Search This Blog

Saturday, November 2, 2024

Harris says spent ‘entire career in trenches’ but how many cases has she actually prosecuted?

 How many cases has Kamala Harris actually prosecuted in a courtroom?

Despite her profile on the California Attorney General website stating she spent her “entire career in the trenches as a courtroom prosecutor,” the only available evidence shows her trying between seven and 15 felonies.

They include a domestic violence scalping, one murder, armed robbery and two child sex crimes – though she claims to have taken hundreds of cases to court.

No records are available from any of those cases, and the only one to have made the news was the 1996 scalping case.

Harris started her career in Alameda County, where she was born, in 1989. In her book “The Truths We Hold” she described being crushed about how she had failed the bar and might not be accepted into the department, but they allowed her to continue working with them until she did finally pass in 1990.

Kamala Harris in 2004 during her stint as the San Francisco District Attorney.MediaNews Group via Getty Images
She was then an assistant district attorney in Alameda from 1990 to 1998 before moving across the bay to fulfil the same role in the San Francisco district attorney’s office.

The Alameda County DA’s office sent The Post a list of more than 60 names they said Harris had prosecuted during her time there. However, they provided no further details of any of the cases such as if they were traffic tickets or serious felonies, or if she had personally tried them in the courtroom.

Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, then 61, and Kamala Harris, then 30, when they started dating in 1994.

A 2003 article by the San Francisco Bay Guardian newspaper titled “Kamala Harris has a perfectly credible record. So why does she have to exaggerate it?” quoted a source in the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office who claimed she tried “roughly 5 to 10 felonies” there and only two more in San Francisco.

Harris rapidly rose through the ranks, successfully running for DA in San Francisco in 2003.

By that time she was billed as a “veteran” prosecutor with “thirteen years of courtroom experience” who could overhaul the office.

“Kamala has tried hundreds of serious and violent felonies, including homicide, rape, and child sexual assault cases,” a mailer put out by her campaign claimed at the time.

Harris served as an assistant district attorney in Alameda County from 1990 to 1998 before joining the San Francisco County DA’s office. She was the managing attorney of the career criminal unit in San Francisco and was elected San Francisco District Attorney in 2004.Google Maps

Prosecutors can refer to “prosecuting” a case which can mean, variously, that they oversee the prosecution but do not appear in the courtroom. “Trying” a case means you participate in the structured trial.

Harris was immediately called out for exaggerating her prosecutorial record, as she was forced to admit in a debate with one of her then-rivals, criminal defense attorney Bill Fazio.

In a debate broadcast on KGO Radio Fazio, a Democrat, took her to task.

“How many cases have you tried? Can you tell us how many serious felonies you have tried? Can you tell us one?” Fazio asked, according to the audio of the debate.

“I’ve tried about 50 cases. Mr. Fazio, and it’s about leadership,” Harris said, without offering any further explanation.

“Ms Harris, why does your information, which is still published, say that you tried hundreds of serious felonies? I think that’s misleading. I think that’s disingenuous. I think that shows that you are incapable of leadership and you’re not to be trusted. You continue to put out information which says you have tried hundreds of serious felonies,” Fazio pressed.

In the same year, during the same campaign for DA, she gave a different answer. At a meeting of the Alice B. Toklas Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Democratic Club, attendees asked the same question about how many cases she had prosecuted three times, according to the Bay Guardian.

Kamala Harris when she was San Francisco District Attorney.Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

Harris conceded she had tried “under 30” cases, but added if you counted misdemeanors, it was closer to 100, the outlet reported.

The San Francisco DA’s office did not respond to repeated requests for information on Harris’ prosecutorial record from The Post.

Today, even some of her past opponents stick by her. One San Francisco attorney who clashed with Harris back when she was in the DA’s office told The Post he doesn’t think Harris has a “high IQ” but said he has never not voted Democrat and thus will vote for her.

He added he believed Harris’ controversial 1994 romantic relationship with the powerful one-time mayor of San Francisco, Willie Brown, greased the wheels of Harris’ rise in the Bay Area.

Criminal defense attorney Bill Fazio, once a deputy district attorney in San Francisco, called out Harris when the two were vying to the DA of San Francisco. Fazio accused Harris of embellishing the number of cases she actually tried in Alameda County and San Francisco.commons.wikimedia.org

Fazio – whose Twitter bio still claims he is “the *only* candidate for San Francisco District Attorney to try a felony in an SF courtroom”– himself told The Post this week he solidly supports Kamala and voted for her both in her Attorney General race and her Senate race.

“To be fair, it wasn’t her specifically who said she tried ‘hundreds’ of cases, it was her campaign literature that did,” Fazio claimed.

Fazio, who worked as a deputy district attorney in San Francisco prior to going into private practice and said he had once tried eight murder cases in a year.

“Harris would probably have had to try six to eight cases a year when she was in Alameda County,” Fazio said. “I know she tried at least two cases when she was (a deputy district attorney) in San Francisco.”

Fazio may have accused Harris of exaggerating her trial record but told The Post he has supported her for years – voting for her to be Attorney General as well as Senator.San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images
Harris pictured in 2010, when she was campaigning to become Attorney General of CaliforniaAP

Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson James Singer downplayed the 2003 controversy in a statement first given to ABC News.

“Vice President Harris oversaw and was involved in the prosecution of hundreds of serious crimes before she was elected District Attorney of San Francisco,” Singer said.

“For more than a decade, she prosecuted child sexual assault cases, homicides, and robberies in Alameda, before overseeing the career criminal unit and served as the head of division on families and children in the San Francisco District Attorney’s office.”

