No, Ms. Harris. I don’t trust you at all. Ambition, not principles, rules.
3
Like some other California commenters,I voted for Harris to be the US Senator for California - not to use it as a stepping stone, after not even completing her first term as a senator - to run for president. Hubris. I'm aware that Barack Obama was a first term senator but then, I supported Hilary in 2008. I've watched her at the debates. She lost me after the cheap shot she took at Joe Biden in the first debate. She's got nothing, she is nothing.
3
Any politician who says "trust me" requires pause.
5
kinda ironic that she criticizes people for making criticisms about her in regards to her prosecutorial record in the 90s even though she attacked Joe Biden on something he did in the 1970s
6
Harris' plan even says that in order to end the "failed" war on drugs, "It begins with legalizing marijuana." But these are the hard facts: Marijuana arrests are only 5% of arrests and nearly 50% of people in prison are there for violent crimes. Only around 5% of people in prison are "low level" non-violent drug offenders, and less than 1% of people are in prison for marijuana. Critics of this false standard narrative have shown that if you remove "drug" convictions from state prisons, the black population drops from 37.5% to 37%.
So, Senator Harris, even if you legalize marijuana, what are you going to do with the other 99% in prison to "end the failed war on drugs"?
We could remove all drug convictions, and the U.S. would still have among the highest incarceration rates in the world. We could remove all people of color from prison, and the U.S. would still top every other developed country for prison rates. Private prisons hold only 8 percent of prisoners, yet activists constantly bray about greed driving mass incarceration. Polls show Americans are ignorant in many other areas, too: For example, 61% of Americans believe half of the prison population are made up of drug offenders when that number is closer to 1 in 5.
9 out of 10 black people want the same or more police, according to Gallup polling. They're even calling for more police in their communities than white people are. What about those voices?
Something tells me that we've all been bamboozled.
3
Trust me? Kamala Harris is the last person I would trust among the 2020 Democratic candidates. We saw her true nature on display at the first debate. She is willing to do anything for political gain.
7
This is an incredibly confusing, idiotic way to back track on her history as a prosecutor. Harris could of said, "I was elected by the people, it was a tough on crime area, I implemented strong policies because we believe that to be a deterrent at that time. We know more now and I plan to reform the criminal justice system in these ways when I am president." But instead, she's trying to say she went against the current ? and now the current has changed ? so she can sail with it. That makes no sense! If she truly felt like there were injustices in our criminal justice system, she should've been a public defender, or a civil rights attorney. Power to her for being a black woman in a high position of power in a difficult era, but she can't recant the years she incarcerated people and rejected their paroles.
Our criminal justice system is built to re-traumatize and oppress marginalized people in our communities. How dare she exploit the lives of people she has traumatized and put behind bars to boost her declining poll numbers?
So no, Ms. Harris, I do not trust you. Joe Biden would be able to deliver "expert insight" into our criminal justice system by your argument. However, Mr. Biden actually held a position to represent people and protect their liberties from the state.
6
Senator Harris’s plan sounds thoughtful and reasonably designed.
That doesn’t answer legitimate questions about Harris’s prosecutorial career, however. While a prosecutor, Harris failed to use prosecutorial discretion to protect the very rights she now defends. And her actions on criminal justice were consistently conservative until she aspired to a Senate seat.
Yes, Kamala Harris can evolve. But she doesn’t get to rely on claims about evolution until she concedes that other candidates— most prominently Joe Biden— have evolved, too.
My view on Harris is that she is a smart lady, but too slick for her own good.
3
The thing is, that when I see the people that we are talking about who are in the system, I see them in a multidimensional way,” Ms. Harris said. “And I don’t just see them based on race and gender. It’s not something I read about. It’s more complex than just knowing the history of racism in America — which most people don’t — it’s about also being able to see them as people.”
The above statement for me is why at this time in our history this country needs a woman like Kamala Harris to be our President. What we need more than ever is someone who can see that there is a real need to see people as human beings, irrespective of all else and that 'everyone' is treated equally .
5
@Britl
Well America needs someone who will work for all the people, her track record shows that she does not. Dont be fooled by the fake gold, there is no substance in the product
33
I suspect that much of the criticism on this issue comes less from the black community, than from white people projecting what they believe black people think. It reduces the issue of police misconduct to a reflexive anti-cop meme, useful as a political wedge issue but utterly worthless in crafting public policy.
Black people can and do appreciate the need for effective law enforcement, which is undermined by police misconduct, not served by it. Kamala Harris is the right messenger for this argument.
10
@Kathleen L. I am not black. However, I am offended by any DA who will block evidence that could reasonably have the potential to exonerate a prisoner. When candidate George W. Bush once glibly said in an interview that he was confident that an innocent man had never been executed in Texas, he lost me forever. Harris's actions in the Kevin Cooper case are similarly defining. Her posture has been more about winning than about justice and truth. She is smart and charismatic, and I wish I could support her, but she is far too willing to set doing the right thing aside in favor of expediency to be good for the badly wounded soul of this country.
20
@Kathleen L. So you support fabricated evidence by police and prosecutor, suppression of evidence favorable to a defendant by law enforcement and the prosecutor, and other brands of prosecutorial misconduct?
Those are cases she fought to the supreme court here in california.
I would also like to mention Harris supported locking you up for the truancy of your child. What a misuse of the criminal justice system.
Please examine Harris' record closely.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
us army 1969-1971/california jd
2
After reading Kamal Harris's book The Truths We Hold, I found both her personal biography and professional experience compelling. She represents diversity - a woman, daughter of immigrants, well-educated, proven state wide vote-getter in a large, financially supportive state who has attracted smart politicians to her cause. The fact that she has worked inside a system--criminal justice--which is getting overdue scrutiny and reform--and can now candidly reassess her role to keep up with public awareness, is a real asset.
Democratic values are always open to criticism and review, think of affirmative action, support for people with disabilities, gay marriage, Black Lives Matter and women's rights in recent years. We don't abandon "the rule of law" in the process--we rewrite the laws! Harris is uniquely qualified.
