Clark Comments On Harris Record

By
Rachel Stevenson
-
0
554

Jeff Clark, a former Trump administration Department of Justice official, raised a pretty intriguing point this week about Vice President Kamala Harris’s prosecutorial career. According to Clark, there’s no evidence that Harris ever personally led the prosecution of a case in court. Speaking on The Charlie Kirk Show, Clark noted that he’s been combing through legal databases to find any record of Harris “first-chairing” a trial, and so far, he’s come up empty-handed.

Harris has leaned heavily on her background as a prosecutor in her political rise, touting her experience as a major selling point. In her standard stump speech, she often points out that before she became Vice President and a Senator, she was California’s Attorney General and a courtroom prosecutor. Harris talks about taking on “predators who abused women,” “fraudsters,” and “cheaters” as part of her prosecutorial career, painting a picture of a tough, no-nonsense leader in the courtroom.

However, Clark’s research tells a different story. He claims that while there’s evidence Harris made appearances in court, he hasn’t found trial transcripts that show she was ever the lead prosecutor. In addition, there are no records, according to Clark, of Harris arguing cases at the appellate level. If true, this would be a significant contrast to the “ace prosecutor” image she likes to project.

And Harris’s record as a prosecutor has been criticized in other areas, too. Take, for example, the case of Jamal Trulove. Trulove was wrongly convicted of murder when Harris was San Francisco’s District Attorney. Trulove recalled Harris being present in court when his guilty verdict was read, and, in his words, she “bust out laughing.” Trulove was later exonerated, and the case remains a stain on Harris’s prosecutorial record.

Harris’s legal career began on a shaky note. She famously failed the California Bar exam on her first attempt, and her early political career received a boost from her relationship with Willie Brown, a major figure in California politics. Brown later admitted to helping Harris secure two key state board appointments, which undeniably opened doors for her future ambitions.

Harris has also been known for some controversial decisions during her time as a prosecutor. She pursued low-level offenders, such as parents of truant students, and was criticized for refusing to seek the death penalty in the case of Isaac Espinoza, an off-duty police officer who was murdered. As California Attorney General, she went after a pro-life filmmaker and tried to force conservative nonprofits to reveal their donor lists—a move that sparked backlash from the right.

Now, as Vice President, Harris continues to capitalize on her tough-on-crime persona. But Clark’s revelations cast doubt on just how hands-on she really was in the courtroom. For someone who’s built a big part of her brand on being a seasoned prosecutor, the lack of any substantial evidence backing that claim could pose a significant political liability.

As for Jeff Clark, it’s worth noting that he himself has been a target of scrutiny, particularly for his efforts to investigate voter fraud claims surrounding the 2020 election. The January 6 Committee zeroed in on his role, but that’s a whole other can of worms.

For now, the focus is on Harris, and the question remains: Did she really have the prosecutorial chops she claims? Based on Clark’s findings, that’s looking a little doubtful.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR