passing to a teammate who’s beyond the onlly defenseman between you and the goal is a distraction from how to get around the defenseman in order to shoot on goal.

          1. “Whether we end up without a fossil fuel free socialist paradise because of Harris’ stance on prostitution . . . [blah, blah, blah]”

            My point was that we might end up with the Green New Deal because we focused on wedge issues that are meant to distract us.

            If we end up with the Green New Deal, it won’t be because of Harris’ stance on anything, but it might be because we chose to focus on wedge issues spoon fed to us by the Biden campaign rather than the best reasons to vote against Joe Biden.

  13. recently spotted at Bloodbath & Beyond shopping for long knives

  14. If Biden/Harris win and after their cronies have bought cheap all previously high-rent district urban properties destroyed and wrecked by oligarch-funded Antifa and its subsidiaries, the National Guard will be called out to clear out the previously DNC-sanctioned rioters/looters/arsonists/rapists/murderers and quell protests, followed by massively-funded neo-progressive “New Police” and “Neighborhood Redevelopment” programs. The cronies will funnel a small part of their resulting massive profits into the political war chests of their political patrons. Kamala is the right person for the job.

  15. a political opportunist who made life more dangerous for sex workers

    She didn’t need any competition with her own sex work.

    1. Or the Oakland PD’s.

  16. Black woman. End of story. Her political history and everything else does not matter today. Perhaps she might be POTUS in a few years.

    1. Perhaps?! Perhaps?!
      Have you read the 25th amendment?
      Done deal; first woman pres, period.

    2. If that were true, she would have won the primary. Sorry but we already had a black President. Having a black woman President now doesn’t carry anything like the significance with voters that having a black one did. IT does with some, but those people are already voting for Biden. It doesn’t with anyone outside the party base. And considering her performance in the primaries, maybe not really much with them.

      1. Moreover, I think the days of “It’s her turn.” party chicanery are over, or at least dramatically changed. There are plenty of women (and men), many of them ardent feminists, who would rightly recognize the first female President “award” going to a woman who stepped over her predecessor’s corpse as usurpation/ill-gotten gains.

        1. The Democrats seem unable to nominate a woman who actually earned her way there. Hillary got the nomination by being married to Bill Clinton and tolerating his philandering. Harris got where she is by being Willie Brown’s mistress. I think the whole “we can have the first woman President” would have a lot more residence if the woman in question had gotten there by her own efforts rather than by who she was married to or fucking.

          1. See: Tulsi Gabbard.

            A woman who checked all the right boxes, and even earned her way there, gets exiled while they promote people who literally slept their way to the top.

            If they weren’t so vocal about it, I’d think the Democrats don’t actually believe in feminism at all.

            1. Gabbard thought for herself and criticized the military industrial complex. And for that she was done. Democrats don’t want women thinking for themselves anymore than they want blacks thinking for themselves. They are all about racial equality and feminism like that.

            2. I liked Tulsi too, for all of those reasons. I watched the Democratic Debates and couldn’t understand why she wasn’t polling better with what seemed a sound platform. She was better than the talking head, we’ll give you everything, infighting bunch surrounding her. I thought Buttegieg, though inexperienced, was holding his own with the lot and especially loved how he called out Bernie for owning three houses. Bernie, free stuff for all, but not out of my pocket, Sanders explained how he DESERVED a house in Vermont, one in DC and a Summer Getaway in the Hamptons. Comedy Gold.
              Once Tulsi was excluded from further debates after calling out Harris it was pretty clear she would not get any serious attention anymore. Nothing like quieting a voice of reason so the rest of the clowns could talk louder. haha

              1. Of course, that’s what communists like Sander sincerely believe. They’re the vanguard doing the so-difficult job of leadership, so of course they deserve 3 houses.

      2. Not poor enough! Damn you, Kamala for having two parents who worked hard and got degrees and good jobs. Because that no doubt shielded her from the Black experience? Let’s see: she’s too leftist, too rightist, too white, too ambitious, lived in Canada, and slept with an older guy when she was an intern. Burn her!

        BTW, where do you think the slaves in Jamaica came from–the Tooth Fairy? And not educated enough? (See below.). She is a high school and college graduate for those of you concerned.

        1. Yeah, she should be elected since her parents had good jobs, and because you drag strawmen around?
          How about her record?