11
@Fran B. Proficient in this field, you say, yes she supported and enforced locking up the poor parent for their child's truancy from school. As a father of eight, I would never vote for someone who would lock me up for such a situation, let alone her record on not turning over favorable information to defendants and protecting cheating district attorneys and law enforcement.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
4
@Fran B. Harris supported and enforced locking up the poor parent for their child's truancy from school. As a father of eight, I would never vote for someone who would lock me up for such a situation, let alone her record on not turning over favorable information to defendants and protecting cheating district attorneys and law enforcement.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
1
@Fran B. Sorry but I'm not looking for a candidate who represents, "diversity." I'm looking for a candidate who represents integrity, leadership, experience, good judgment, and policy expertise. I could care less what racial or gender or sexuality boxes a candidate ticks.
9
"to overhaul the criminal justice system, vowing to end mass incarceration and revamp police practices through a progressive wish list of policies, including some ideas Ms. Harris previously rejected during her years as a district attorney and state attorney general."
Too little to late for running on overhauling criminal justice. She already had that chance.
6
What people should be asking themselves is why every time a woman is willing to put herself out there, particularly someone who has dedicated her life to public service and not to a multi-million dollar a year corporate job like Harris, is she relentlessly attacked on social media??? Could it be the same reason that out of five top candidates she is the only one who is mixed race and not a white male?
Even if you all were black, you should be looking at your own racial bias against one of the only black candidates and women out there.
She has integrity and grit, and I know the city she served and parts were decimated by crack and gangs, downtown SF no more than a way station for criminals spreading HIV and poison before they were incarcerated once again.
She knows how to lead without bribery or scandal and Trump is terrified at the thought of running against her, and he should be.
We have a real criminal in office spreading hate, fear and division, so re-evaluate your game when attacking the real, and not a “poser.” Look it up.
4
@Anonymous. The choice for now is not between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. There are 10 or more other Democratic candidates out there besides Harris with equally distinguished or even better records. Some of them are women like Warren and Klobucher whose education and experience would also have brought high salaries in the corporate world. Warren has been much more consistent in her policy proposals over the years and has not found it necessary to play catch-up every week and latch on to somebody else’s newest idea.
While she may be free from scandal, Harris’s record in law enforcement in California has opened her up to a lot of criticism and would certainly be used against her in the general election. People who might not vote for Trump might not come out to vote for anybody else either.
Harris was collecting money for a presidential run back in 2016 almost as soon, or even before she had been seated in the Senate. She had done nothing to show that she was ready to be president. Between January of 2016 and the first Democratic debate the only ideas for her campaign she seemed to come up with were a defense of forced busing, complete with a tee shirt to advertise it, and a speech with some phony distress that she hoped would embarrass Biden. She was putting on her act for the jury.
With the number of choices among the Democratic candidates for the nomination, Harris is way down on my list. Being better than Trump is hardly a recommendation.
6
What Kamala Harris discovered to her chagrin is that you can't hunt with the hounds and run with the hare - and that the digital age affords little escape from previous public postures and deeds.
She undoubtedly thought her attempt to paint Biden a racist in the first debates was a brilliant move. But she was unwittingly making a target of herself given her own race record as a prosecutor and state's attorney. The damage to her own campaign was far more enduring than it was to Biden's.
I have no doubt Harris is eminently more qualified to run the country than Trump ... but who isn't? In admitting you're riding the winds of public sentiment 'just like everybody else', you're not only being unfair to everyone else (like Sanders and Warren who stuck their necks out for principle) but you're offering delegates little to distinguish you from the crowded field of Democratic hopefuls.
3
The question of mass incarceration is brought up but there is no indication of a number or comparison with other nations.
I'm a California native born and raised in Los Angeles county (Compton). I voted for Kamala Harris for CA Attorney General. I voted for Kamala Harris for US Senator. But, I'm sorry to say, that I do not trust Sen. Harris to reform the criminal justice system BECAUSE she was a DA who sent poor black/brown people to jail/prison for minor marijuana offenses knowing that she herself had smoked weed. That makes her a hypocrite. These new criminal justice proposals are too little justice for those she herself imprisoned and it's way too late.
29
She kept thousands of California prisoners in solitary confinement for life even when then President Obama said it was inhumane. The Center for Constitutional Rights labeled her a reactionary not someone who stood up for the powerless.
Not my idea of a reformer. The candidates must explain their past behavior.
4
The DA of a big city gets a flood of prosecution recommendations from all the area law enforcement agencies. And she pursues a small number of investigations that she initiates herself.
The cases that are referred to the DA’s office are screened — some are assigned for prosecution, some are declined, and some are sent back for more work. If a case is to be prosecuted, it is worked by a line attorney and then charged (unless the line attorney recommends declination). Once charged, the vast majority of cases are disposed of by plea agreement. In the most significant cases, these agreements are reviewed by the DA. Otherwise, they are rubber stamped.
The DA exercises her influence in three main ways: telling the police what to investigate and what to let slide; reviewing prosecution decisions; and reviewing plea agreements. Her role is almost always reactive. Her only proactive input is in deciding what should and should not be investigated. And her influence there is overrated. If she directs that drug use cases not be referred, for example, the police are likely to find other offenses to charge — disorderly conduct is one favorite. As for special investigations, there aren’t many. And making cases based on a political agenda is tough. The fact that you want to protect minorities, for example, is tough to translate into convictions.
So what is a progressive DA? Mostly, she is a DA with a traditional caseload who talks progressive talk.
1
She seems like she is ALL politician. Whichever way the winds blow she will follow, so long as it leads to the throne.
She should have a suitable consort.
Her and Mark Rubio; now there's a power couple!
6
If the Democratic candidates are going to speak of criminal justice reform, decriminalizing border crossings, reparations and doing away with private health insurance then the only question that remains is how big President Trump's winning margin will be.
If the Democrats want to win the White House in 2020: Run the campaign Bill Clinton ran and Barack Obama ran. Come back in from the far Left edge.
6
“I know the system from the inside out,” Ms. Harris said. “So trust me when I say we have a problem with mass incarceration in America. Trust me when I say we have a problem with accountability. Trust me when I say we have to take the profit out of criminal justice.”
