Kamala Harris stops short of fully accepting Joe Biden's apology: 'We cannot rewrite history'

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Sen. Kamala Harris said Sunday that she applauds former Vice President Joe Biden's apology on his comments about his ability to be civil and work with segregationist senators in the 1970s, but stopped short of absolving him of all of his past remarks on issues of race.

The California Democrat said a "point of disagreement" between the two still remains when it comes to desegregation busing.

"He is right to recognize the impact of his words, and I applaud him for doing that," Harris said of her 2020 presidential opponent during a gaggle with reporters in Hartsville, South Carolina. "There is still a point of disagreement between he and I, and that remains ... which is the issue of busing."

"We cannot rewrite history about what segregationists were doing at that time on a number of issues including opposing busing."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kamala-harris-stops-short-of-fully-accepting-joe-bidens-apology-we-cannot-rewrite-history/ar-AADZrj0?li=BBnb7Kz

[redstateblues]

1. This is a losing issue for you Kamala and for the Democratic Party

Especially in the General. Keep it up. 4 more for Trump

[calguy]

4. She's giving them ammunition

I hate to see this happening. Luckily it's still very early.

[RHMerriman]

31. Curious ... does she find anything that Trump says about what he was doing

Curious ... does she find anything that Trump says about what he was doing 40 years ago - hell, 40 days ago - to be hurtful, or is the senator only hurt by things the Democratic frontrunner and most recent vice president says?

[at140]

51. Kamala is out to win nomination and must knockout Biden

first, because he is leading the pack. It is not complicated!

[AlexSFCA]

52. and Warren needs to step up her game

she can only win if she knocks down Biden. I think we’ll a full on assault on Biden during second debate.

[at140]

61. Yes, front runner receives the most flak

in every nomination fight.

[RHMerriman]

53. Funny, I thought the point was to win the election in November.

I mean, I'm sure she'd get re-elected to the Senate if she got the nomination and then lost in the general, but then again, maybe not...

Plenty of solid Democratic members of Congress in California at the moment who have not made a practice of attacking their fellow Democrats to chose from...

[at140]

60. Cart before the Horse!

Kamala can't win in general if Biden defeats her for nomination.
It is not complicated.

[RHMerriman]

66. Allies couldn't win in 1945 if the Soviets were defeated in 1942...

Allies couldn't win in 1945 if the Soviets were defeated in 1942...

Equally not complicated.

[at140]

69. And your point is?

WWII? Going back a bit aren't we with non-congruent comparison.

[RHMerriman]

76. Focus on the real enemy?

Focus on the real enemy?

Don't shoot at your friends?

Avoid fratricide?

Crazy concept, I know...

[at140]

91. Too early for that, the prize is just too important

for any career politician. Expect a hard fought struggle until the last day
at the convention.

[RHMerriman]

106. Set aside personal ambition in favor of the common good?

Set aside personal ambition in favor of the common good?

I know, very old-fashioned concept, but one can hope...

[at140]

108. Nice concept, but rarely has happened before!

I can't think of any presidential nomination fight being settles so early,
before any primaries have taken place,
UNLESS an incumbent president was running for 2nd term.

[RHMerriman]

110. Given the stakes, perhaps it should?

The only former chief executive who ever posed as great a threat to the nation was Buchanan; perhaps some historical perspective would be helpful...

[at140]

113. Accept the reality as it exists

but nothing wrong in dreaming about your ideals.

[RHMerriman]

114. Trust me, there's one Democratic incumbent I won't be voting for next time around...

Trust me, there's one Democratic incumbent I won't be voting for next time around...

[oasis]

109. I don't have too much use for any Democrat who refuses to look

at the "big picture".

[RHMerriman]

111. You are not alone...

You are not alone...

[treestar]

81. It is not necessary to knockout someone else

You just have to get the most votes. If you can't do that without knocking others, you aren't the one. Hillary won the nomination without doing that. President Obama won the nomination without doing that.

