NYT Op-Ed: Kamala Harris Was Not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor’

[Deleted member 15440]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html?

With the growing recognition that prosecutors hold the keys to a fairer criminal justice system, the term "progressive prosecutor" has almost become trendy. This is how Senator Kamala Harris of California, a likely presidential candidate and a former prosecutor, describes herself.

But she's not.

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. Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors.

Click to shrink...

Worst of all, though, is Ms. Harris's record in wrongful conviction cases. Consider George Gage, an electrician with no criminal record who was charged in 1999 with sexually abusing his stepdaughter, who reported the allegations years later. The case largely hinged on the stepdaughter's testimony and Mr. Gage was convicted.

Afterward, the judge discovered that the prosecutor had unlawfully held back potentially exculpatory evidence, including medical reports indicating that the stepdaughter had been repeatedly untruthful with law enforcement. Her mother even described her as "a pathological liar" who "lives her lies."

In 2015, when the case reached the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, Ms. Harris's prosecutors defended the conviction. They pointed out that Mr. Gage, while forced to act as his own lawyer, had not properly raised the legal issue in the lower court, as the law required.

The appellate judges acknowledged this impediment and sent the case to mediation, a clear signal for Ms. Harris to dismiss the case. When she refused to budge, the court upheld the conviction on that technicality. Mr. Gage is still in prison serving a 70-year sentence.

Click to shrink...

Loads more in the full story, please read it all before jumping in with hot takes. Harris is the kind of hardass law and order candidate who seems particularly ill-suited to the current moment and the Democratic base.

e. Well crap I forgot to finish the thread title. A mod edit with the headline would be appreciated. e2. Thanks.

 

[Kill3r7]

She did her job or what was necessary to keep her job. You can put together a piece like this for every AG in the country.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

 

[entremet]

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

This happens every election, though. You want to know what you are getting. It's happening to Beto as well. Don't run for Presidential office if you don't any criticism ever. Also the article is not chicken little:

Of course, the full picture is more complicated. During her tenure as district attorney, Ms. Harris refused to seek the death penalty in a case involving the murder of a police officer. And she started a successful program that offered first-time nonviolent offenders a chance to have their charges dismissed if they completed a rigorous vocational training. As attorney general, she mandated implicit bias training and was awarded for her work in correcting a backlog in the testing of rape kits.

But if Kamala Harris wants people who care about dismantling mass incarceration and correcting miscarriages of justice to vote for her, she needs to radically break with her past.

A good first step would be to apologize to the wrongfully convicted people she has fought to keep in prison and to do what she can to make sure they get justice. She should start with George Gage.

 

[WedgeX]

There's really only been one "progressive prosecutor" in the whole country - in Philly just now.

It's fine to examine Harris' record, for sure.

 

[Hollywood Duo]

Have you considered that she was forced to play it a little hard because of her standing as a woman in a male dominated field?

 

[Deleted member 15440]

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

what's the alternative to presenting and examining a candidate's public record?

 

[Deleted member 13364]

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

What do you think a primary is for?

 

[Deleted member 31817]

Yeah it's her biggest failing and I hope she successfully addresses it.

Have you considered that she was forced to play it a little hard because of her standing as a woman in a male dominated field?

Click to shrink...

Well the police hate her anyway so lol

 

[Deleted member 15440]

Have you considered that she was forced to play it a little hard because of her standing as a woman in a male dominated field?

Click to shrink...

i don't really care though. if she has that kind of mindset (which i doubt, she seems very self-confident and assertive enough to do what she wants to do regardless of the gender politics) then wouldn't it carry over to the presidency? i don't want someone who would ratchet up international tensions or go super aggressive in the justice department just to prove they're tough.

 

[jay]

what's the alternative to presenting and examining a candidate's public record?

Click to shrink...

Picking your favorite with a D next to their name and then yelling about how their behavior is irrelevant because they don't have an R next to their name.

 

[Deleted member 2145]

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

you mean here comes the 'looking critically at potential presidential candidate's past records' train? what's you alternative?

 

[Steve Winwood]

She did her job or what was necessary to keep her job. You can put together a piece like this for every AG in the country.

Click to shrink...

Is this supposed to be a defense of her? Republican Senators are also doing what's necessary to keep their job. You don't get to slough off moral culpability because you want to keep employment. If you can put together a piece like this for every AG in the country, then maybe those people shouldn't be the Democratic nominee for president.

 

[Geräuschkolosse]

Politicians have to manage their repentance carefully. As long as you're not riding a palanquin borne by the re-animated corpses of your victims while doing it, apologize when it's no longer gonna harm your plan to change things for the better.