I trust you when you say all this, Kamala. After all, you helped to create these problems and enthusiastically perpetuated them, so, yes, I trust that you know what the problems are. But, as Einstein is reputed to have said, the problems we face will not be solved by the same minds that created them--in other words, not by you. No. not by you.
7
Not mentioned in this article is that Harris sent an innocent man to the death chamber who was later proven innocent by the Innocent Project...
She also had 1600 arrested for smoking pot while she is guilty of having smoked weed.
Lastly, she made arrangement for men meant to be released to say longer, past their release date, to do labor for the state and complete a work project.
9
I say this as a young black man from the San Francisco Bay Area...
I'm so sick of the Harris haters. Every credible candidate that is running for president has changed their positions over the years, often times that is because people can evolve and chance their positions genuinely. Gasp! Warren was a Republican for much of her adult life. Sanders voted for the 1994 crime bill and had a very squishy record on gun violence prevention. But somehow, Harris the villain closet conservative?! It's absolutely ridiculous.
It's a wonderful thing when Harris's people are reaching out to DeRay Mckesson for his insight and actually implementing his suggestions in her plan. Not to mention Harris's incredibly progressive Senate voting record and her very progressive policy stances on immigration and refugee reform along with gun violence prevention.
The Democrats are running several well qualified and progressive candidates. Harris is undoubtedly one of the strongest ones.
8
@Marcus L. as an Angeleno I feel the need to respond to you especially because you're so on point. You are 100% correct in your assessment of the other candidates; Joe Biden wrote the 1994 Crime Bill, Bernie Sanders voted for it. And DA Harris effectively "prosecuted" it. All 3 people are now back-tracking. But, they've all caused tremendous collateral damage. Harris as a black woman and a DA could've reduced, alleviated or corrected the damage (especially in San Francisco/Oakland/Sacramento) but she chose silence, inaction and vacillation. That doesn't make her any worse than any of the other candidates but criminal justice cowardice hurts more when it comes from someone who should absolutely have known better.
4
This woman has more chutzpah than any chance to become President. She's throwing a hail Mary pass to keep her candidacy alive. Democrats nominate her at their peril.
6
This should have been her platform from day 1.. She came out rallying against Trump but and that was the extent of her campaign. She spiked after her, "You go girl!" moment with Biden on the debate stage and she's been falling since.
The only problem with her plan is that it will cost money and the American voter doesn't want to watch their tax dollars benefiting criminals. This is her desperate attempt to get back in the game, and it may be too little too late.
3
When Kamala was California Attorney General, she did not prosecute Steve Mnuchin's bank even as it was stripping tens of thousands of Californians of their homeequity. Then she took five grand from Steve for her Senate run. and now he is our Treasury Secretary. The homeowners that lost their homes suffer on while she rises from their ashes.
10
Kamala's opening play in the first debates, was dirty trickster. She will never overcome her race baiting set up of Joe Biden. And, the black community, who still solidly backs Biden, was insightful enough to see through her patronizing.
The best she can do is offer concepts and plans that may serve the greater good of the eventual leading candiates. Harris can then go back to supressing evidence and trying to keep disadvantaged people in prison!
5
Senator Harris should take over the currently corrupt/racist Justice department after the election.
This is the best place for her talents, not the presidency.
The overhaul would be transformative for our country. The Department of Justice is where she is needed.
3
@lechrist
Here Here! All the running candidates deserve cabinet posts or high office posts after the election!
3
Please, Democratic candidates, stop with the cannibalization of your own! Every time it happens, you give The Chump fuel for the general election.
1
Political proposals from leading politicians most of the time either fail to make dramatic change , have little impact , or make matters worse . The bigger she is promoted by the Media the more ineffective will be the plans she produces to gain wide support. That's how it always is as politicians try to satisfy all of the voters publicly and then act in whatever way big business , or big donors tell them to behind closed doors .
The proposals summarized here are a case in point as he totally fails to address one of the biggest problems the incarceration of people for personal drug use that harms not only them , but also their families . Clogs up the system and makes lawyers unavailable and reduces the defense available to poorer defenders unequal to that of wealthier ones and does nothing to address addiction .
The drain on law enforcement is also obvious if one just watches one cop show as they spend most of their shift arresting and processing people for minor drug use harming first offenders with a record that will harm upward mobility and affect them and their family for life for a mistake or something they cannot control if addicted .
Furthermore , is she needed the latest protest by BLM to motivate her to address the historical unequal treatment of minorities and the poor by the Criminal Justice System this suggests she is just another major politician unaware of peoples needs and part of the problem .
2
@VB
s/b as she totally failed to address , and if she needed the latest protest .
1
Close ties with Gov. Newsom and his oil billionaire wife, is enough to cry detour on the road to the Presidency.
And, unless Warren was once a KGB agent, and Sanders' is Putin's brother, we do not need more information on the two of them.
As far as Biden, set aside his distinguished career, his ship has sailed and Trump knows this. He cannot win, he already proved that.
2
I guess the same reasoning would put Trump in charge of ethics reform. Sorry, senator, prosecutions have consequences, always for the prosecuted, but sometimes for the prosecutor.
2
Kamala Harris is undoubtedly qualified to be president. Until last week, she stood a good chance of becoming the Democratic nominee. But, in typical Democratic fashion, she trashed her own candidacy with a monumental blunder in judgment. She attacked Joe Biden in the first debate, and immediately her poll numbers sank through the floor. And it was announced that in the second debate, she plans to do it again. She will be out of the running by the end of the month.
To anyone else, the lesson should be obvious. Democrats do not want Democratic candidates to attack other Democratic candidates. The enemy of the American public is Donald Trump, not Joe Biden. The only issues to be discussed are how to defeat Trump, and how to undo the damage he has wrought. The far-out issues on immigration, reparations, student debt, free health care for all, etc., now under discussion by Democratic candidates are sure to throw the election to Trump.
2
A step in the right direction, although at odds with her history. Even if we get pass that on her redemption tour, she's not Presidential timber.
But on criminal justice reform, little will happen without changing the incentive system.