[at140]

90. How many opponents Hillary had during primaries?

Now there are a dozen viable democrats running for president.
Different situation. Hillary had mainly one opponent. And can you honestly
say Bernie did not fight hard until the bitter end?
These politicians are all working hard to get the nomination for the top job in country.
It is a huge prize and they will not give up easily.
They are not going to sing kumbaya and anoint someone without a fight.

[treestar]

96. Fight for it on their merits

Not by cutting others down.

[treestar]

8. +1

How long is this going to go on?

[onetexan]

57. K&R

[Owl]

87. Yes indeed. And this is not a good thing.

[EffieBlack]

88. A lot of folk must believe that

which helps explain why they won’t let it go, even though Biden apologized, and he and most of the rest of the free world have moved on.

[George II]

2. I saw her answer this morning on MSNBC. Yes, we can't rewrite history, but isn't she expecting...

....Biden to do so?

[bluewater]

3. How so?

[ucrdem]

5. She expects him to believe her hard luck story.

She left out the year of Montessori school and the fact that her busing program wasn't mandated or court-ordered. And she didn't desegregate Thousand Oaks elementary. It was never segregated.

[bluewater]

9. "she didn't desegregate Thousand Oaks elementary. It was never segregated."

Would you have links showing the racial balance in that school compared to others in the district over a period of years?

I realize the district had black students, but what were the actual numbers for that school compared to other elementary schools?

Thanks.

[ucrdem]

11. Thousand Oaks had a 2.1% AA student population the year before the busing program started.

I'll find a link if you need one.

[bluewater]

13. You made a statement that the elementary school was never segregated.

Please provide data showing the racial balance of that school compared to other elementary schools in the district.

You do realize that segregated schools can have a small minority student population, right? How that percentage compares to other elementary schools in the district needs to be answered to back up your claim.

[ucrdem]

17. It wasn't segregated. It had a mixed student population.

There was no court order, no lawsuit, no consent decree. It was a voluntarily organized busing program.

[bluewater]

21. So you can't provide actual data?

To believe your claim that the elementary school was never segregated, you need to show us the racial balance for that school compared to the other elementary schools in the district.

It's that simple.

Segregated schools don't have to be 100% white and 100% minority to still be segregated.

[ucrdem]

22. Berkeley schools were never segregated. If you think they were, prove it. nt

[Cha]

24. Thanks!

[ucrdem]

25. Heya Cha!

[Cha]

26. Go

get 'em!

[ucrdem]

29. LOL

I hope there's a DU in heaven and that's all I'm gonna say!

[bluewater]

27. That's not how it works. YOU are the one making the claims.

"Berkeley schools were never segregated. If you think they were, prove it."

You made the positive claim that the elementary school was never segregated.

Now you made the claim that all Berkeley schools were never segregated.

When asked to provide data to back up your claims, showing the actual racial balance in each school, you have not produced any data or links to such data.

I think I have made my point.

Thank you for the discussion.

[ucrdem]

28. See below.

You're welcome!

[ucrdem]

23. I was wrong -- it was 3% at Thousand Oaks in 1963, before Harris was even born

Sacramento Bee:

While it’s true she was among the second class of students at Thousand Oaks Elementary School to participate in a fully integrated busing program, she was far from the first black child to attend the school.

Data from the Berkeley Unified School District shows the school had 15 black students in 1963 — a year before Harris was born. They represented 3% of the total elementary school student body

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article232076402.html

[bluewater]

30. "while other schools had a black population as high as 97%" wtf!

While it’s true she was among the second class of students at Thousand Oaks Elementary School to participate in a fully integrated busing program, she was far from the first black child to attend the school.

Data from the Berkeley Unified School District shows the school had 15 black students in 1963 — a year before Harris was born. They represented 3% of the total elementary school student body, while other schools in the district had a black population as high as 97%.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article232076402.html#storylink=cpy


DAMN. and DOUBLE DAMN.

So much for your claim that Berkley schools were NEVER segregated.

[ucrdem]

32. There was no systematic segregation and no lawsuit against it. There was unequal distribution

and that's what the busing program voluntarily addressed.

[bluewater]

33. So you were wrong and are now moving the goal posts?

Thank you for pointing out that the elementary school had a 3% minority enrollment while other schools in the district were as high as 97% black.


I think we are done here.

Thanks for the discussion.

[ucrdem]

34. In the context of busing, there was no determination of systematic segregation.

But if you need to leave, I completely understand!

[bluewater]

36. Your claim that Berkley schools were never segregated was wrong.

Would it not be better to admit you were mistaken and read some wrong information?

I admit when I am wrong all the time.

That school, according to your own article, was 3% minority while other schools in the district were as high as 97% black.

It's right there in the article.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article232076402.html

It's just futile to try and defend a claim that Berkley schools were never segregated, that's clearly not the case.



But what about that elementary school? Let's look at that also:

"Black representation had grown slightly in the early-1960s. By 1967, the district considered its schools to be “partially desegregated,” but still “making progress toward racial integration,” according to documents obtained by The Sacramento Bee. The records show one in ten students at Thousand Oaks Elementary School in 1967 were black" [2 years before Harris attended]

"After a pilot program and the launch of a formal busing program that fall, the schools had been more evenly divided. During the first year of the program — a year before Harris arrived in 1969 — black enrollment jumped from 10% to 37%. The district’s data shows an increase in black representation at Thousand Oaks from 37% to 41% by the end of Harris’s first year of school."

So there you have it, Harris was one of the students bused in the second year of the program to integrate that elementary school. The school was still segregate and she was a participant in integrating it.

I think this is a wrap.

[ucrdem]

37. Show me the consent decree compelling Berkeley to desegregate and you win.

[StarfishSaver]

40. The courts didn't get involved because, unlike many other cities Berkeley desegregated voluntarily

and, therefore, black parents didn't have to bring a lawsuit asking the court for a declaratory judgment that the schools were segregated and asking the courts to issue an order mandating the schools develop and implement a desegregation plan.

The lack of a lawsuit and court order doesn't mean the schools weren't segregated. It just meant that the city admitted the segregation and desegregated without being dragged kicking and screaming to court.

And, FYI, you seem not to understand what a consent decree is. While a consent decree is usually enforced with a court order, it is not the same as a court order. It's really a form of settlement agreement reached before a verdict or appeal.

Some desegregation cases were settled prior to final judgment, and as part of the settlement, the school district and the plaintiff entered a consent decree. Once the consent decree was finalized and approved, the court issued an order that the consent decree be carried out and oversaw the implementation of it.

In other cases, the case went to trial and the court ruled that the schools were segregated (usually over the continued denials of the school districts, who did not admit their schools were segregated and continued to resist desegregating). At the conclusion of the case and following the verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, the courts ordered the schools to devise and implement a desegregation plan. Consent decrees were not involved in such cases but, instead, these were straight forward court orders.

Hope that's helpful.

[bluewater]

42. The school was still segregated when Harris started attending it.

After a pilot program and the launch of a formal busing program that fall, the schools had been more evenly divided. During the first year of the program — a year before Harris arrived in 1969 — black enrollment jumped from 10% to 37%. The district’s data shows an increase in black representation at Thousand Oaks from 37% to 41% by the end of Harris’s first year of school.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article232076402.html#storylink=cpy

[ucrdem]

45. Per NYT the school was 40.2 percent AA the year before Harris got there:

The school had been 2.5 percent black in 1963. In 1969, it was 40.2 percent black as a result of integration.

Harris started the program in 1970 when she was in first grade.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/30/us/politics/kamala-harris-berkeley-busing.html

[bluewater]

54. The school was desegregated between 1968 and 1969 thanks to the busing program.

After a pilot program and the launch of a formal busing program that fall, the schools had been more evenly divided. During the first year of the program — a year before Harris arrived in 1969 — black enrollment jumped from 10% to 37%. The district’s data shows an increase in black representation at Thousand Oaks from 37% to 41% by the end of Harris’s first year of school.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article232076402.html#storylink=cpy

If the NY Times is right, and the Sacramento Bee wrong, then Harris attended in 1970.

She said she was in the second year of a program to desegregate the school, and she might actually have been in the 3rd year. wow! lol

So what was your point exactly?