          “Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as a district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms Harris opposed them or stayed silent,” law professor Lara Bazelon wrote last year in an op-ed for The New York Times.
          “Kamala Harris had a reputation in California as a prosecutor and attorney general who waited rather than led, who moved on controversial issues only once she saw what was politically viable,” the daily Sacramento Bee wrote in a June editorial.
          As concerns police brutality — a subject very much in the news following the death of George Floyd, a black man whose killing at the hands of police in May sparked nationwide protests — Harris has also been criticized for failing to intervene in cases involving police violence….”

          Are you paid or just a random lefty piece of shit?

    3. How is Harris a “black woman”? Are you applying the one drop rule?

      1. Do you have her 23andme profile? She is Indian and African-American. Now we hear that her line includes a white slave trader in Jamaica. Is her maternal progenitor the Caucasian wife of said slave trader? My guess is no, she was more likely a slave. I don’t haveher geneaolgy chart at hand, but it seems she’s more like <20 Caucasian, and isn't that all that counts in this country?

        1. Do you have her 23andme profile?

          I asked: by what criterion is she supposed to be black? So you tell me.

          I don’t haveher geneaolgy chart at hand, but it seems she’s more like <20 Caucasian, and isn't that all that counts in this country?

          That’s what counts to racists. Are you a racist?

      2. Is Kamala Harris Legally African American, Indian, Both, Neither, or Something Else?
        Harris’ origins allow her to properly claim Asian or Black/African American legal status, and she has chosen the latter.

  17. Kamala Harris is a very safe choice for a ticket that is winning at this time. She will bring enthusiasm and that is important. Her tough stance as a prosecutor are likely to be forgotten, but her prosecutor style will be useful against Pence and his boss. As an aside, black woman drive Trump crazy, especially when they question him and his reactions will be fun to watch.

    1. You’re hilarious.

    2. Damn this is bot-level sentience.

      1. “Damn this is bot-level sentience.”
        Your assumption is that the slimy piece of lefty shit is sentient.

    3. black woman drive Trump crazy

      *cues up Some Girls, by the Rolling Stones*

      1. I expect that every Presidential news conference between now and November 3 will include a question that starts with “Kamala Harris says”. I am guessing that Presidential news conferences last until mid September and then stop entirely. After that we will only hear from President Trump in tweets and call-ins to Fox and Friends.

      2. play Monkey Man next.

        1. Because she’s been passed around by every she-rat in this town?

          1. just my favorite Stones. the intro is beautiful.

            1. Lots of good stuff on Let It Bleed.

              1. Yes. From Beggers Banquet, Let it Bleed, Sticky Fingers, and onto Exile on Mainstreet, I don’t think any band in history, including the Beatles had a run of four records in a row that were that great. They did those four records in about three and a half years. Holy cow what a creative burst.

                1. I like all of those, but It’s Only Rock and Roll is my favorite Stones album.

                  1. I like that one too. Let it Bleed is probably my favorite. My favorite after their best period is Some Girls. That is a fantastic record.

              2. i think it was the first one w/o Brian Jones or something and they really didn’t have any replacements set up so *all* the guitars are Keith.

                1. And a lot of the base parts as well. The base line on Sympathy for the Devil is Kieth. People don’t give Kieth enough credit as a musician. Listen to Get Your YaYas out sometime. Half of the guitar solos are Kieth. He is thought of as the master rhythm guitarist and best riff and guitar hook writer after Chuck Berry. And he is all that. But he could really shred too. His solo on Sympathy for the Devil, which is the first one that comes out on the right speaker (Mick Taylor’s is second and comes out on the left) is epic. It is real 70s guitar God stuff that Clapton or Dwayne Alman or any of the greats would have been happy to have played.

                  1. I got a Telecaster because it’s what he plays.

                2. No. Mick Taylor is the reason that era is so great.

    4. Careful. We have a large number of threatened white males here.

      1. Seems we only have a couple lefty shits here.

  18. I would love to see her in court “your honor, just because we paid off a lab tech to falsify the evidence and didn’t mention that we found out the defendent wasn’t in the country at the time of the crime, that does not make the confession we wrote for him false”

    1. That sounds familiar – Kamala is an evil version of Otter in Animal House

  19. No idea whether Biden was awake when this decision was made, but it seems like his team is trying to lose. As abhorrent as the thought of Susan Rice being the VP pick was, at least her exploits had slipped into more or less a distant memory at this point.