Right now, more tickets, arrests, indictments, judgments...lead to bigger promotion for police, chiefs, prosecutors, and judges.
Prosecutorial misconduct - suppressing evidence, unfairly eliminating jurists, setting bail too high, overcharging, cash bail, false testimony, professional perjury, etc - has little to no consequences.
For example, when Laquan McDonald was shot, the homicide was classified as justified. When McDonald's lawyer successfully sued to have the video released, a year later, the officer was fired and then charged.
No new evidence had been produced. The video, now public, was so brazen, that officials had to distance themselves from the officer by firing him and then charging him.
The reality of the video so contradicted the filed report that the charade could no longer be maintained. Meanwhile the other officers who corroborated the report, who stole CCTV video to suppress (from ironically, a Burger King), and failed to honestly characterize McDonald's slaughter should have likewise been fired and charged with perjury and conspiracy.
They were not. So when a system fails to dissuade incarceration, and rewards such statistics, is it a surprise that there's corruption?
1
All politicians, especially those running for the highest office in the land, have an ego. Ms. Harris's is supersized. For some reason she seems to feel that the nomination is hers and she is entitled to be the Democratic nominee.
How a nominee for President cannot have a clear and detailed plan for medical insurance for the American people is beyond comprehension. Biden wants to expand on the Affordable Health Care Act and most of the other candidates want to have Medicare for All. Ms. Harris? Well, it's difficult to know exactly what she wants as she does not seem to understand our health care system and how to fix it to make sure that everyone is covered. Her ignorance about this is incredible. Did she not feel this was of enough importance for her to spend some time understanding all the possible alternatives?
Now she is making a play on criminal justice reform. The lady seems to not have thought out what she stood for before she announced her candidacy.
I'm a liberal Democrat who was an enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama. I have not yet decided if my vote is going to Biden or Warren. I don't care for some of the proposals and positions of many of the candidates but at least they have positions that they have clearly spent the time to think about it. Not so for Ms. Harris, and my Party already went thru the experience of another candidate who felt she was entitled to the nomination and that attitude helped bring our nation to the disaster it faces now.
2
I often times find it difficult to trust a politician that continually says "Trust me..."
1
I find it interesting that the Kamala haters making comments all overlooked this part of the article:
"Mr. Biden helped write, and Mr. Sanders voted for, the 1994 crime bill that has been widely criticized by civil rights experts for contributing to the rising prison population."
As to Tulsi, she spewed out a list of accusations when the format did not allow time for a detailed response. Why is she in the race, what qualifies her to be President? Nothing.
I like Ms. Harris because she took on something difficult and did it well. I think she can prosecute the case against Trump and the Republicans, given a chance.
Ms. Harris seems to want her cake and to eat it too. She doesn't want to apologize or admit to any of the multiple failings on her part during her time as a prosecutor yet she wants voters to believe this new platform of hers. She understands it intellectually and it is emotionally hurtful? What does that even mean? Voters can think whatever they want but can't criticize her because it will hurt her feelings?
4
Kamala Harris is definitely a candidate with ability and perseverance. But her real talents are insincerity and opportunism and the ability to say "I didn't hear that correctly".
10
Frankly, I don’t know what motivated Senator Harris to become a prosecutor instead of a public defender. I was always outraged when the crime bill was proposed in the early 1990’s. I was always outraged at the concept of privatizing prisons. I understood mass incarceration before anyone used such terminology. I always was against the death penalty. I knew of the racism of the criminal justice system before Senator Harris was born. Would Senator Harris fight for criminal justice reform in the future? Maybe. Would she compromise each of her positions in the face of resistance in the future as she has in the past. Stay tuned.
1
Like any attorney, a prosecutor is required to zealously advocate for her client, namely the state. It’s unfortunate but true that voters never reward criminal defense attorneys. Voters even vote against judges who rule in favor of controversial defendants because it is required by law.
I like Sen.Harris and plan to carefully review her new proposal. It sounds like a big step in the right direction. I am curious about her proposal regarding bail. While it’s silly to require it of shoplifters or those who possess small amounts of narcotics, how else can you make sure that those accused of serious felonies will show up for trial? I don’t want those in possession of illegal weapons, nor those accused of assault with a deadly weapon, rape, child molestation, nor attempted murder out on their own recognizance. This is not about race/gender, it’s about public safety.
2
Kamala Harris is more phony than a $3 bill. Just like Medicare for All, it's clear that she's saying what she thinks progressives want to hear, but her actual ideology is still quite unclear. For the record, I think we need to get rid of for profit prisons, legalize marijuana, and improve prison conditions, but I think a lot of these so called "justice" reforms will only create more victims of crime. However, I still have a lot more respect for politicians who take a consistently liberal approach to the issue than those who appear to radically tack left to scrounge for votes.
4
The scariest words that you can hear from a politician are "Trust Me". There is an endless list of politicians who used those two words, and what occurred was anything that comes close to trusting them.
What we have here is another politician who is willing to say anything to get elected. And, on top of this, as a DA Mr. Harris is rather suspect. There are a number people in California prisons because of her; some probably should not be there.
Between this story, and the one on Warren, in today's Times; I am glad the t=The Times is digging up dirt to make sure we do not have a repeat of 2016; a choice between bad and worse.
2
Important to reflect upon the years Ms. Kamala has taken away from so many persons of color languishing behind bars. An apology cannot restore years of life lost in prison. This recent pivot is disingenuous and a disservice to those abused by the system she led.
4
"..she pointedly said her critics should remember the tough-on-crime political environment that dominated in the 1990s and early 2000s."
So it is okay if she changes HER stance on issues, because it is a different time, with different narratives. It is different though, when you are going after opponents because of what they did 40 years ago.
16
Harris is on a different field now than San Francisco. Please give credit for recognizing past errors and ameliorating her stance. There is no question she is proficient in this field and has the tools and experience to work the changes.
7
@DENOTE REDMOND Proficient in this field, you say, yes she supported and enforced locking up the poor parent for their child's truancy from school. As a father of eight, I would never vote for someone who would lock me up for such a situation, let alone her record on not turning over favorable information to defendants and protecting cheating district attorneys and law enforcement.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
3
I would have celebrated Harris’s ability to evolve had she not attacked Joe Biden on positions from decades past.