That because the program started working a year before her story is somehow false? wtf lol

[ucrdem]

49. It was at 40.2% AA per NYT, 37% per Sac Bee, the year before she started in 1970. nt

[bluewater]

55. Again, Desegregated between 1968 and 1969 thanks to the busing program

[ucrdem]

56. So she desegregated an unsegregated school while attending Montessori.

She's really something!

[bluewater]

62. Facts are stubborn things, Harris helped desegregate her school.

You said her elementary school was never segregated.

In 1963 it was 97% white, 3% black

In 1967 it was 90% white, 10% black

After a pilot program and the launch of a formal busing program that fall, the schools had been more evenly divided. During the first year of the busing program, 1968, black enrollment jumped from 10% to 37%.

Black representation at Thousand Oaks went from 37% to 41% by the end of 1969.

Harris was one of the first few years of students that integrated that school, whether that was in 1969 or 1970.

Suggesting that she attended "an unsegregated school" seems little more than sophistry, I don't think many people will buy into that argument.

Harris helped desegregate that school as did all the other children that rode that bus with her.

[ucrdem]

43. Yes thank you. It appears to have been a great success!

[58Sunliner]

63. If you knew Berkeley,

you would know that some schools were situated in areas that were predominately AA. Technically not the same as segregated, which is a policy, and not a product of drawing from the population in the area. You can argue that discrimination/economics forced blacks to live in certain areas. There was one public high school, and all attended it.

[ucrdem]

67. Exactly.

You said it better than I could!

[StarfishSaver]

73. No. No. No

"Policy" is not what makes segregation segregation.

Segregation can either be by law - "de jure" - or a result of other factors - "de facto." How it came about does not determine whether the segregation exists. It exists whether it was mandated by law or was the result of such things as housing discrimination that segregated neighborhoods and, therefore, locked people into segregated "neighborhood schools."

Where "discrimination/economics forced blacks to live in certain areas," and the result was that they attended all-black schools, that segregation is just as unconstitutional as segregation expressly mandated by law.

In fact, de facto segregation is even more invidious because it's much harder to overcome. Since it's built into the system, not only do people claim no responsibility for it (WE didn't separate the black kids from the white kids. They're just attending their NEIGHBORHOOD schools! Not OUR fault!), it takes much more disruption to undo it since it's woven into every aspect of the society and, therefore, more difficult to unravel. That's why northern school desegregation was so much more difficult overall than southern desegregation.

But what you're describing - segregation in practice rather than written policy - is segregation and was just as unconstitutional and subject to legal challenge as segregation written into law.

[58Sunliner]

115. By the way-those predominantly black schools had white students.

[ucrdem]

116. Very good point.

[ucrdem]

38. Thousand Oaks was 40.2% AA in 1969, the year BEFORE Harris was first bused there:

in 1969, it was 40.2 percent black as a result of integration.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/30/us/politics/kamala-harris-berkeley-busing.html

So contrary to her debate claim, Harris did NOT desegregate Thousand Oaks or any other school. Talk about rewriting history!

[bluewater]

44. Harris did help desegregate it. It's explained in your own article.

After a pilot program and the launch of a formal busing program that fall, the schools had been more evenly divided. During the first year of the program — a year before Harris arrived in 1969 — black enrollment jumped from 10% to 37%. The district’s data shows an increase in black representation at Thousand Oaks from 37% to 41% by the end of Harris’s first year of school.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article232076402.html#storylink=cpy

She said she was in the second year of the program that desegregated the school and she was.


Facts are stubborn things.

Honestly, I don't understand what you are trying to take issue with.

[ucrdem]

46. It was fully integrated the year before she got there.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/30/us/politics/kamala-harris-berkeley-busing.html

And it appears that she was in the 3rd year of the program which began in 1968:

A campaign spokeswoman confirmed that Ms. Harris joined the class in 1970, her first grade year, which was the third year of integration.

Same link.

[bluewater]

47. a WHOLE year? A distinction without a difference?

