Have we forgotten what Kamala Harris did to innocent people in CA?

With all attention on the candidates for POTUS, let's not forget what we know about "Number 2"

Photo Illustration by Erin O’Flynn/The Daily Beast/Reuters

Editorial pieces appearing even in liberal leaning media have been expressing concern over Biden’s physical and cognitive fitness. Leading up to the last Presidential election, they warned us of Harris’ record of weaponizing the law against the innocent.

---

Alexandre Dumas’ fictional novel, “The Count of Monte Cristo”, was one of the first “chapter books” I read to my son when he was young. I read him an abridged version of the novel.

“The Count of Monte Cristo” had everything needed to command the attention of a young reader who was learning that some stories take more than a night to tell. Heroics, betrayal, love, vengeance, double-crossing and forgiveness. What’s not to like? A film adaptation released in 2002 was also highly entertaining and underrated.

Briefly, Edmond Dantès, the central character, was an illiterate, handsome, earnest young man of 19 when he fell victim to dark, political interests at play at the brink of Napoleon Bonaparte’s brief return to power after his exile on the island of Elba.

Edmond Dantès, first mate on the Pharaon safely sailed the merchant ship back to Marseille after the death of the captain, Leclère while at sea. The ship's owner, Morrel, decided to award the young Dantes by promoting him to replace the deceased Leclere as captain, affording him the means to marry the love of his life, Mercédès.

His early promotion draws envy from crewmate Danglars and jealousy from Fernand Mondego, an aristocrat and rival for Mercedes’ affections. Unbeknownst to any, the deceased captain Leclere, while on his deathbed, had charged Dantes with delivering a package to one of Napoleon’s Generals on the island of Elba during their journey back to Marseille. After successfully delivering the package to a General Bertrand, he then took a letter from him to be delivered to a Bonaparte sympathizer in Paris.

Danglars lets his powerful buddies know that Dantes made a suspicious stop at Elba without any explanation.

But Dantes was unaware that he was acting as the courier of secret information that might have aided the exiled emperor’s eventual return to power. His innocence was confirmed by the letter he carried, seal still unbroken.

Unfortunately, the Bonapartist in Paris turned out to be the father of a young magistrate, De Villefort, who had political aspirations in the house of Bourbon, which had returned to power following Bonaparte’s temporary exile on Elba. By burning the letter, De Villefort destroys not only the evidence that ties him to a dissident father but also the only proof of Dantes’ innocence.

And thus, De Villefort, Mondego and Danglars had common interests in getting rid of Dantes. Dantes is falsely accused of treason, arrested, and imprisoned without trial in the Château d'If, a grim island fortress off Marseille.

(Note to Readers: What I am describing here is the collusion of powerful interests acting covertly. It’s a conspiracy. Something that obviously happens only in fictional tales like this one. Back to the story…)

De Villefort regarding Dantes for what he believes is the last time (from “The Count of Monte Cristo”)

Château d'If was run by a brutally sadistic warden, Armand Dorleac, who delighted in torturing his prisoners, condemning them to interminable solitary confinement in dark cells and visiting them on their birthdays when he would beat them within an inch of their life, reminding them that they would live out the rest of their days in this way.

The scenes of Dantes’ unjust punishment highlight the depravity of the co-conspirators who were enjoying the pleasant benefits of Dantes’ absence with no concern of his mental and physical anguish that resulted from their lust for power. Together, they sealed Dantes’ fate. Or so they thought…

---

What kind of person can sleep at night knowing that an innocent person remains in shackles from their misdeeds? Is condemning an innocent person to a life sentence with no hope for escape, parole or recourse any different than committing murder in the first degree? Murderers and co-conspirators take the lives of the innocent to serve their purposes.

If we as a people agree to hand over the enforcement of laws to an authority, those laws must protect the innocent first—including suspects. It’s better to let a hundred guilty persons go free than to imprison a single innocent one. In the long run, it is a tiny concession. Without it there will be no stops on interests that will weaponize a legal system against their adversaries. Authoritarianism begets authoritarianism.

But such treacherous acts by power hungry political aspirants aren’t confined to psychopathic characters in fictional novels set in 19th century France. It happens today in this country and those kinds of acts are committed by those at the highest levels of our legal system. One of them is a step away from being the leader of the “free” world.

Kamala Harris knowingly punished innocent people

There’s no denying the possibility that Vice President Kamala Harris may one day have to step in to replace Joe Biden in the White House or on the debate stage when President Biden falls ill, breaks a hip or is found dead in bed—a possibility that seems more likely now more than ever.

Four years ago voices on both sides of the political divide were concerned about Harris’ lack of scruples when she presided over her CA District Attorneys when she was the state’s Attorney General.