1
How do these candidates formulate these complex and far-reaching plans for reforms? They are working with skeleton staffs and are constantly campaigning and raising money. A plan such as hers would require inputs from many stakeholders, it would require legislative backing from the House and the Senate, it would have to take its place in line and be assigned a priority with many other legislative initiatives, which may be down on the list. And of course with the dysfunctional gridlock in US politics, which everyone can see, it is not going to happen!
This is simply not credible.
It is disheartening to see so many of the Democratic candidates for President floundering like this. What is needed is a stable individual in the office of President, someone who will perform the function responsibly with a middle of the road approach reflecting American values, and that is the basis on which these campaigns should be run. What is not needed now is someone wanting to reform fundamental segments of American society in a manner many might oppose, in other words, someone who will just lead the country into 4 more years of political gridlock.
18
The whole problem is that the “stable” and “responsible” person you are looking for would never touch this job with a 10 foot pole, for a number of reasons.
3
@gbc1
" What is not needed now is someone wanting to reform fundamental segments of American society in a manner many might oppose . . . "
And yet you speak of things not credible?
"And if I am elected, a promise to be lukewarm, tepid, and above all, redundant!"
3
@gbc1 No less credible than many of Trump's blatant lies on the campaign trail.. Drain the swamp? Mexico paying for the wall? C'mon. It's par for the course for candidates to make outrageous claims they could never do even with overwhelming majorities in congress and a stacked court..
1
Really, Kamala.
6
In my humble opinion, Ms Harris is a cop without a vision or a message for the country.
If she is the Democratic candidate Trump will run rings around her.
60
The "Kamala is a cop" meme comes mainly from Sanders' supporters. A state AG is not a cop. Harris is a prosecutor who had innovative programs for reform.
2
@Full Name (required) You say that Trump will run rings around her, when his message for the country is nothing other than to use his office to fatten his own pockets. That's pretty rich.
2
Picture Biden in a debate with Trump. Then see in your mind's eye, Kamala facing, debating [with knowledge that Trump cannot even grasp] the full list of international issues that must be addressed in the coming election. Keep your eye on who can qualify, according to experience, education, governmental knowledge, confidence in public forum, vocabulary, and cool presence. If you believe Trump can override any attributes that Kamala has, vote for him.
10
@jdoe212 I am not voting for Trump, but Harris supported and enforced locking up the poor parent for their child's truancy from school. As a father of eight, I would never vote for someone who would lock me up for such a situation, let alone her record on not turning over favorable information to defendants and protecting cheating district attorneys and law enforcement.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
1
@jdoe212 Proficient in this field, you say, yes she supported and enforced locking up the poor parent for their child's truancy from school. As a father of eight, I would never vote for someone who would lock me up for such a situation, let alone her record on not turning over favorable information to defendants and protecting cheating district attorneys and law enforcement.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
1
@jdoe212. Truman defeated Dewey just as Trump defeated Clinton. Clinton certainly had a better grasp of facts and figure than Trump has ever had in his life. Trump supporters in the electoral college states aren’t going to sit still for the facts. And Trump can make up facts faster than a cheetah can run, and defend them with the help of of every one of his flunkies in all agencies of the government, even the agency responsible for the weather.
1
I wonder if her plan includes granting new trials to inmates convicted by evidence that was tampered with, by false testimony or by evidence suppression. Convictions she let stand as California AG.
35
@Paul Turner Kammy kept a man on death row after he had been proven innocent by DNA. And she didn't just keep him there, she fought fairly aggressively to keep an innocent man on death row.
3
I'm struck by the inherent sexism and short-sightedness of the many commenters dismissing this as a purely opportunistic move for Harris. Of course she's looking to do what she can to win - if she wasn't, her candidacy would be pointless! Rather than dismiss her because of the obvious and expected, why don't we get smarter about how we as voters play the game? How might we put her determination to win to good use for our own policy purposes?
17
@NYCLady Kammy is almost solely opportunistic. She does not set out to serve the common good. She sets out to serve her insatiable ambition. Shouldn't the public good be a factor in her drive for more power?
8
@NYCLady what I am struck by, and tired of, is that any criticism of a female candidate is seen as sexist. If you want to play with the boys you have to play by the same rules. No handicap for being a woman.
9
Because her opportunism is fairly transparent and pathetic. It’s not sexist to call her out for that.
Also, you remember what happened to John Kerry, right? He was an opportunist too, switching positions so much George W. successfully labeled him a “flip-flopper” and he lost. Don’t want a repeat of that.
9
Senator Harris got blind swiped in the debates on her own record. We need to address why so many men wind up in prison to begin with. Some obviously need to be kept off the streets. There are real reasons why young men join gangs and become criminals. Let's be honest about why these men are in prison and find ways of real support to avoid their return.
19
@Pepperman
She was blindsided by a wild misrepresentation of her record. There's a difference.
Well, the Democrats would have to believe that, "It's because they're black!". But I/We know better, it's because they're criminals. I've been there, there are very, very few innocent people in jail. People are not shy about telling you what they did in jail. Unfair sentencing? How about staying out of jail? Anyway, IMO, a lot of it harks back to a lack of a father figure in the household. I doubt if that will change anytime soon.
3
@Pepperman She did not get blindswiped in the debates on her own record. She knows her record. In the SF Bay Area, where she lives and was SF attorney and then state AG, social media has been talking about her prosecutorial record every since she announced. In Bay Area, they know she is not a progressive, just a say-whatever to get votes person. She knows her record is out there and she knows folks are aware of it. She did not get blindswiped.
2
Harris laughed at the prospect of jailing parents over truancy. Harris refused to free prisoners eligible for parole because she wanted their free labor in fighting wildfires and washing cars of state officials. This is a progressive prosecutor? Harris continually touts herself as having an in with black people because she is a “woman of color” yet she is on camera saying she won’t do anything to benefit black people. And she wants black people to vote for her. I don’t think so.