 

[Hollywood Duo]

i don't really care though. if she has that kind of mindset (which i doubt, she seems very self-confident and assertive enough to do what she wants to do regardless of the gender politics) then wouldn't it carry over to the presidency? i don't want someone who would ratchet up international tensions or go super aggressive in the justice department just to prove they're tough.

Click to shrink...

Being AG and being the President are 2 very different jobs. Her work as a Senator is much more indicative of what she would do as President.

 

[Orb]

Her past troubles me, but I think she might be the best mass appeal candidate sadly. It's not likely that I will vote for her in primaries but if she is the candidate I will vote for her in the general without hesitation.

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

No one is free from sin. There is not a single living US politician whose past and present policies I could 100% support. That's why we examine all candidates and present their histories for people to decide who to vote for in a primary. Examining her past and criticizing it fairly while also being pragmatic about it is fine.

 

[Deleted member 15440]

This happens every election, though. You want to know what you are getting. It's happening to Beto as well. Don't run for Presidential office if you don't any criticism ever. Also the article is not chicken little:

Of course, the full picture is more complicated. During her tenure as district attorney, Ms. Harris refused to seek the death penalty in a case involving the murder of a police officer. And she started a successful program that offered first-time nonviolent offenders a chance to have their charges dismissed if they completed a rigorous vocational training. As attorney general, she mandated implicit bias training and was awarded for her work in correcting a backlog in the testing of rape kits.

But if Kamala Harris wants people who care about dismantling mass incarceration and correcting miscarriages of justice to vote for her, she needs to radically break with her past.

A good first step would be to apologize to the wrongfully convicted people she has fought to keep in prison and to do what she can to make sure they get justice. She should start with George Gage.

Click to shrink...

absolutely, she needs to account for what she did and make up for it. if she can convince me that she's a changed person and she genuinely believes that what she did as prosecutor was wrong then all the better.

bringing stuff like this up isn't about condemning someone for all eternity, it's about holding public officials accountable and hopefully making them better.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

What do you think a primary is for?

Click to shrink...

Please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of articles designed to spread negative press around potential Democratic candidates coming out long before the primary has even started. We're gonna see this shit for every single candidate and the Russians are just going to make it worse.

 

[Deleted member 15440]

Being AG and being the President are 2 very different jobs. Her work as a Senator is much more indicative of what she would do as President.

Click to shrink...

what has she done as senator to specifically address the kinds of failures she had as prosecutor? i haven't heard her say much with regard to criminal justice.

 

[Deleted member 13364]

Please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of articles designed to spread negative press around potential Democratic candidates coming out long before the primary has even started. We're gonna see this shit for every single candidate and the Russians are just going to make it worse.

Click to shrink...

She's all but certain to launch her run very soon. This stuff is entirely fair game, and yes you are going to see it for every candidate. It's a primary.

 

[sphagnum]

Please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of articles designed to spread negative press around potential Democratic candidates coming out long before the primary has even started. We're gonna see this shit for every single candidate and the Russians are just going to make it worse.

Click to shrink...

Primary season has started. Candidates are literally declaring and Kamala is obviously doing it soon.

A Russian isn't behind every critique of a politician.

 

[Deleted member 15440]

Please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of articles designed to spread negative press around potential Democratic candidates coming out long before the primary has even started. We're gonna see this shit for every single candidate and the Russians are just going to make it worse.

Click to shrink...

articles examining the record of prominent presidential candidates have always existed for good reason, and attributing anything you don't like to russian influence is more detrimental to the process by far

 

[Hollywood Duo]

what has she done as senator to specifically address the kinds of failures she had as prosecutor? i haven't heard her say much with regard to criminal justice.

Click to shrink...

AFAIK she hasn't really been probed on it but I'm sure that will all come through the primary process and Democrats can decide if she has risen to the challenge.

 

[peppersky]

Have you considered that she was forced to play it a little hard because of her standing as a woman in a male dominated field?

Click to shrink...

"Playing it a little hard" is a cute euphemism for "repeatedly refusing to release innocent people due to technicalities".

 

[Deleted member 4346]

Harris has to address this. If she can't address it properly then she is done. I like her as a candidate but not going to lie, her record as prosecutor gives me pause.

 

[TheRuralJuror]

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

This is part of the process when you run though. Y'all seem to want the candidates to be handled with kid's gloves. This isn't a matter of anyone saying she's not good enough. The information is there and people are free to make their own decisions regarding it.

 

[Deleted member 2145]

Please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of articles designed to spread negative press around potential Democratic candidates coming out long before the primary has even started. We're gonna see this shit for every single candidate and the Russians are just going to make it worse.