Last edited Sun Jul 7, 2019, 09:44 PM - Edit history (1)

After a pilot program and the launch of a formal busing program that fall, the schools had been more evenly divided. During the first year of the program — a year before Harris arrived in 1969 — black enrollment jumped from 10% to 37%. The district’s data shows an increase in black representation at Thousand Oaks from 37% to 41% by the end of Harris’s first year of school.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article232076402.html#storylink=cpy

Harris said she was a participant in the second year of a program that desegregated that school.

During the first year of the program — a year before Harris arrived in 1969 — black enrollment jumped from 10% to 37%.

The district’s data shows an increase in black representation at Thousand Oaks from 37% to 41% by the end of Harris’s first year of school.

Even if she participated in the 3rd year of the program, what difference does that make? She was one of the pioneering students bused in to desegregate that school. In 1967 it was still 90% white.

[ucrdem]

48. I'd call 40.2% fully integrated. YMMV. nt

[bluewater]

50. Because of the busing program she was a participant in. lol

Harris was a participant in the 2nd (according to the Sacramento Bee) or, as you posted, the 3rd year of a busing program that INTEGRATED the elementary school.

The school went in two years, from 1968 to 1969, from 10% black to 41%.

A school you claimed was never segregated.


Kamala Harris participated as a child in the busing program that desegregated her elementary school. Whether it was the 2nd or 3rd year of the program seems like a quibble, honestly. She was one of the pioneering students participating in integrating the school.

Honestly I don't know what else to say.

First you said her elementary school was never segregated, and you were wrong.

Then you said all of the Berkley schools were never segregated, and you were wrong.

Now you are saying that the busing program that she participated in integrated the school a whole year before she attended and that is supposed to matter some how?

I am at a loss for words.

[StarfishSaver]

58. "It was fully integrated the year before she got there"

Desegregation isn't a "one and done" thing where the school gets desegregated in the first year and then the desegregation plan ends and everybody goes back to business as usual Even if the first year was successful in desegregating the schools, the programs continued for a period of time to keep the schools integrated, since, unless you added each subsequent class of students to the desegregation plan, the whole thing would fall aparte. So trying to claim that she somehow wasn't part of a desegregation program because the school "was fully integrated before she got there" doesn't make any sense.

[bluewater]

64. I am at a loss for words.

The school was desegregated between 1968 and 1969.

"So trying to claim that she somehow wasn't part of a desegregation program because the school "was fully integrated before she got there" doesn't make any sense."

Even worse, he's claiming the school was integrated for ONE WHOLE year before she attended, so she wasn't part of the ongoing desegregation program.

[ucrdem]

68. It was *already* integrated. But more accurately

..it was never segregated, in the sense that the term applies here, meaning deliberately and systematically.

[StarfishSaver]

71. Segregation needn't be deliberate and systematic in order to exist and to be unconstitutional

Saying "it was never segregated" because the segregation was not imposed by law is pushing a fallacy.

Have you heard Biden talking about "de facto" segregation v. "de jure" segregation - pointing out that Harris' school was the result of the former? That's what he's talking about.

Please, please take the time to read up on and learn about this topic before trying to school the rest of us about it. I'm sure you are very knowledgeable about many things - most of which I probably am pretty clueless about - but it's clear you don't know this topic very well so it's not very helpful for you to try to instruct others about it, especially when you keep getting it wrong.

This is not a slap at you - just a suggestion that you should make an effort to learn about it before trying to argue about it.

[ucrdem]

74. It was never segregated at all if you want to get semantic.

Segregated means separated and races were not at this school. And that my friend is the bottom line.

[StarfishSaver]

75. As I said, you don't know enough about this to lecture anyone about "bottom lines" or anything else

The more you try to instruct me about it, the clearer it is how little you know about the topic.

You really should just stop. You're not proving anything.

[ucrdem]

77. Look in any dictionary.nt

[R B Garr]

78. Thanks for the definitive data. Now you're being told that

1969 is the same as 1970 — no difference. Soon we’ll be hearing that voluntary busing is unconstitutional. Anything to smear Berkeley.

[ucrdem]

80. Thank you. I thought when she said it that it sounded peculiar

but yeah she threw Berkeley under the bus along with Joe, so to speak!

p.s. not to make light of an important and sensitive topic but Berkeley has always prided itself on its commitment to equality and diversity and she painted it as something quite different for the purpose of advancing her career. And if she's going to fudge facts in this race she's going to get called on it.