46
@Lynn in DC No one was jailed under Kamala Harris' truancy policy. They were issued a summons to appear in court, where strategies were discussed to get their children back in school. Besides, in California, well over 90% of juvenile homicide victims are dropouts from school or truants. Would you rather if she had done nothing to address the problem?
As for this supposed refusal to release those eligible for parole, who were they? What types of crimes were they accused of? If no one can produce any evidence to support these claims, then they're nothing more than cheap shots lobbed by the Far Left.
6
@C.M.
Do you actually live in California? You seem uninformed on the senator's record.
Senator Harris herself said "Jailing parents was an unintended consequence of the [truancy] law." Truancy is or should be a social work matter, not a law enforcement matter. But just as a hammer views everything as a nail, a prosecutor views everything as a law enforcement matter whether it is or is not.
https://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-ff-federal-judges-order-state-to-release-more-prisoners-20141114-story.html
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/05/kamala-harris-spins-facts-on-truancy-law/
5
The only acceptable Criminal Justice Reform bill Harris could release is one she is not involved in. In fact,she should be investigated for prosecutorial misconduct and indicted. Her crimes against the community are reprehensible. Thanks to Tulsi Gabbard her record was outed on the national stage. She is a shill for the private prison industry. Maybe a little jail time will help her see who really needs to be “reformed.” She is not fit for any office.
25
The most loyal and long suffering base of the Democratic Party is black African American Protestant female.
Neither Kamala ' Persecutor' Harris nor Cory ' Corporate' Booker can consistently and credibly speak to nor for that Democratic Party foundation.
Neither has the character and credibility and humble humane empathetic civilian public service resume connection of a Barack Obama aka Michelle and a Deval Patrick aka Diane
10
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard's measured yet forceful exposure of Sen. Harris's failings as California AG demonstrated why she is the Democratic candidate most able to take the fight to Donald Trump - staying on-message, detail-oriented, not gaffe-prone, progressive but reasonable.
36
@Charles Agree 100 percent.
4
Sure, Senator Harris has “more experience with minority communities” than the other candidates—more experience throwing them in prison.
It takes a lot of nerve to run as a progressive after two decades of implementing regressive criminal justice policies and reliably doing the bidding of California real estate interests.
The only progressive policy Kamala Harris has reliably shown an interest in is her own political progression.
36
Maybe Ms. Harris' plan will give her some more street cred with progressives, but it sounds more opportunistic than sincere to me. She wants to win the nomination, I get it, but she's so all over the map that she's no longer one of my top picks. Warren, Buttigieg, Biden have a better chance at beating Trump.
28
@JAS
To me a Biden 'win' would be a step sideways at best, not a step forward. If we could have a Warren/Buttigeg 2020 ticket we would have a sure-fire winner in 2020 and the Dems would hold the White House for at least 8 years. A real win/win.
2
The USA have the worst justice system of the industrialized world.
8 times higher violent crime rate per capita than the European average.
You have 50 times more risk to be killed while robbed in the US than in Europe .
Also the highest incarceration rate per capita , 8 times as well higher than in Europe .
Almost 1 % of US citizens are in jail at all times . 0.8 % exactly.
For this, it is interesting to compare in Europe with the similar situation of England , no social benefits like in the USA , and a 50 % superior incarceration rate than the average in France, Germany or Italy.
Incarceration rate in France : 0.1 %.
England : 0.15 %
USA : 0.8 %
10
Oh wonderful, reduce incarceration so that criminals can get back on the streets and commit more crime like what happens here in California. I hope voters don’t fall for this.
15
“Ms. Harris said she was best suited to disrupt a criminal justice system that has disproportionately affected minority communities because she has more personal experiences with those communities.”
What exactly are Ms. Harris’s “personal experiences with those communities”? She is the mixed-race child of an Indian mother and a mixed-race Jamaican father, both highly educated academics. She spent her childhood in Berkeley CA and Montreal, summering in her maternal grandfather’s home in India. Such a personal history is unusual for any American, leave alone the marginalized communities that Ms. Harris claims to represent.
Ms. Harris is an opportunist whose positions are defined by the most recent opinion polls. Her lack of any core convictions other than “Kamala first” is becoming increasingly apparent to voters. She will continue to drop in the polls the more voters learn about her.
59
Kamala Harris was Biden’s number one Vp choice until she pulled her little stunt
Now he will pick Stacy or Julian or who knows.
But he won’t be picking her and it looks like the voters aren’t either
21
This is terrible. Folks in California, yes liberals, dislike Harris and her policies quite a bit. She messed up with the extreme truancy policies and now leniency with prison time, less incarceration will only result in more drug addicts who are homeless. I don’t believe any government when they say they will roll out recovery programs. Most are quite useless, as evidenced by the state of San Francisco today. Democrats are proving to be quixotic, and quite a mirror image of their Trumpian colleagues. Perhaps we made a mistake voting in Pelosi. She seems to be quite iron willed about doing diddly squat, which serves the republicans and rich quite well. Yes liberals will vote for a thoughtless, blue nominee in 2020, simply to get rid of status quo. So depressing.
14
Another phony liberal, trying to reconcile their record with what they think voters want to hear today. See: Gillibrand on Second Amendment rights, Warren on campaign financing and Biden on.....well, just about everything. The larger question is, did you believe in the things you said and did in the past or were they also insincere efforts to get elected?
15
@Larry
They didn't believe then and they don't believe now.
They just twist and turn endlessly towards POWER.
1
@Larry Fruadsters
1
I had big hope for Kamala. Right now though I can see her in the rear view mirror. She’s a solid contender but I don’t see her topping genuine progressives like Warren or Bernie.
6
Funny! she never gave poor Americans a break, now she wants a break from them?
18
Kampala Harris was a prosecutor who, at times, exhibited questionable ethics and now blames the “system “ for her decisions. She WAS the system with the nearly unfettered discretion inherent in her office.
Like Elizabeth Warren, she recently tweeted that Michael Brown was “murdered”, a statement garnering the maximum number of “Pinocchios”.
Just another politician chasing votes without regard to truth
24
"When asked about her apparent evolution, Ms. Harris said the political environment had shifted — not her core ideology."
