San Fran Willie played a pivotal role in advancing Kamala’s career, giving her well remunerated jobs while also sleeping with her.

She was then in her late 20s, and he, married all the while, was around 60. He figured prominently in Harris’s defeat of the late Terence Hallinan for the position of District Attorney.

DISMISSAL

For example, Willie would threaten his workers with dismissal if they didn’t turn up at Kamala’s rallies. They were known as the “patronage army”, from the hilariously named San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners, or SLUG for short. Typically, they were the only people there. And not a sniper in sight!

Willie has said – “yes, I dated Kamala Harris. So what?” Well, perhaps.

Far more importantly, Willie corruptly provided her with sinecures for which she was totally unqualified.

Former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard claims that Kamala isn’t qualified for the top job.

True enough. Interestingly, this is the same charge that Schweizer made in his book about all the jobs Willie (still with us, happily, now aged 90) threw the young Harris’s way back in the early 2000s.

But lack of ability is only the half of it. Far worse was her actual performance in the various offices delivered to her. Her tenure was utterly corrupt.

The thing that most characterised Kamala’s tenure in San Francisco was her selective prosecutory philosophy and practice.

It seems more than a coincidence that the likelihood of her DA office prosecuting someone had more to do with whether he or she had donated to her campaign for office than with the merits of the case. Schweizer’s book spells it out in its gory detail.

Suffice it to say that one of the chief beneficiaries of Harris DA office largesse was the Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco and the total absence of indictments for priestly sex abuse, widely known to have been rampant in that neck of the woods.

It wasn’t just the isolated case.

Tulsi Gabbard has brought other legal hiccups on the part of Harris to our attention and America’s, previously.

It is all out there.

And it didn’t stop, either, when Harris became Attorney General of California. The legal cowboyism continued apace.

CLOSE

She was described at one point by Barack Obama as the best looking AG in the nation. Obama has always been a close ally of Kamala’s.

And Kamala’s envious record of selective justice had nothing to do with a consistent pattern of discrimination. It wasn’t that she had it in for Jews, or Catholics, or white people, or blacks, or anyone else.

No, it was simply about mates. And not even real mates. Mates of convenience.

It is hard to imagine a more cynical, calculated and depraved attitude towards public service.

It was a pattern of corrupt behaviour, “selective law enforcement”, directly related to the payback of favours in return for help in getting Kamala’s career going and then proceeding.

The most chilling part of all this is that it is known to be typical behaviour across the American political system and the American judicial system.

Deep and broad connections, paybacks, deals, favours owed and returned, cronies, wealth, power, influence and endlessly extended careers. It is a system-wide stench.

It is a little like the corrupt Gladys’s defence of her own pork barrelling and petty corruption in NSW.

One, it is just “politics” and two, “they all do it.” Gladys also benefited from the media’s notorious and unmerited protection of female politicians as a breed.

Andrew Urban at The Spectator Australia has posed the question: “Integrity goes to character. Does Kamala Harris pass this test? It is a key question now she is the Democrats’ Presidential candidate after Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the Presidential ticket.

“Previously, she was San Francisco’s District Attorney (2004-11), and then California’s Attorney General (2011-17). Can her future be ‘unburdened by her past’, to quote from her most frequent saying?”

Urban, I am guessing, think not. He brings the views of various law professors and other experts to bear.

It turns out there has been a widely held aversion to the thought of KH taking up the reins of high office, based simply on her record, a record that is dismal, bordering (pun intended) on the perverse.

She should simply be disqualified from high office. And they think a couple of JD Vance nasty references to motherless women disqualifies him. Strange times, these.

I mentioned California.

This is appropriate. The VP has been called out over her record as Border “Czar”.

I guess, to her credit, there haven’t been too many Canadian illegals. Just tens of millions from the other direction.

DINGHIES

There are fewer bigger issues on either side of the Pond. In Old Blighty, they simply do not know how to stop the dinghies.

Stateside, they simply can’t stop the land invasion. Critics of Harris – where does the buck stop here? – over the legal and illegal invasion have two lines of attack.

Both are damning. One is incompetence. The other is deliberate replacement theory politics.

People keep saying that Harris is a far-Left progressive. A marxist.

Well, on mass immigration, aren’t they all? She will certainly play well in Geneva, Brussels, Kiev (however it is spelled these days) and all the other globalist enclaves. They like crony politics and they like Lefties.

People have also called Kamala the Diversity, Equity & Inclusion candidate. That, she is.

But, of course, she isn’t remotely African American. Her mother was Indian; her long disappeared (divorced) father is from the Caribbean. That would be Donald J Harris. Another Donald J. He is a former Stanford professor, and the late mother was a biomedical scientist.

There is seemingly no excuse for Harris being so stupid, as many people characterise her. Perhaps unfairly.

Kamala is certainly, though, a candidate of colour. US social commentator Matt Walsh has suggested that she may only get darker by election day, perhaps in the manner of our very own man of much colour, the former professor, Stan Grant.

What else might the media do to help get KH over the line? Well, they will run interference and pursue JD Vance as a distraction.

Then there is favourable search engine optimisation. If you google “Willie Brown”, for example, pretty high up you will get some Time magazine “fact checking” on claims about Harris.

Former presidential candidate Ben Carson is on to it.

He warned the media would turn Kamala into a “godlike figure” and now they’re scrubbing her records, too.

GovTrack has erased Kamala Harris’s 2019 ranking as the “most liberal senator”.

Adding to the controversy, Axios recently retracted their labelling of Harris as a “border czar,” which multiple mainstream media outlets purported in 2023.

She was never the Border Czar!  (Well, it is true enough, I suppose, that she never did squat on the issue.)

Every trick in the bag will be brought to bear. Get the fact checkers up to the plate. If the Trump campaign doesn’t make this electoral fraud – for that is what this is – an election issue, they should be sacked.

CORRUPTION

Yes, I know all politicians lie about other politicians. But the level of truth-corruption in these times of technology-driven memory-holing has reached intolerable levels.

Perhaps enough people now see this for it to become a winning electoral issue.

The Democratic Party, from those distant days until now, isn’t the same Party, and America ain’t the same place.

There are two possible counters to this suggestion. One is that the Kennedys were also crooks. Look at the 1960 election and the links to Chicago and Mayor Richard Daley.

The other is that “Mattress Jack” also slept his way to the top. Mind you, he would have got there without that.

His bedroom antics were incidental to his career progression. Such was his inherent leadership skill set, unlike his Democratic successor, and his various conquests had nothing to do with his day job. No comparison.

Even Slick Willie had leadership skills, a serious brain and political smarts, after all. His sexual exploits were more career breakers than career makers.

No, Kamala Harris has a seedy past, one that has far more to do with corruption than with the casting couch, and little promise of a second chapter in the Democrats’ longstanding, now debased, narrative of Camelot.PC

– Paul Collits