In the age of the Me Too movement it is going to be tough for any candidate with sexual assault skeletons in their closet to win the presidency.
Federalist Papers reports:
But it is even tougher when one is a progressive candidate that portrays themselves as a champion of women.
That is the issue for California Sen. Kamala Harris whose aide was caught in a sex scandal that Harris has attempted to sweep under the rug.
And it is a man whose leadership she praised in her new book she is touring the nation promoting.
Not stunningly the media has remained silent on the issue, asking her virtually no questions about it as she continues her tour.
Imagine if that was a Republican candidate.
But The Daily Caller was at one of her recent book signings where they asked people about the scandal.
They posed the question with the premise that the aide was one of President Donald Trump’s.
The respondents were quick to bash the president for it.
But when they were told that it was one of Harris’ aides they were dumbfounded.
If the media does it’s job and reports on the story it could be something that ruins her dreams of being president.
As we reported previously Harris’ aide had a lawsuit brought against him and Harris feigned ignorance.
Sen. Kamala Harris finds herself at the center of a sex scandal.
And it has happened mere months after harassing Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh about unsubstantiated allegations from decades ago.
And Harris wants everyone to take her word for it, saying she had no idea about her staffer’s actions.
That is unlike the drubbing she gave Kavanaugh when he denied what was accused of him.
This is not going to help Sen. Harris’ 2020 dreams of becoming president.
The Washington Examiner reported.
Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., doesn’t know anything — and that’s her best defense.
When news broke that the California Department of Justice settled a $400,000 sexual harassment settlement involving one of her longtime staffers, Larry Wallace, Harris was supposedly stunned.
“We were unaware of this issue and take accusations of harassment extremely seriously. This evening, Mr. Wallace offered his resignation to the senator, and she accepted it,” spokeswoman Lily Adams wrote in an email to the Sacramento Bee.
This would be more believable if this was an isolated incident of ignorance. Unfortunately for Harris and her presidential hopes, she has a habit of know-nothingness: Things would go bad, the headlines would be ugly, and California’s top cop would insist on her own obliviousness.
But now it appears she knew about before she said she did and has been lying about it, The Sacremento Bee reported.
The latest information, however, as reported by the Bee, suggests Harris had longer than previously reported to discover and act on the allegations.
When Wallace resigned earlier this month, some were already alarmed that Harris could have been unaware of misconduct in her office while she served as attorney general and that she hired the offending employee to work for her Senate office. “For Harris to flatly deny any knowledge of this settlement seems, shall we say, far-fetched. For the moment, let’s take her at her word,” the Bee editorial board wrote. “A second and equally troubling interpretation is that Harris isn’t a terribly good manager, and that her staff was insulating her from information critical to the performance of her duties.”
The misconduct was known to others in the office for which Harris was responsible, according to the Bee.
Harris “took responsibility” for the incident, but blamed staff for failing to inform her in the 26 months since the victim’s first notice. “That’s what makes me upset about this. There’s no question I should have been informed about this. There’s no question. And there were ample opportunities when I could have been informed,” she said.
Harris is widely expected to run for president in 2020. Her purported ignorance of employee misconduct and the concomitant lawsuit potentially clash with her vocal support for the #MeToo movement. The Bee‘s editorial board worried the revelations bode ill for her presidential ambitions. “This is hardly a propitious beginning to a presidential candidacy,” the board wrote.
From Federalist Papers