LAWYERS - THE LAWLESS CLASS - THE CASE AGAINST LAWYER-PROSECUTOR KAMALA HARRIS, BRIBES SUCKER - Kamala Harris Failed to Investigate Client of Husband’s Law Firm as California Attorney General
Next One: Nutrition Companies And Kamala’s Husband PETER SCHWEIZER
In 2015 the attorneys
general from fourteen other states, including New York, launched an effort to
investigate nutrition companies on the grounds of false advertising and mislabeling.
These excerpts are
from @peterschweizer‘s
2020 #1 bestseller, “Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s
Progressive Elite.
The Obama
administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) was also going after dietary
supplement producers, charging them with exaggerated claims
The Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) opened an investigation into Herbalife in March 2014. In July
2016, the FTC won a $200 million settlement against Herbalife. But Harris
never even investigated the company.
It is worth noting that
those corporations in question all happened to be clients of her husband’s law
firm, Venable LLP. GNC, Herbalife, AdvoCare International, Vitamin Shoppe, and
others were represented by Venable.
In 2015, prosecutors
from Harris’s own attorney general’s office based out of San Diego sent her a
long memorandum arguing that Herbalife needed to be investigated. … Harris
declined to investigate or provide the resources-and never offered a reason.
Kamala Harris Gave 1.1%
of Income to Charity in 2019
Win McNamee
/ Getty
29 Sep 20201,298
2:15
Sen.
Kamala Harris (D-CA) and her husband, attorney Douglas Emhoff, gave 1.1% of
their income to charity in 2019, tax records show.
Harris reported giving $35,390 to
charity, while she and her husband earned $3,095,950 in taxable income.
Though earning far more than Joe Biden, who heads the Democratic
ticket, Harris and Emhoff gave slightly less to charity as a percentage of
their income than the former vice president and his wife, Dr. Jill Biden, did.
They gave 1.5% in 2019.
Harris and Emhoff gave to several different charities, including
several universities and a foundation in memory of Matthew Silverman, which focuses on suicide
prevention.
The Biden/Harris campaign released several tax records ahead of
the first presidential debate to show a contrast with President Donald Trump, who
has not released his tax returns, but whose taxes have been the subject of
recent reporting by the New
York Times.
The Times claimed
that Trump paid no taxes or very little federal tax in recent years, due to
business losses though it noted that he had in fact paid millions to the U.S.
Treasury and rolled over the payment to future taxable years.
Vice President Mike Pence has not released any tax returns since
taking office in 2017, though he has filed them. In 2015, he and his wife,
Karen Pence, gave about 8% of their income to charity.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior
Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday
evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book
is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s
Presidency. His recent book, RED
NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary
from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak
Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Kamala Harris Failed to Investigate Client of
Husband’s Law Firm as California Attorney General
Democratic vice-presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA)
failed as California’s attorney general declined to investigate faulty
advertising claims against one of the nation’s leading nutritional supplement
companies, which also happened to be a client of her husband’s law firm.
As California’s chief law enforcement officer between 2011 and
2017, Harris racked up a record as a tough on crime prosecutor. From cracking down on school truancy to opposing marijuana legalization—with more than 1900 people
being prosecuted for possession of the drug under her tenure—Harris was
California’s self-acknowledged “top cop.”
That record, however, did not extend to clients of Venable LLP,
the law firm where Harris’s husband, Douglas Emhoff, was a high-profile
partner. Harris, in particular, failed on numerous
occasions to investigate the nutritional supplement giant Herbalife. At
the time, Herbalife was a high-profile client of Venable, paying the firm
hundreds of thousands of dollars for its legal services every year.
One such instance occurred in 2015 when prosecutors from the San
Diego-branch of Harris’s attorney general’s office sent her a “lengthy
memorandum” expressing the need for an investigation to be opened into
Herbalife for fraudulent marketing practices, according to Yahoo News. Even before the memorandum was sent,
Herbalife had a long and complicated history in California, at one point even
generating nearly one thousand complaints about its marketing practices.
It is unclear if Harris ever saw the memorandum in question as
no investigation was ever opened by her office. More notably, shortly after the
memorandum was sent by the San Diego prosecutors, Harris appeared at a
$1,000-dollar-a-had fundraiser in Washington, D.C. hosted by the Podest Group,
which then represented Herbalife as a lobbying client. Later that same year,
Emhoff would be promoted to managing director of Venable’s West Coast
operations.