There's unexpected truth in this. She's changed the lined she's parroting to follow the more vocal contingent of Democrats, but her core ideology hasn't shifted - it remains all about her and her ambitions.
84
The great thing about the Kamala Harris' cult of anti-Trumpism is that it isn’t actually about anything. Her philosophy is similar to a fake plastic toy they given to rank-and-file Democrats to play with so they’re too preoccupied to reach for something real, like healthcare, peace, or justice. Anti-Trumpism has never been about opposing Trump. It’s about killing off what remains of the true left in America by bullying them into falling in line with the establishment and accusing them of supporting an evil Nazi traitor if they don’t. It’s about manufacturing support for new cold war escalations with Russia. It’s about manufacturing support for internet censorship to quash anti-establishment ideas. It’s about rescuing the career of every MSM pundit who’s been proven wrong about everything since 2015. It’s about distracting from the DNC scandal which proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that democracy does not exist in America in any meaningful way. It’s about pacing rank-and-file Democrats into alignment with Bush era neoconservatives. Opposing Trump has nothing to do with it.
38
Senator Harris’ pattern of agreeing with something in the spur of the moment and then denying it later (often the very next day) claiming she hadn’t heard it - is disqualifying.
Plain and simple. Disqualifying.
She either has no core and will agree to something she expect benefits her personally or is prepared to lie about her previous position. None of the two options are comforting.
She did so the first time during the debate when she took a position for Medicare for All that she walked back the next day - claiming she hadn’t heard the question. When it was the very same question that was asked on Night 1 of the other candidates.
I found that hard to believe.
Then this time she agreed with the questioner on the ‘R’ word to describe the Trump administration. Then claimed the next day to not have heard the rest of his question (implying the questioner’s thick accent had something to do with it).
Then what was she saying “Well said, Well said” to and laughing for?
The issue isn’t that Trump says worse things and we should hold him accountable. The time for that will come soon too.
But, this pattern of saying “I didn’t hear” is deeply uncomfortable and is the excuse only a child should be allowed to get away with.
She was #2 on my list of candidates at the start of the year, but I've taken a look at all she’s done and said since and revisited my assessment of her.
103
@Patrician
Agreed. I was intrigued by Kamala early on, but I attended a campaign event in NH in February, and was taken aback at her inability to answer questions.
At that event, Harris promised to be very visible and present in NH. Now, seven months later, it turns out that she has made the fewest visits to NH of any candidate. Was she misleading people deliberately or just disorganized? Not sure which, but neither is reassuring.
51
@Patrician
Having lived in the very city where she was a prosecutor, you are right to re-consider. And the article only begins to address the issues.
43
All of the positives attributed to her-- she seems tough, really smart, female, non-white, experienced-- mean nothing if her record in California shows blind support for law enforcement, swimming WITH the current (not against), winning at any cost, and being part of the problem in criminal justice. She is an impressive talent, but an opportunist with little integrity. If she were a white male with less charisma, we wouldn't be talking about her at all.
88
@Jorge
Jorge, I got a good laugh concerning your perception of Ms. Harris ("She is an impressive talent, but an opportunist with little integrity.")
I take that comment as sarcasm; as what "talent" that is impressive concern 'being an opportunist with little integrity'.
1
Let’s just call it what it is, Ms Harris has one core value say or do anything to get elected. I’m running for DA lock em all up. I’m running for President my position changes three sixty. Not what the country needs
110
@Patrick.
We do not need another politician with close ties to billionaires, that would be Gov Newsom, and refers to her childhood as a burden when her family was well within a social, educated, upper class.
3
“Affirmative criminal justice,” espoused by Kamala Harris and others on the far left, is part of ongoing efforts to develop sympathy for criminals and make it appear that criminals are actually victims.
To set the record straight, victims of crimes are the true victims; the perpetrators—and those who aid, abet and participate in crime with them—are criminals.
I hope all the progressive prosecutors--and Democratic Presidential candidates--will give serious thought to what it means to eliminate bail, reduce sentences and allow criminals to run loose in our communities. Who is responsible for post-release crimes committed by those released early? An apology to their future victims will be of small consolation for those who are harmed; and how about compensation and restitution for the actual victims?
Early release or release without bail of thousands of criminals is a recipe for increased crime, and increased numbers of victims. (Check federal statistics of recidivism rates—very extreme and very sobering.)
Virtually no criminals are forced to commit their crimes; there is such a thing as free will.
It's simple: Just don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
17
@Mon Ray
As violent crime explodes here in St. Louis, we are getting to see what happens when you have a "progressive prosecutor." In our case, it means the rate of successful trial prosecutions has dropped to 20% when it used to be 80%. And supposedly this is some kind of victory?!
11
No one is advocating an elimination of bail. They want an end to *cash* bail, which disproportionately jails the poor and minorities, even before being convicted of a crime. Is it fair that rich criminals go free while the poor and potentially innocent languish behind bars waiting for a trial that may take months to arrive?
1
@shstl so you favor violating the constitution, e.g., using fabricated evidence?
DNA evidence shows that our criminal justice system is B+ at best, meaning 15-20% are either not guilty, or worse innocent.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
1
A very important piece of reform that wasn't listed among her reform ideas is reigning in the unfettered power of prosecutors. This is perhaps the main cause of increased incarceration, and needs to be examined and controlled.
24
@James Lerner Educate yourself, James Lerner. The main cause of increased incarceration happened because of federal legislation -- legislation Kammy enthusiastically supported as a prosecutor. But it has been federal laws that increased incarcertation, not prosecutorial discretion.
1
Senator Harris should really be a GOP representative, she made her thoughtful career of trust me off of the backs of minority people she put in prison. She could of worked on reform with her powerful positions she decided not to.
"Trust me" slogan is insulting to everyone who cares about democracy and this country. Ms. Harris is an ambitious person, it is all about her and her entitlement . She like Trump didnt care about how many people she locked up and how many families she destroyed .
There is nothing wrong with ambition but at this point in time we have enough self entitled people in political office, who know nothing and will do nothing but satisfy there own needs.
She needs to drop out of the race and focus on her position in the Senate.