[Chitown Kev]

79. If that were the case

then you could also say that almost no schools in the north were "segregated" because Southern Jim Crow was not applicable to the North.

That does not mean that schools in the North were not deliberately and systematically segregated...they sure as hell were...residential living patterns and housing covenants were how that was done...setting u neighborhood boundaries, etc...which was still quite systemic.

[treestar]

10. Well he is not to talk about things

That happened, because it’s hurtful. Maybe not rewriting but not mentioning those old segregationists could make them go away. Bringing them up was so hurtful. Even just to use them as an example.

[bluewater]

12. I rather not joke about what 'those old segregationists" actually did. It's not funny.

I rather not joke about what 'those old segregationists" actually did. They were racist bastards that oppressed black people.

If you want to defend Biden, defend Biden.

Please don't crack jokes about "those old segregationists".

[tishaLA]

16. Yes, segregationists whose raison d'etre was to dehumanize black folks

are probably best left in the past instead of commenting on their "civility."

Link to tweet

[ucrdem]

19. Berkeley isn't in Mississippi. nt

[tishaLA]

20. Where did Sen Eastland hail from and who was it that

touted his civility? Fannie Lou Hamer would like to say a few words about Sen Eastland and it's not to talk about his civility:

Link to tweet

[treestar]

82. They are not going to go away

and disappear. They are not going to have never existed. They were even in the Senate. Unlike McConnell and Co. they could at least work out a budget and presumably some other things.

Reminds me of the bind we had over Black History Month. It was described as hurtful to black students as they were singled at and stared at they the rest of the class. So there was no way to teach Black History at all. It would be racist to ignore it, racist to teach only white kids (as it was hurtful to the black kids, but a segregated class was hardly permissible) and yet teaching it to an integrated class was hurtful to the black kids.

[StarfishSaver]

7. How is asking someone if think they were wrong about something in the past "rewriting history"?

[ucrdem]

6. She will.

[oasis]

14. I'm in a world of hurt in anticipation of another Trump term.

What about me Kamala?

[CTyankee]

15. Please Kamala, it's "between him and me" not "he and I."

It's just good basic grammar.

And go Kamala! You are great and I love you.

[tishaLA]

18. All of what you said

that "he and I" stuff made me grind my teeth.

[cwydro]

39. Drives me crazy when educated people do that.

Should know better.

[StarfishSaver]

72. That made my eyes roll back in my head.

And not in a good way.

[whistler162]

35. Must've been a odd prosecutor

if she picked who whe would work with out of the police force! Fairly certain that so,e of the LEO's she had to work with where/are racists.

[ucrdem]

41. The Innocence Project has been going after Harris' prosecutions for years.

I'm beginning to see why.

[58Sunliner]

59. Just ask her why she could not advocate for victims of church abuse.

Why she could not investigate priests who were accused and still in circulation.

[Princetonian]

83. Harris has a lot of skeletons that will make her an unviable candidate in a general election.

I hope reporters do begin asking about this and other egregious parts of her history.

[58Sunliner]

84. Yep.She gets the nom, it will be endless. And it will smell.

[EffieBlack]

86. Something will smell, alright

But that stench won’t be coming from Kamala Harris’ closet ...

[58Sunliner]

89. They will be shredding her over the Willie Brown machine. And not just because she dated him.

Willie Brown-Allegations of political patronage followed Brown from the State Legislature through his tenure as San Francisco mayor. Former Los Angeles County GOP Assemblyman Paul Horcher, who voted in 1994 to keep Brown as Speaker, was reassigned to a position with a six-figure salary as head San Francisco's solid waste management program. Brian Setencich also was appointed to a position by Brown.[24] Both were hired as special assistants after losing their assembly seats because of their support of Brown. Former San Francisco Supervisor Bill Maher was also hired as a special assistant after campaigning for Brown in his first mayoral race.[54] Brown is also criticized for favoritism to Ms. Carpeneti, the lobbyist with whom he had a child. In 1998 Brown arranged for Carpeneti to obtain a rent-free office in the city-owned Bill Graham Civic Auditorium. Between then and 2003, a period that spans the birth of their daughter, Carpeneti was paid an estimated $2.33 million by nonprofit groups and political committees controlled by then Mayor Brown and his friends.[11][55]