This was not the only time that Harris declined to take action
against Herbalife. In April 2015, Harris refused to
join 14 other state attorneys general in asking Congress to open an
investigation into the herbal supplements industry for not appropriately
disclosing ingredients in their products. At the time, Herbalife was explicitly
mentioned by the attorneys general as one of the companies that warranted
further scrutiny.
The revelations are detailed more fully in Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by
America’s Progressive Elite—a book released
earlier this year by Peter Schweizer, a senior contributor at Breitbart News
and president of the Government Accountability Institute.
Harris and her husband’s ties to Herbalife come back into view
as the California lawmaker has catapulted onto the national scene after
being chosen as Joe
Biden’s running mate.
The best-case scenario is that she’s a progressive who repeatedly violated her own principles so that she could promote her career. In the worst-case scenario, she’s just another corrupt, rotten, regressive prosecutor. JESSER HOROWITZ
Unethical conduct plagues legal career of Kamala Harris
On Jan. 2019, U.S. Senator Kamala Harris declared
her candidacy for President of the United States of America to great fanfare.
She
earned quick praise and frequent comparison to former President Barack Obama. A
recent Democratic Party straw poll by the Daily Kos ranked her in the top tier
of Presidential candidates, with 27 percent of respondents voicing their
support for her candidacy. So far, she has pitched herself to the American
people as a strong progressive with a particular passion for criminal justice
reform.
Harris
has a reasonable chance at winning the Democratic Party nomination. She’s
charismatic, smart and very likely to bridge the growing divide within the
party between the progressive left and the centrists. If she wins the nomination,
she might even defeat Donald Trump in the general election. I understand why
some voters in the party have decided to rally around her: She’s a promising
alternative for Democrats who want someone progressive like Bernie Sanders but
better than he is at speaking to identity politics.
However,
I would like to encourage my fellow Democrats to approach Senator Harris with a
healthy dose of skepticism. As a prosecutor and California State Attorney General, Harris has
engaged in blatantly unethical behavior for her profession and embraced
positions that actively hurt her constituents. While this does not
necessarily have to be a red line for everyone—and it certainly will not
prevent me from voting for her should she win the Democratic nomination—our party
should hold Harris’ feet to the fire here. Even more concerning than her past
positions is that she refuses to own up to them, portraying herself as a
long-time, progressive criminal justice reform activist.
I
want to clarify that I have no inherent issues with a prosecutor being elected
to the presidency. We need prosecutors; we need people who serve the public
good rather than represent the interests of paying clients. However, if
your job requires you to make decisions that could potentially ruin people’s
lives, the ethical standards should be higher, not lower. If you, like Kamala
Harris, decide you want to run for President of the United States, it becomes
imperative that the public thoroughly and mercilessly scrutinizes every facet
of your political career.
In
2015, law enforcement caught Robert Murray, a prosecutor in Kern County,
committing one of the most egregious offenses a prosecutor could perpetrate.
Specifically, he falsified a confession transcript that connected the defendant
with a far worse crime than that with what he had actually been charged. When
the defense demanded a copy of the original tape recording, Murray admitted to
his crime but said that it was merely a harmless joke. The judge disagreed. He
stated that the court refuses to tolerate such outrageous conduct and dismissed
the indictment on the grounds of prosecutorial misconduct (Observer,
“California Prosecutor Falsified Transcript of Confession,” 03.04.2015).
How
does this incident involve Senator Harris? At the time, she was the Attorney
General of California. In that capacity, she appealed the indictment. According
to Sidney Powell of The Observer, this was the third time she had appealed a
prosecutorial misconduct dismissal in less than three months. As of March 2015,
Murray was still allowed to work as a prosecutor (Observer, “California
Prosecutor Falsified Transcript of Confession,” 03.04.2015).
As Attorney General, Harris has a history of fighting to keep
men she knew were innocent in prison and of hiding cases of significant illegal
activity conducted by law enforcement. In 1999, Daniel Larsen was sentenced to 27 years to life in
prison for possession of a concealed weapon. There had been nine witnesses who
could testify that Larsen was not guilty, but the court called none of them at
the trial because of his incompetent and now disbarred attorney. With the help
of the Innocence Project, he was able to prove his innocence, and the court
overturned his conviction in 2009.