Click to shrink...

if looking critically at the primary candidates is going to be something you don't have the stomach for then just put your head in the sand until the general

"but Russia!" is a dumb reason to not look into a candidates past record. this is absolutely necessary.

 

[Christian]

There's no question, she'll have to address her time as attorney general, and she has time to do it. There's some questionable stuff in her history, as I'm sure there is for almost anyone that's running for President. How they respond, and in Kamala's case, what she's done since she was attorney general to make up for these errors, is what's going to determine their success.

 

[Deleted member 31817]

Please forgive me if I'm a little skeptical of articles designed to spread negative press around potential Democratic candidates coming out long before the primary has even started. We're gonna see this shit for every single candidate and the Russians are just going to make it worse.

Click to shrink...

Better head over to the primary thread and declare everyone there a russian bc they're comparing and contrasting candidates.

 

[Deleted member 6230]

She did her job or what was necessary to keep her job. You can put together a piece like this for every AG in the country.

Click to shrink...

This is like saying you can't criticize the police for brutality or disproportionately targeting Black people because they're just doing their jobs.

 

[Snowy]

Can we draft Krasner instead of Kamala? He is a not-Bernie I would absolutely support. She is mediocre at best.

 

[Arttemis]

i don't really care though. if she has that kind of mindset (which i doubt, she seems very self-confident and assertive enough to do what she wants to do regardless of the gender politics) then wouldn't it carry over to the presidency? i don't want someone who would ratchet up international tensions or go super aggressive in the justice department just to prove they're tough.

Click to shrink...

You're saying women in the workplace towing a company's line (or local government's) are doing it to "prove they're tough", as opposed to working harder just to keep their job?

It's still disgusting behaviour, but she's taken a 180 degree stance on Justice since then, which to me implies she was not given a choice beyond keeping her job or be replaced.

 

[OrdinaryPrime]

if looking critically at the primary candidates is going to be something you don't have the stomach for then just put your head in the sand until the general

"but Russia!" is a dumb reason to not look into a candidates past record. this is absolutely necessary.

Click to shrink...

Yeah this is for the Democratic primary. Being skeptical is fine, but all of this is information that can be verified. So to follow up on your comment, if people are skeptical, verify it for themselves, do their own research and come to your own conclusions. Don't block it out by saying "Russia", we should find the best candidate and vote based on our individual principles. Hopefully joined together we get a candidate that will win against Trump and the Republican party. But we should do our due diligence, these people are going to potentially serve us as President.

 

[Deleted member 15440]

Can we draft Krasner instead of Kamala? He is a not-Bernie I would absolutely support. She is mediocre at best.

Click to shrink...

krasner's great but he just got into office in philly and there's still a great deal of work for him to do there. i really doubt he would run and he definitely doesn't have national name recognition.

 

[Madison]

Harris has to address this. If she can't address it properly then she is done. I like her as a candidate but not going to lie, her record as prosecutor gives me pause.

Click to shrink...

Yup. She has to acknowledge it directly and on a big platform.

 

[entremet]

Primary season has started. Candidates are literally declaring and Kamala is obviously doing it soon.

A Russian isn't behind every critique of a politician.

Click to shrink...

This same stuff also happens on the side. Our current President, along with the other GOP hopefuls, were heavily critiqued by the conservative media establishment as well. This is par for the course for running for President.

This is why Michelle Obama will never run for President. She's seen this twice and hated it.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

if looking critically at the primary candidates is going to be something you don't have the stomach for then just put your head in the sand until the general

"but Russia!" is a dumb reason to not look into a candidates past record. this is absolutely necessary.

Click to shrink...

I'm not saying there's no room for critical examination of a candidate's past history. What I'm saying is that I am just always going to be skeptical of the actual intent behind these kinds of information dumps, especially when they come in the form of op-eds. The NYT has been doing thinly veiled propaganda for King Dumbass for AGES now.

These discussions are obviously important to have, but I've seen too many intelligent people get deceived by disingenuous FUD campaigns to have faith in the integrity of the people delivering the information.

 

[Deleted member 15440]

You're saying women in the workplace towing a company's line (or local government's) are doing it to "prove they're tough", as opposed to working harder just to keep their job?

Click to shrink...

i'm saying that excuse doesn't do anything for me whether it's true or not, and in harris's case i don't think it's true. i think she did all these things because she thought they were the correct courses of action, not because she was scared of looking like a weak woman.

 

[Deleted member 2145]

I'm not saying there's no room for critical examination of a candidate's past history. What I'm saying is that I am just always going to be skeptical of the actual intent behind these kinds of information dumps, especially when they come in the form of op-eds. The NYT has been doing thinly veiled propaganda for King Dumbass for AGES now.