Brown increased the city's special assistants payroll from US$15.6 to US$45.6 million between 1995 and 2001.[56] Between April 29, 2001 and May 3, 2001, San Francisco Chronicle reporters Lance Williams and Chuck Finnie released a five-part story concerning Brown and his relations with city contractors, lobbyists, and city appointments and hires he had made during his tenure as Mayor. The report concluded that there was an appearance of favoritism and conflicts of interest in the awarding of city contracts and development deals, a perception that large contracts had an undue influence on city hall, and patronage with the hiring of campaign workers, contributors, legislative colleagues, and friends to government positions.[57]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated Brown when he was Speaker. " All this was before he supported her run for DA. After he had a relationship with her and given her 2 jobs and a BMW.

[EffieBlack]

92. Uh-hunh. Nice research about Willie Brown - (that has nothing to do with Harris)

I’m sure there’s plenty more smear by association where that came from that will no doubt be disseminated at opportune times.

That’s how it works, right?

[58Sunliner]

95. I really did not have to look far for info. I was born in the Bay Area.

And it's not a smear when it, in fact, happened. It has a lot to do with Harris-because she chose to associate with and take favors from him, while he was under investigation. It is corrupt. If they were both repukes we would not be having this discussion.

[EffieBlack]

85. Don't fall for the ratfuck

[highplainsdem]

65. Disappointing reaction, but not surprising, given what I've learned about her recently.

Hope to God she won't be our presidential or VP nominee...

[Trumpocalypse]

93. What have you learned? nt

[tirebiter]

70. Hang it up

See what tomorrow brings

[Trumpocalypse]

94. I like Harris

And would love to see her at the nominee or VP, but she is totally overplaying this. No one really cares about busing. It is a 30 year old issue. She needs to start talking about the future.

[StarfishSaver]

97. When did Harris last talk about busing, not in response to a question?

She's been on the road talking about the future and getting a great response.

[Trumpocalypse]

98. I hope so

Unfortunately that is not what is getting media attention.

[StarfishSaver]

101. "Media attention" - 'nuff said

But check out C-Span's coverage - for example the Essence Festival in New Orleans last weekend. She was outstanding, positive and lit the place up.

Elizabeth Warren and Buttigieg were also fantastic there. Booker, Beto, de Blasio and Bennet also spoke and we're all great.

[Trumpocalypse]

102. She still could have accepted

Biden’s apology.

[StarfishSaver]

103. She did accept his apology - in fact she said she applauded it

She said they just don't agree about busing (which wasn't the subject of his apology.

But it's interesting you keep moving the goalposts. First, she wouldn't stop talking about busing (which she has), then she needed to talk about the future (which she is) and now she supposedly didn't accept his apology (which she did).

Sounds to me like you have a problem with her no matter what she does.

[Trumpocalypse]

107. I'm not moving the goal posts

I’m just stating my opinion. You seem to be dedicated to picking a fight because I made some comments about Harris that you don’t like. You’re not going to change my opinion so move on.

[Cha]

100. Harris is the one "Not letting this GO".

[StarfishSaver]

104. How is she not letting this go?

What has she said about this topic in the last week that wasn't a response to a media question.

I'm pretty sure she has said far less about this that some people on DU, who for some reason, seem determined to keep churning the issue.

[emmaverybo]

105. If she thinks she can ride her debate performance and Biden was a segregationist like his pals

thing into first place, I think she is mistaken. She has boosted her national profile, upped her
standing with the black electorate, but despite the dazzle, doesn’t have as wide a following as Warren and, as yet, her experience.

I hope she will stop milking her hurt feelings and start honestly earning the “she’s the one who can take on Trump” buzz. Take on Trump, Kamala.

[Cha]

99. So who is "not letting this GO"?

[BootinUp]

112. I just peeked. Nt