43
Prisons are filled with drug dealers and that’s where they belong. Look at the devastation wrought by their activity. Every single one of those people made a choice and decided that earning an honest wage at a regular job just wasn’t for them. Now “progressives” are pushing to set them free.
8
The important point here is that we need to fix the system. It doesn't matter who proposes the plan to do so.
5
John. It really does matter who proposes the fix. If it doesn’t let’s cancel the election and keep Trump
3
Two articles today on Presidential aspirants: Ms Harris and Ms. Warren, pointing out contradictions of both individuals. I will address only the one by Astead Herndon, listed as a "...national reporter...". (That last phase is an oxymoron in my mind).
Mr. Herndon reports Ms Harris has taken up a "policy fringe" position that has become a "largely consensus position" (popular with Democrats). This has the smell of opinion, not "reporting",
(Personal comment, the byline has cheapened completely honest reporting by making the writer of same a star, instead of a humble reporter of facts.)
Herndon describes Ms Harris as "leaning into an explicit pitch" of her identity as a "woman of color". Harris rationalizes her changing political dogma as "the currents have changed"; and "like everybody else" she has her 'finger in the wind'.
The article goes on later with the 'changing currents', "everybody else" rationale.
An earlier cementer thinks Ms. Harris' talking of her mouth from both sides (my phrase) is swell "at this time in history". Ostensibly the individual thinks it would not have been earlier "in time". Another finger in the wind.
Robert Burns said "oh what a gift he gie us, to see ourselves as others see us."
Good day.
7
You know what I’d love to see - Harris grow a spine and stand up for the prosecutorial work that was clearly such an important part of her life and career. The fact that she has done nothing but cower from and try to appease the radical left-wing fringe of the Democratic Party, who never met a vicious criminal they didn’t love, is a strike against her for me.
38
@Truth Gee, why do I think the Dems never had your vote to begin with?
6
@Truth Maybe if she took your advice, she'd have to run as a Republican. I'm (not) sorry that you're upset that the Democratic party is being pulled away from the failed policies of the past.
3
Mitch & Mike - actually, I’ve voted for democrats in national and statewide elections consistently for 30 years, but whatever.
I want Trump out of office. But he gets re-elected in 2020 because the party went too far to the left, remember the moderate Dems like me who told you so.
4
Think about it.
“I was swimming against the current, and thankfully the currents have changed,” she said. “The winds are in our sails. And I’m riding that just like everybody else is — because it’s long overdue.”
Her "explanation" makes no sense. The currents she was swimming against were all the things she opposed then and now, "...thankfully, the currents have changes."
This is typical politician doublespeak. Thankfully Kamala doesn't have to press anymore to incarcerate college kids for smoking weed. Thank god, right Kamala?
Our "political class" salivates for power and all the benefits that comes with it. Houses on the shore, private jets, huge speaking fees, fetes in Palm Beach where everybody wears soft Italian loafers and sips prosecco and they'll say anything to get there.
If your friends and colleagues treated you with the disdain and disregard our "leaders" treat us you'd "unfriend" them in a minute.
This is all such a bummer. On both side of the aisle.
64
@Billy H.,
well said.
You are so right, and it is all very depressing on both sides of the aisle.
If the plutocrats can figure out a way to get her across the finish line (if Biden were to falter, Harris is their backup), then they’ll try to shame those of us who refuse to vote for her with a steady stream of accusations of racism and sexism.
No, I just don’t like authoritarian thugs, even if they’re female and a minority.
The one good thing Ms. Harris has done for the country is to prove that women and minority’s can be as ruthlessly power hungry as any white guy, although I’m puzzled as to why anyone needs proof of that.
5
Once a prosecutor always a prosecutor. Concern for the rights of the poor and minorities is not in the DNA.
43
Sorry. Poor and minorities are over represented in the victims of crime. Harris is a total mess as a candidate- but prosecutors with integrity are a treasure. Without integrity, well you know....
16
I would love to see Ms. Harris demonstrate the kind of political creativity she may be capable of, by projecting some aspect of a common cause with Biden in the next debate. If she wants cred for the capacity to unite the country (against a universal danger) that would be a breathtaking example.
8
Kamala Harris releases a hope not a plan for criminal justice reform to address national justice needs. But her “plan” would not address the complaints of Black Lives Matter activists: how would it have corrected the abuses of local police, municipal statutes, judges and state prisons in places like Ferguson, MO, Louisiana (Angola), and Alabama’s prison overcrowding.
Death bed conversions may be sincere, in life and in politically desperate campaigns. But cynics have an understandable skepticism when the convert’s plea for forgiveness is for no failing in particular. Harris needs to address her particular case policies, like her decision to prosecute minor marijuana possession cases. She was not a progressive prosecutor for justice reform while state prosecutor.
7
If Democratic voters insist on nominating only candidates whose hands are clean of any of the messy compromises that must be made to get and keep power in our political system, we will by definition have selected a candidate who cannot win in that system, and who has no real experience of administering or legislating within it. And so, as usual, I watch my party try its best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
6
It’s often the Generals and soldiers who have been to war who fight against militarism when they return.
7
Excellent point. But we wouldn’t like to see the generals continually flip flop and seldom answer questions in a straightforward or coherent manner. Or be intentionally divisive for no cause other than self-promotion.
3
Too little too late Kamala.
Major, and devastating, criticism of your prosecuting career came out six months ago (to the national audience) and you have continued to run on your dated view of that role. It has been the downfall of your candidacy.
59
Kamala Harris put rapists, murderers and armed felons behind bars.
Apparently, this is "Part of the problem?"
13
@bayboat65 suppression of favorable evidence to a defendant and fabrication of evidence and prosecutorial misconduct violate the constitution and the statutory law here in California, and generally in the US. So having the State rely on such evidence is "Part of the problem" and who advocated to overlook it, Kamala Harris.
Plus she wanted to lock up poor kids for their children's truancy. I am a father of eight. I would never support such a person using our criminal justice system to do such a thing, but had to encounter those threats, although in every case it was the school's own record keeping at fault.
us army 1969-1971/california jd
2
Senator Harris is done. This is just a desperate move after her poorly thought out ambush on Biden,
71