How
does this involve Senator Harris? She challenged his release not because she
believed he was guilty—she did not dispute his innocence—but because he hadn’t
presented proof of his innocence quickly enough. And so, she fought to keep a
man she definitely knew was innocent behind bars for life (NBCLosAngeles,
“After 13 Years in Prison, Man Found Innocent of Crime Freed,” 3.20.2013).
In
another incident, law enforcement discovered that Deborah Madden had purposely
sabotaged the drug results of multiple cases as a technician at a San Francisco
crime lab. But even though the highest levels of
the district attorney’s office knew about Madden’s unreliability as a drug
expert, Kamala Harris and her office hid this information from defense
attorneys. Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo ultimately ruled that
Harris’ office had violated defendants’ rights through this act of
prosecutorial misconduct, calling into question the convictions of nearly 40
defendants (SFGate, “Judge rips Harris’ office for hiding problems,”
05.21.2010).
However,
perhaps Harris’ most egregious example of immoral conduct happened in 2014. A
federal judge ordered that all non-violent second-strike offenders be eligible
for parole in California in an action against constitutional prison crowding.
Kamala Harris, then the Attorney General of California, disagreed with the
decision. She argued in court that by releasing
these inmates early, prisons would lose “an important labor pool” (Los Angeles
Times, “Federal judges order California to expand prison releases,”
11.14.2014). Despite pitching herself as a lifelong champion for
criminal justice reform, Harris had advocated that the need to keep nonviolent
offenders as slaves outweighs their constitutional rights. How would the
Democratic Party call itself progressive if members threw their support behind
someone with such an atrocious record on civil rights issues?
Even
worse, Harris has yet to apologize for her actions and in fact has refused to
even acknowledge them (Reason.com, “Kamala Harris Hopes You’ll Forget Her
Record as a Drug Warrior and Draconian Prosecutor,” 01.31.2019). At a town
hall, she responded to a question calling her out on her past actions by
answering “I’ve been consistent my whole career,” and then explained how the record
supports her claim that she has been progressive on prison reform (CNN Twitter,
“I’ve been consistent my whole career,” 01.28.2019).
I
won’t delve into her argument because, in my view, it’s irrelevant. When you
actively cover up police misconduct, try to keep a man who you know is innocent
in prison and refuse to release nonviolent offenders because you need their
involuntary labor, you don’t get to reframe your narrative.
Kamala
Harris is not owed an audience. She is not entitled to one simply because she
wants to be president. We should not give her the benefit of the doubt, because
she refuses to even acknowledge her wrongdoings. We don’t have the right to
forgive her; that right belongs to all the people she’s wronged over the course
of her long career.
For
that reason, I ask you not to vote for Kamala Harris in the primary, no matter
how attractive a candidate she is or how well she explains away her
inconsistent career. It’s possible that her past really won’t have much of an
impact on how she’ll be as president, but why should we wait and see? The
best-case scenario is that she’s a progressive who repeatedly violated her own
principles so that she could promote her career. In the worst-case scenario,
she’s just another corrupt, rotten, regressive prosecutor.
Now that Kamala Harris is going to be the Democrat Party’s vice-presidential candidate, I am plugging here excerpts from a book that I had tweeted about a few months back. Sadly, I don’t think a single Indian news site or portal has reviewed or covered it.
So here goes:
Kamala Devi Harris was born to Donald Harris, her Jamaican-born
father and Dr. Shyamala Gopalan, her Tamil Brahmin mother from India. Her
father is a Marxist economist who taught at Stanford University.
Who Is Willie Brown And What’s The Connection?
“In 1994, she met
Willie Brown, who at the time was the second-most-powerful man in California
politics. As Speaker of the State Assembly, Brown was a legend in Sacramento
and around the state.
Brown was under
investigation several times,by the State Bar of California, Fair Political
Practices Commission,the FBI.
In 1986 …as California Assembly Speaker, he “received at least $124,000 in
income & gifts…from special interests that had biz before the Legislature.”
Now this is neither
here nor there for me, except for the political angle:
“Brown was sixty at the time he began dating Kamala, who was twenty-nine. Brown
was actually two years older than her father. Their affair was the talk of San
Francisco in 1994.
Kamala’s mother defends
her daughter’s decision – and offered choice comments about Brown. “Why
shouldn’t she have gone out with Willie Brown? He was a player. And what could
Willie Brown expect from her in the future? He has not much life left.