“That is what mattered to voters in San Francisco more than two decades ago and why she was elected District Attorney.”

Former Department of Justice special agents who worked under Harris when she was Attorney General from 2011 to 2017 told The Post recently that Harris’ claims that “personally prosecuted” transnational drug or gang cases was not true.

They say she merely presided over arrests made by any number of state and federal agencies during her tenure.’ They say she merely presided over arrests made by any number of state and federal agencies during her tenure.

https://nypost.com/2024/11/02/us-news/how-many-cases-has-kamala-harris-actually-prosecuted/

One more huge 'elephant in the room’ that Harris has been quiet about

 With the economy top-of-mind for voters heading to the polls, one finance expert is sounding the alarm about Vice President Kamala Harris’ “lack of conversation” surrounding international economic theory.

“There is a potential red flag there with Harris’s lack of conversation surrounding tariffs and really confronting China head on,” “What Should I Do With My Money?” author Bryan Kuderna told Fox News Digital.

“She has been so quiet on any international economic theory, whether that’s to have tariffs, not to have tariffs, how we’re going to move forward the next four years in comparison to the other superpower, China, kind of the elephant in the room. She’s been very, very quiet on this.”

Harris has largely focused her economic platform on domestic issues and supporting America families through proposed credits and incentives. She has also touted policies which would make the rich “pay their fair share in taxes.”

Continue watchingThis Day in Historyafter the ad

Kuderna, however, warned if Harris is elected and her economic policy goes into place, it could leave America vulnerable on the world stage.

Harris has been mum over tariffs and confronting China head on.AP

“If we step back and say, well, let’s just kind of see how things unfold. Let’s focus on America and helping young professionals, helping first-time homebuyers, things of this nature, that’s all well and good. But meanwhile, if that allows China and their economy to really become a bit more dominant, that can have long-term consequences to our global standing as No. 1.”

Chief economist at the International Center for Law & Economics, Brian Albrecht, conceded it is “a bit concerning that Harris has not brought out a more concrete plan about what she would do related to tariffs, international trade and immigration and things like that. But she’s in a hard spot. She needs to defend an administration which kept in basically every tariff that Trump put in.”

Although the Biden-Harris administration has kept many Trump-era tariffs in place, the vice president has hit her contenders’ tariff proposals hard on the campaign trail, even accusing him of “selling us out” during the September ABC News Presidential Debate.

The Tax Foundation mentioned Trump’s plan includes imposing a universal tariff on all U.S. imports of 20%.Getty Images

While Harris has distanced herself from tariffs, both Kuderna and Albrecht argue it is reasonable to assume she will be a “continuation” of Biden’s approach to foreign trade relations with China and other nations.

Conversely, former President Trump’s economic agenda has a strong international focus aimed at competing against China, while also calling for lowering taxes and cutting regulation domestically.

Kuderna summarized Trump’s vision as one where the administration would “help domestically by cutting regulation, by lowering taxes, letting the American people and American corporations lead the way on their own by getting out of their way, and then as the U.S. government, we’re going to go abroad and make sure that we can keep China in check and then work on Iran, the Middle East, Russia, Ukraine, all these other little fires that have been expanding.”

The Tax Foundation noted Trump’s plan includes imposing a universal tariff on all U.S. imports of 20%, raising Section 301 tariffs on China to 60% and levying a 10% foreign retaliation tariff on U.S. exports to China.

Harris not having a cohesive plan on how to tackle China is an “elephant in the room,” the expert claims.AFP via Getty Images

Albrecht warned Trump’s increased emphasis on tariffs is a “major concern” for consumers and U.S. manufacturing.

“We know from economic research that that cost is ultimately borne by consumers but also affects U.S. manufacturing. So, in the name of protecting U.S. manufacturing from competition with China, you’re actually hurting U.S. manufacturing,” the chief economist argued. 

Trump has been very bold about using tariffs as a means to compete on the world stage and as a tax revenue source.

Albrecht argued the problem with Trump’s plan is “the math just doesn’t add up.”

“There’s not enough imported goods to make that work versus every dollar that people make in income. And if you would try to do that, you’d basically shut down international trade.”

It’s unclear if Trump’s tariffs will be implemented or used as a negotiating tactic. However, if the tariffs are implemented, they would raise between $2 trillion and $4.3 trillion in tax revenue over a decade, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget’s analysis.

“We always hope for a bigger, better economy and that we can tax everybody less as they grow, grow, grow and then make the rest of the world pay for it. That all sounds good, but in practicality, there would be some short-term pain to maybe get to that long-term gain,” Kuderna reasoned. 

“Would that revenue from international tariffs offset any loss in tax revenue that we have domestically? That’s very hard to quantify, but it likely wouldn’t happen immediately, and that’s the concern is are we just going to add to our national debt,” he continued. 

Both candidates’ proposed economic agendas are expected to substantially add to the U.S. national debt. 

The CRFB calculated Trump’s plan could add roughly $8 trillion to the debt by 2035 compared to roughly $4 trillion under Harris.

While both candidates recognize the significance of the economy, Trump retains a narrow lead over Harris according to national polls. A recent survey from Reuters/Ipsos found Trump sits at 45% support on the economy, compared to Harris’ 40%. 

“It’s clear to everyone that the economy is a major concern. Where we disagree is kind of what that means in practice and what to do about it going forward,” Albrecht said. 

https://nypost.com/2024/11/02/business/expert-issues-warning-over-the-elephant-in-the-room-that-harris-has-been-quiet-about/