    1. Remember, this isn’t just the VP pick. If elected, Biden isn’t going to make it through his first term. They’ll have enough trouble getting him through the swearing-in on Jan 20, before invoking the 25th Amendment on the 21st.

  20. “making her the first African American vice-presidential candidate in U.S. history”
    I thought she was Jamaican and Indian. Shouldn’t it be first Black VP candidate? Identity politic labels are confusing

    1. >> first Black VP candidate

      because they started capitalizing it 6 weeks ago even if she wasn’t she would be

      1. The VC has a nice explanation of which categories she is eligible to claim, and in which circumstances.
        She can be as black as Emperor Hussein was.

        1. Did that include her anchor baby status?

    2. “Black” refers to African-Americans, so she isn’t “Black”.

      She also isn’t “black”, being more light skinned than Trump.

      1. If she’s Biden’s running mate, then she ain’t black!

      2. I can’t say this to a certainty, but I don’t believe her pigment is the result of sprayed on chemicals, so not an apt comparison.

      3. Don’t forget, though, that blacks range from being very dark complected to being very light complected. Not all blacks look or act the same, either.

        1. Not according to Biden.

      4. Too light-skinned. You people really get to the intellectual heart of the issue. She’s African-Jamaican then?

        1. Presumably the question could be answered by seeing what Jamaican immigrants refer to themselves as.

    3. Shouldn’t it be first Black VP candidate?

      Given that she is actually lighter skinned than Trump, does that mean that Trump is our second Black president?

  21. Leave it to Biden to make the worst choice available. I was right though — he went with the candidate with the best hair.

    1. She passed the sniff test.

  22. Geez, I was planning on voting for Biden, but after hearing how bad Kamala is I guess I’ll vote for Trump instead. Said no one ever. There can’t be that many people who are really undecided between Trump and Biden, but those few people might be enough to swing the election, which is why they’re called “swing voters” instead of the more accurate “morons”. They’ll wait until the last minute to read up on some shit on the candidates to see which one sounds better and make their decision based on about 5 minutes worth of research. And what do you suppose they’ll be reading? Not one damn word of criticism of Kamala Harris, I’ll tell you that. As somebody posted elsewhere, there’s a NYT editorial about what a terrible piece of shit Harris is, but that was from last year and you can bet your ass the NYT is trying their best to memory-hole that particular editorial. There simply is too stark a difference between the candidates that this contest has to come down to who can attract the larger chunk of the ignorant voters and the MSM is going to go whole hog on keeping the voters ignorant.

    1. Generally, I agree with you Jerry. Never in my lifetime has the VP pick meant squat when it comes to the actual election. That said, however, never in my lifetime has a major party nominated someone who is so clearly physically and mentally unfit for the job as Biden. Even the people who claim Biden is up to the job admit he is unlikely to be so for his entire term. So, I can’t help but wonder if this might be the one time where the VP pick matters. There are people out there who want to vote for Biden but won’t because they see how out of it he is. If they were to really like the VP, I imagine those people will be less concerned about Biden’s mental issues. If, however, they see the VP as a nutjob unfit for office, then Biden’s mental issues become a much bigger concern.

      1. A vote for “Binden” is really a vote for Kamala; read the 25th amendment.

        1. I think a good number of people agree with you. And that makes this VP pick important where normally the VP pick is not.

        2. A vote for FDR is a vote for Truman!

      2. Ferarro carried Minnesota for Mondale.

        1. Closest presidential race in history, that was!

      3. “never in my lifetime has a major party nominated someone who is so clearly physically and mentally unfit for the job”

        Clearly false as the Republicans nominated Donald Trump in 2016.

        1. Trump has served effectively for four years. You dumb asses need to pick a fucking talking point. Is Trump incompetent and unable to do the job or an arch villain tyrant who is going to appoint himself dictator for life. Try thinking and giving your lies some internal consistency. That will work better than just emoting like you are now.