He (Willie Brown) put
Kamala on the State Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and later the
California Medical Assistance Commission. The MAC paid $99k a year in 2002..
UIAB ~$114k. Both posts were part-time. At the time, she was working as a
county employee making ~$100k”
During his tenure,
Brown came under FBI investigation twice for corruption involving lucrative
contracts flowing from the city to his political friends.
I thought it was only
in Third World countries that people were forced to pay bribes to get services
they’re entitled to from their government,” said U.S. district judge Charles
Legge about the rampant corruption under Brown. “But we find it right here in
San Francisco.
In January 2003,
shortly after announcing her campaign, (Kamala) Harris had signed a form saying
that she would stick to the city’s $211,000 voluntary spending cap for the
campaign (for the San Francisco district attorney election).
Harris signed the
pledge-and then blew right past the spending limit. By the end of Nov, she had
raised $621,000…
The San Francisco Ethics Commission vote to fine Harris was unanimous. Her
campaign had to pay a $34,000 fine, a record in city elections.
Does Church Fund Kamala Harris?
And Her Other Shady Shenanigans
Moving On To The Next, And By Far The Most Disturbing Aspect:
Church Sex Abuse Scandal
Harris often recounts
her background as a sex crimes prosecutor earlier in her career to attack
others for their legal failings in this area.
During her
decade-and-a-half tenure as a chief prosecutor, Harris would fail to prosecute
a single case of priest abuse and her office would strangely hide vital records
on abuses that had occurred despite the protests of victims groups.
Harris’s predecessor as
San Francisco district attorney, Terence Hallinan, was aware of and had
prosecuted numerous Catholic priests on sexual misconduct involving children.
And he had been gathering case files for even more.
Hallinan’s office had
launched an investigation and quickly discovered that the San Francisco
Archdiocese had extensive internal records concerning complaints going back
some seventy-five years.
In spring of 2002,
Hallinan demanded the church turn them over to his office. A month later, the
archdiocese reluctantly complied.
The secret documents
were explosive and reportedly contained the names of about forty current and
former priests in the San Francisco area who had been identified in sexual
abuse complaints.
Hallinan used the
information from the files to begin pursuing legal cases against them. In
nearby San Mateo and Marin County, prosecutors obtained the same church records
and those in Marin charged Father Gregory Ingels in 2003
But by June 2003,
Hallinan and other prosecutors had hit a roadblock: the U.S. Supreme Court
ruled that California’s law extending the statute of limitations for priest
abuse cases was unconstitutional.
The records that
Hallinan had in his possession touched on well-connected institutions at the
heart of California’s power structure. St. Ignatius College Preparatory School,
in the Archdiocese of San Francisco, counted California governor Jerry Brown …
as alumni.”
Now Comes Church Sexual Abuse And The Kamala Connection
According to San
Francisco election financial disclosures, high-dollar donations to Harris’s
campaign began to roll in from those connected to the Catholic Church
institutional hierarchy.”
For some reason, she
did not want the documents released in any form.
Harris’s office claimed that the cover-up was about protecting the victims of
abuse.
Victims’ groups wanted the documents released and Harris was stopping it.
They’re full of
shit,” said Joey Piscitelli, the northwest regional director of Survivors
Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP), the largest and most active victims’
group. “You can quote me on that. They’re not protecting the victims.
With the outcry of
victims groups, Harris’s office then attempted to shift blame, claiming that
the idea of burying the evidence had been first suggested by her predecessor,
Hallinan.
But he [Hallinan]
responded angrily to her claims. “I told Jack Hammel [the archdiocese’s legal
counsel] in no uncertain terms that I wouldn’t go along with anything like
that.
James Jenkins..the
founding chairman of the archdiocese’s Independent Review Board… resigned from
the board… Jenkins argued that Harris’s deal with the archdiocese not only
denied the rights of known victims, it also prevented other possible cases from
coming forward.
In April 2010, a
journalist with the San Francisco Weekly asked for the records through
California’s Public Records Act. Harris’s office denied the request, offering
conflicting explanations as to why they could not provide them.
In 2019, I requested
those records through a California attorney. The San Francisco district
attorney’s office responded that they no longer had them in their possession.
Were they destroyed? Were they moved somewhere else? It remains a disturbing
mystery.