Soon after she secured her #2 spot on the Blue ticket in 2020 the NY Post warned their readers about Harris’s violations of defendant rights in this article :

“Some of Harris’ prosecutorial shenanigans are well-known by now. In 2010, a California Superior Court judge blistered Harris’ DA office for violating defendants’ rights by covering up detrimental information about a drug-lab technician. The judge concluded that prosecutors working under Harris had failed to fulfill their constitutional duty to tell defense attorneys information about prosecution witnesses that might challenge their credibility. The failure of Harris’ prosecutors led to the dismissal of more than 600 drug cases.”

The NY Post article was just skimming the surface of VP Harris’s record of disregarding defendants’ rights. But with too much to lose so close to election day four years ago, lefty organizations seemed to forget what they wrote about Harris a year and a half earlier, when Harris was just one of the lower tier Dem hopefuls.

Here’s what the NY Times had to say in an opinion piece from January, 2019 about her record of suppressing exculpatory evidence to notch some extra wins for her and her DAs in CA. The Times first corroborates the NY Post in regard to her dereliction of her constitutional duty with regard to her knowledge of misconduct of the drug lab technician and then goes further:

“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.

…

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.

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.

That case is not an outlier. Ms. Harris also fought to keep Daniel Larsen in prison on a 28-year-to-life sentence for possession of a concealed weapon even though his trial lawyer was incompetent and there was compelling evidence of his innocence. Relying on a technicality again, Ms. Harris argued that Mr. Larsen failed to raise his legal arguments in a timely fashion. (This time, she lost.)

She also defended Johnny Baca’s conviction for murder even though judges found a prosecutor presented false testimony at the trial. She relented only after a video of the oral argument received national attention and embarrassed her office.

And then there’s Kevin Cooper, the death row inmate whose trial was infected by racism and corruption. He sought advanced DNA testing to prove his innocence, but Ms. Harris opposed it. (After The New York Times’s exposé of the case went viral, she reversed her position.)”

The article continues:

“All this is a shame because the state’s top prosecutor has the power and the imperative to seek justice. In cases of tainted convictions, that means conceding error and overturning them. Rather than fulfilling that obligation, Ms. Harris turned legal technicalities into weapons so she could cement injustices.

In “The Truths We Hold,” Ms. Harris’s recently published memoir, she writes: “America has a deep and dark history of people using the power of the prosecutor as an instrument of injustice.”

She adds, “I know this history well — of innocent men framed, of charges brought against people without sufficient evidence, of prosecutors hiding information that would exonerate defendants, of the disproportionate application of the law.”

All too often, she was on the wrong side of that history.”

While Democrats relentlessly remind the public that “the other guy” is a convicted felon, they are simultaneously promoting a ticket that features Kamala Harris, who the Times once warned has a history of turning “legal technicalities into weapons so she could cement injustices”.

Fighting to uphold wrongful convictions? Evidence tampering? Suppressing crucial information? Is she any different than Villeforte? She is. Villeforte did it to one person only. Villeforte didn’t write a brazenly disingenuous memoir. And Villeforte is just a character in a book screwing over another character in a book. Harris did this to real people.

I am not a fan of Donald Trump or Joe Biden, but with regard to the character required to be a public servant, Kamala Harris is particularly unfit. What’s worse? Breaking the law or using the law to punish the innocent to further one’s power? How many innocent people are in California prisons right now because of Harris’ political ambitions?

Trump undeniably has the gift of gab and a record of exaggeration, prevarication and an endless series of shameless narcissistic commentary. He probably is responsible for shady business dealings, questionable bookkeeping and even monetary payments that can be reasonably considered “hush money”.

We also have a President who has used the power of his office to suppress Americans’ freedom of speech and a Vice President who, in my view, is guilty of punishable crimes.

We are a country that is being programmed to think that we must always choose between the lesser of “evils”. Take preemptive military action against presumed perpetrators which risks the lives of our soldiers and innocent civilians or risk future attacks upon us or our allies? Endure the possibility of Covid-19 or accept the speculative benefit and unknown harm of a “vaccine”? Biden/Harris or Trump/TBD?

What is she talking about?

Kamala Harris has been recently mocked for repeatedly using a certain phrase in her numerous public appearances:

“I can imagine what can be, unburdened by what has been”

Her detractors chide that this phrase, offered as a wise adage of hope, is nothing more than word salad that gets more and more cringe-worthy every time she utters it with obviously rehearsed affect.

It’s actually not incomprehensible gobbeldygook. What has been, for Harris, was all too often being on the wrong side of history. It’s obvious how Harris would apply this to her own life.

She would like to see her future “unburdened” by the baggage she carries of her past. Before asking for a karmic pardon perhaps the Vice President should ask forgiveness from George Gage, Daniel Larson, Johnny Baca, Kevin Cooper and all the other people that may be unjustly languishing in the California penal system because of the weaponization of the law under her authority. Until then, she can imagine all she wants.

So what happened to Villeforte, the magistrate who casually sealed the fate of an innocent man in “The Count of Monte Cristo”? You’ll have to read the book to find out. Let’s just say that Harris shouldn’t be hoping for a story book ending—for her sake.