    2. She has no play in the upper midwest and is very likely a negative there….Joe just gave away the election, sorry, champ

      1. Joe Biden can handle the upper Midwest. Kamala will bring out voters in close southern and western states. Can Biden/Harris win there, unlikely, but keeping them in play hurts Trump/Pence.

        1. Joe Biden can’t even handle his upper set of dentures, much less the upper Midwest. This VP announcement is about as consequential as Cruz picking Carly Fiorina in 2016, who gives a shit? Not a lot of people, I suspect.

    3. It’s not about people changing their minds.

      It’s about whether they bother showing up to vote at all.

    4. I was voting Jo Jo until this, so that’s one in Trump’s column that wasn’t there before yesterday.

  23. Everything Trump haters secretly wished Trump had done but did not, Harris will do and be cheered for it.

  24. And she’s probably not a natural born citizen. Birtherism is back baby! Maybe we’ll get a court case this time. Who has standing? Pence?

    1. I am not following that argument at all. She was born on US soil. That makes her a US citizen. Her father wasn’t a diplomat or anything. Her parents were foreign citizens but birthright citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment.

      The argument about Obama was that he wasn’t actually born in the US. But Harris was. I don’t see how she could possibly not be a natural born citizen.

      1. The birthier argument for Obama and Harris is the same, for some people American means white.

        1. Yeah, that is why Herman Cain and Colin Powel had that problem right?

          For people like you, American apparently means stupid. Jesus Christ you are an idiot.

          1. So how else would you explain the Obama birtherism?

            1. “So how else would you explain the Obama birtherism?”

              Idiots almost as stupid as you who didn’t like Obama.
              See how easy that is?

            2. So how else would you explain the Obama birtherism?
              Maybe it was the mini-bio his publisher put out that said “Born in Kenya…” and that the first “proof” provided of his US birth was self-admittedly phony, might have had something to do with it.
              Remember, it was Sidney Blumenthal, a HiLIARy acolyte, that first floated 0blama’s lack of “natural born citizen” status.

            3. So how else would you explain the Obama birtherism?

              Superficially, it was about a fake legal issue. Fundamentally, it was about the fact that Obama hated (and hates) US culture and history; Obama thinks and acts like a foreign leftist intellectual.

        2. The birthier argument for Obama and Harris is the same, for some people American means white.

          Stop projecting your own racism onto others.

      2. Birthright citizenship via location of birth is not enshrined in the 14th, but via parental status is.

      3. Wait a minute, John. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, which is part of the United States. Therefore, he was born here in the United States.

  25. Kamala Harris was the biggest phony on the Dem primary stage. Examples (verbatim answers of hers): Q. “Should they ban plastic straws, Kamala?” A. “Um, I think maybe they should.” Q. “Should felons (e.g., the Boston Bomber) be allowed to vote from prison, Kamala?” A. “I think we should have that conversation.”
    Other stuff: Her complete-bullshit, tearing-up performance taking down Biden for opposition to busing. Her 100%-non-substantive pure perjury-trap questioning for Kavanuagh during the hearings (“Have you ever spoken to attorneys with the firm Kasowitz Benson?”)
    Just a fucking horrorshow of an individual. Well done, Joe.

    1. I love the notion of a perjury trap. Of course, Harris was questioning a naïve young man with no knowledge of the law, and he was unable to condition his response with “that I know of.”

      1. Got to be dizzy after that.

      2. He was quite able to condition his responses. That doesn’t excuse Kamala’s reprehensible conduct.

  26. Kamala Harris is horrible on gun rights.

    1. Kamala Harris is horrible on gun rights.


      1. Kamala Harris is horrible on gun rights.

        FTFY 😀

    2. As is much of the US population.

      1. Sure they are, that is why gun control is such an electoral winner for the Democrats.

        If you were not so stupid, I would explain to you the concept of revealed preference versus stated preference and how that makes the various push polls about how America supports “common sense gun control” irrelevant. But, there is no way you are capable of understanding those concepts. So why bother?

        1. That one’s not wrong, though. I’d say at least the same third that likes gun rights, is also on the opposite side disliking them.

  27. How long before Biden gets confused and tells Harris to make sure to vacuum under the couch?

    1. That already happened when she showed up for the interview. I guess she was just relieved that the whole “busing thing” is now just water under the dementia bridge.