She somehow served as
San Francisco district attorney from 2004 to 2011, and then as California
attorney general from 2011 to 2017, and never brought a single documented case
forward against an abusive priest.
To put this lack of
action in perspective, at least fifty other cities charged priests in sexual
abuse cases during her tenure as San Francisco district attorney. San Francisco
is conspicuous by its absence.
The Next One: Prostitution But No Prosecution
At San Francisco’s
adult entertainment clubs, dancers were taking customers behind closed doors
and having sex for money. … After repeated complaints … the San Francisco
Police Department decided to take action.
The police action
caught the attention of newly installed district attorney Kamala Harris, and
her staff sent the message to hold off on the enforcement.
Meanwhile, in response
to continued complaints, the police conducted a pair of sting operations. Three
undercover officers went into each of the two clubs and were quickly solicited
by female employees for paid sex.
At both the Market
Street Theater & New Century Theater, it happened “within minutes.”
When the operations were done, 9 women were arrested, as was the GM of the New
Century. The cops claimed that they were “slam-dunk cases. But Kamala Harris
dropped the cases.
It just leaves me in
amazement,” said San Francisco Police Department vice captain Tim Hettrich. It
was “almost legalizing prostitution.
Harris’s strange
objections to prosecuting prostitution cases connected to these raids have a
possible explanation. The owner of both the Market Street and New Century
theaters was a company called Déjà Vu.
An owner of Déjà Vu,
Sam Conti, had a long history with Willie Brown. Conti had first hired Brown as
his defense attorney back in 1977. They remained friends. At Conti’s 2009
funeral, Brown delivered a videotaped eulogy.
Next One: Construction And Conflicts Of Interest
Ricardo Ramirez ran a
cement and concrete company called Pacific Cement. As of 2003, a full one-third
of the public works projects in San Francisco used Pacific. … Those
contributions often went to the Willie Brown machine and were not always
legal.”
39/51″In 1997, state officials found that Ramirez had illegally contributed
$2,000 to Brown’s 1995 mayoral campaign.
…
Ramirez never faced charges for delivering substandard concrete. Instead,
Harris’s office settled for a plea deal involving a single environmental count,
illegally storing waste oil at one of his production facilities.
Harris & her office
refused to offer an explanation as to why they were going so light on Willie
Brown’s friend & donor. “Harris’ office had no explanation for why it
dropped the concrete case,” – the Chronicle.””Kamala Harris’s signature program
as San Francisco district attorney was called Back on Track-a program designed
to give first-time drug offenders an opportunity to avoid a criminal record.
Those (in the program)
included were not just nonviolent, first-time offenders who had committed a
single drug offense. Some were illegal immigrants and violent criminals such as
Alexander Izaguirre.
Amanda Kiefer was
walking down the street when Izaguirre snatched her purse and jumped into a
waiting SUV. Rather than drive off, the SUV sped toward Kiefer to run her down.
Kiefer jumped on the hood and saw Izaguirre and the driver laughing.
The driver slammed on
the brakes throwing Kiefer to the ground. The impact fractured her skull.
…
Harris did not offer an explanation. Instead, she simply explained that
enforcing federal immigration law was not her job.
Next One: Nutrition
Companies And Kamala’s Husband
In
2015 the attorneys general from fourteen other states, including New York,
launched an effort to investigate nutrition companies on the grounds of false
advertising and mislabeling.
The
Obama administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) was also going after dietary
supplement producers, charging them with exaggerated claims
The
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) opened an investigation into Herbalife in March
2014. In July 2016, the FTC won a $200 million settlement against Herbalife.
But Harris never even investigated the company.
It
is worth noting that those corporations in question all happened to be clients
of her husband’s law firm, Venable LLP. GNC, Herbalife, AdvoCare International,
Vitamin Shoppe, and others were represented by Venable.
In
2015, prosecutors from Harris’s own attorney general’s office based out of San
Diego sent her a long memorandum arguing that Herbalife needed to be
investigated. … Harris declined to investigate or provide the resources-and
never offered a reason.
These
excerpts are from @peterschweizer‘s 2020 #1 bestseller, “Profiles in
Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite. A pity this book’s
not received the coverage it deserves in India.