These discussions are obviously important to have, but I've seen too many intelligent people get deceived by disingenuous FUD campaigns to have faith in the integrity of the people delivering the information.

Click to shrink...

this seems more reasonable but certainly doesn't excuse your original dismissive post

 

[manchego obfuscator]

good read. Anyway, extremely looking forward to at least a year of anyone who scrutinizes her record as a prosecutor of being accused of racism, sexism, or being part of a Russian active measure

Have you considered that she was forced to play it a little hard because of her standing as a woman in a male dominated field?

Click to shrink...

holding women to a lower standard by downplaying their agency in making questionable decisions and attributing it to sexism is ironically a form of sexism, even if unintentionally.

 

[Noodle]

She did her job or what was necessary to keep her job. You can put together a piece like this for every AG in the country.

Click to shrink...

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

Have you considered that she was forced to play it a little hard because of her standing as a woman in a male dominated field?

Click to shrink...

Imprisoned innocent man for 70 years = "Just doing her job"/"Damn you purity tests!"/"Playing a little hard"

What is wrong with you people to be so cultishly enamoured with a person that you'll come up with such self-evidently fallacious hand-waves?

 

[Deepwater]

Harris is basically the "👏🏾Hire👏🏾More👏🏾Women👏🏾Prison guards" tweet personified

 

[Hollywood Duo]

Imprisoned innocent man for 70 years = "Just doing her job"/"Damn you purity tests!"/"Playing a little hard"

What is wrong with you people to be so cultishly enamoured with a person that you'll come up with such self-evidently fallacious hand-waves?

Click to shrink...

I said she would have to answer to her decisions during the primary process. We'll see what she has to say for herself.

 

[Deleted member 15440]

I'm not saying there's no room for critical examination of a candidate's past history. What I'm saying is that I am just always going to be skeptical of the actual intent behind these kinds of information dumps, especially when they come in the form of op-eds. The NYT has been doing thinly veiled propaganda for King Dumbass for AGES now.

These discussions are obviously important to have, but I've seen too many intelligent people get deceived by disingenuous FUD campaigns to have faith in the integrity of the people delivering the information.

Click to shrink...

i think if you're going to make points like this they should be substantiated by direct criticisms of the article, otherwise you're just derailing the conversation

 

[Parthenios]

This record as AG is one of those things that could hurt her in the primary but help in the general.

 

[lmcfigs]

This record as AG is one of those things that could hurt her in the primary but help in the general.

Click to shrink...

help with who?

 

[Bonafide]

Here comes the 'not good enough' train. Making frequent, looping stops at Kristen Gillibrand, Beto O'Rourke and every single other prospective Democratic candidate until the 2020 election.

Click to shrink...

Man what the hell is with you guys? In politics you need to have standards. And then you need to hold the people you're voting in to represent you to those standards. Just because someone has a D next to their name doesn't mean they should get your vote. Harris should have to speak to this we shouldn't wave it away on some 'well she had to play hard ball as an AG'.

We're going to have multiple candidates running, you need to make some distinctions somewhere.

 

[Snowy]

krasner's great but he just got into office in philly and there's still a great deal of work for him to do there. i really doubt he would run and he definitely doesn't have national name recognition.

Click to shrink...

I agree and was just kidding, but like, why is it always these people that have shown themselves willing to play ball with the worst aspects of our shitty system the Dems offer up? Or rather, why have we as voters been so complicit in letting this shitty paradigm assert itself?

 

[entremet]

I'm not saying there's no room for critical examination of a candidate's past history. What I'm saying is that I am just always going to be skeptical of the actual intent behind these kinds of information dumps, especially when they come in the form of op-eds. The NYT has been doing thinly veiled propaganda for King Dumbass for AGES now.

These discussions are obviously important to have, but I've seen too many intelligent people get deceived by disingenuous FUD campaigns to have faith in the integrity of the people delivering the information.

Click to shrink...

That's an Op-ed contributor. A law school professor. Op-ed contributors are not the voice of the NYT. That's the editorial board. I still don't get why people still don't understand this simple aspect of newspapers.

Unless your critique is never to run critical pieces of Democratic candidates in the Op-ed section.

I do understanding criticizing the NYT newsroom, which has run pieces that many think humanize white supremacists. That's a fair critique. Or how the newsroom handled the Iraq War, which I think was their biggest editorial mistake ever.

 

[Bonafide]

help with who?

Click to shrink...

People who get a chubby from "law and order" and locking black people up.

Aka moderates.