  28. I wonder what Harris’ position would be on a vice President helping frame and entrap political enemies using the Federal TopCops by using something like the Logan Act to criminalize normal Presidential Transitions

    1. I totally trust a woman who once argued that faking a confession did not rise to the level of “gross proprietorial misconduct” necessitating the dismissal of charges against a defendant with control of the FBI and Federal Intelligence community. I mean, who wouldn’t?

      Harris makes Hillary seem like an honest patriot.

  29. An article that is critical of a Democrat?

    Nope. This piece is just a figment of your imagination. I have it on good authority from most of the posters here that Reason is in the tank for Democrats because they are critical of Trump.

    This is a leftist publication because it is critical of Trump.

    So this piece here is just an illusion. A mirage. Nothing to see here, move along. Can’t go against the “Reason hates Trump and loves Democrats!” narrative.

    1. Reason adopts a progressive world view with a few libertarian-leaning policies. They also have a pathological hatred of Trump.

      I’m sorry such nuance is too simple for your partisan worldview, where everybody needs to fit into one of two boxes.

  30. She and Hillary are like twins, both willing to say or do anything to get a vote today and say the opposite tomorrow. In other words, both are political sluts.

  31. “According to the California secretary of state’s website, the Trumps donated a total of $8,000 to Harris’s campaigns from 2011-2014. Trump, a former real estate tycoon and television personality, announced his candidacy for president in 2015, and had not held public office before that. ”

    This isn’t the first time Trump’s political “opponents” were people he supported for election. Trump famously praised Hillary Clinton’s term as Sec of State, and donated money to the Clinton Foundation.

    Does anyone find it strange that all of these “opponents” go to each others’ weddings, contribute to each others’ campaigns, and go to the same parties? Politics is like WWF, where good friends pretend to be sworn enemies in order to get gullible people to buy tickets to the show.

    1. It’s just hedging your bets. You wouldn’t want someone to win an election that you hadn’t already bribed, the price goes way up once they’re in office.

  32. Thanks for this information about Kamala Harris, I’m her big fan. This is my website Yo WhatsApp, it’s all about celebs.

  33. Didn’t her ancestor in Jamaica own over 200 slaves in the early part of the 19th century?

    1. Sure, but that was a long time ago, and people don’t have to repeat their ancestor’s mistake. For actually relevant support of the Democratic party’s oldest tradition – slavery – read the part about Kamala’s office arguing to keep minor offenders in prison because the state needed cheap labor.

  34. Still better than Coach Closet.

  35. “Harris fought to destroy Backpage.com”
    Backpage back story: Serial killers used Backpage to entice their victims to assignations from which they never returned.

    1. Gee, I understand that some people were lured to their deaths OVER THE TELEPHONE!!!!
      Should we ban that, or should we just consider you an ignoramus?

  36. Kameleon Harris will adopt whatever position it takes to get elected.

    1. In SF, we were ‘privileged’ to witness her progress from ‘mistress of Willie’ to DA, thence to CA AG.
      AFAIK, Kamala Harris never stood before cameras or gave an interview unless she had carefully gauged the political wind direction and equally carefully wind-socked her response.
      The woman has no principles other than self-promotion. As surprising as it might sound, her ‘mentor’ does claim in his columns to have some (which, of course, no longer represent any danger to the doddering old crook); she has never exhibited any at all.

  37. according to intellectual dilettantes on CNN she also seems to be the greatest orator since Pericles

    1. That’s a different sense of “orator”.

  38. “Harris’s attorneys argued that nonviolent offenders should stay behind bars because the state needed their cheap labor.”

    Just upholding the Democrats’ oldest tradition: slavery.

  39. The lameness and childishness of the Harris rollout was quite shocking….a comparison to ebola? ( a complete non sequitur)…our performance against other countries in the covid situation?…which of course she failed to define why she thought the US was the worst…and then some silly “the court or the judge has ruled against Trump” (paraphrasing here) kind of line….were they serious?….this was their opening and this was their best material? lol

  40. This is Really Good oputunity for everyone who wana make a big amount at home own laptop And make your family happy so can u do>> Click For Detail.

  41. As far as being a drug warrior I know people can change. I did along with a lot of other police, prosecutors, judges and others at Law Enforcement Action Partnership who think out drug policies are a total failure.. So let’s see what shes says now.

Please to post comments