Kamala Harris Refused to Prosecute Priests’
Sexual Abuse After Church’s Lawyers Funded Her Campaign
ROBERT KRAYCHIK (BREITBART)
Peter Schweizer, author of Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of
Power by America’s Progressive Elite and
president of the Government Accountability Institute, discussed with host Alex
Marlow of Sirius XM’s Breitbart News Daily on Thursday that
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), while San Francisco’s district attorney (DA),
refused to prosecute cases of priests’ sexual abuse.
Harris was the only DA among those from the top 50 metropolitan
cities not to lay charges against clergy for sexual abuse, said Schweizer,
reflecting on Harris’s tenure as the San Francisco DA between 2004 and
2011.
Schweizer stated, “The numbers are pretty stunning. From 2004 to
2011, Kamala Harris was the San Francisco [district attorney] responsible for
all prosecutions and the prosecution team in the San Francisco area. Between
2004 and 2011, she did not prosecute a single case of priests’ sexual
abuse–period.”
Schweizer continued, “To put that in the context of how stunning
that is, if you look at the top 50 metropolitan areas in the United States
at that time, all 50 prosecuted at least one case, the sole exception being
Kamala Harris in San Francisco.”
Breitbart · Breitbart News Daily – Peter Schweizer – August 13, 2020
After being elected as San Francisco’s DA, Harris terminated her
predecessor’s plans to publicly release “clergy abuse files” naming names of priests accused of sexual abuse.
Terence Hallinan, the former DA of San Francisco, had slated the files for
public release against the wishes of the Archdiocese of San Francisco.
Schweizer described Harris’s suppression of the above-mentioned
documents as “stunning.”
“[The Archdiocese of San Franciso wasn’t] real happy to
share hundreds of pages of complaints that had been made about priests in the
area,” Schweizer said, “and according to [Hallinan’s] account, there were at
least the names of 40 current and former priests who had been accused of
molestations by people in that archdiocese.”
Schweizer went on to say that “Terence Hallinan talked about the
fact that he was going to pursue prosecutions. He also wanted to have victims’
groups go through [to] redact names, and then he wanted to release the records
to the public, which had been done in so many other areas. Well, he lost in the
2003 elections to Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris came in; she deep-sixed those
documents. She basically put it under seal so that it could never be released
publicly.”
Victims’ rights groups criticized Harris’s suppression of the
documents detailing allegations of sexual abuse against priests, Schweizer
noted.
“The victims’ rights groups snapped,” Schweizer remarked. “Some
of the other groups went absolutely ballistic, and you can understand why.
Kamala Harris claimed that she sealed those records to protect victims. The
victims call that outrageous and wrong. They used language that I couldn’t use
on radio.”
Schweizer determined, “The bottom line is [Harris] has a
terrible, atrocious record on this specific issue, and it’s a little bit
baffling because she proclaims to be somebody who’s a victim’s advocate, but
she has this horrible record of covering up and failing to prosecute these
crimes.”
Harris received political campaign donations from lawyers and
law firms representing the Archdiocese of San Francisco.
Schweizer assessed, “Many of the law firms and lawyers who were
representing the archdiocese on a variety of legal matters — including priests
that had been identified as possible culprits — gave large contributions [to
Harris’s political campaign]. Some of them had never given contributions to a
race like this before, but they loaded up her campaign coffers.”
Schweizer went on. “When you look at some of the [Catholic]
institutions that were in the gun sites at the time, these are some very
powerful and elite-connected organizations. One of them is a school called
Saint Ignatius Prep. This is the alma mater of former California Gov. Jerry
Brown — who talks very eloquently and passionately about how important that
school is to him. That school has also educated several generations of the
Getty family, the very wealthy family that made its money in oil.”
Marlow pointed out that Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D-CA) father was
the general counsel for Getty Oil.
Schweizer replied, “Gavin Newsom is also very passionately
supportive of this school. Members of the Getty family sit on the school’s
board of directors, and, of course, the Getty family were huge backers of
Kamala Harris’s run for this office.”
“[Harris] has never given an explanation of why she handled this
the way that she did,” Schweizer stated.
Schweizer concluded by contrasting Harris’s reversal of
Hallinan’s pursuit of sexual abuse allegations against clergy. “Once Kamala
Harris took that position as San Francisco [district] attorney, these victims
were completely shut out by and all cooperation ended,” he said. “This is a
story that needs attention. It demands her being asked about it and her
answering questions about it.”
Comments
Post a Comment