Tulsi attacked Kamala with a claim made in the rightwing Free Beacon in February,

[pnwmom]

the claim that Kamala prosecuted 1500 pot cases. It was a smear designed to mislead people into thinking Kamala had personally approved the prosecution of all 1500 pot cases charged by all the lower level prosecutors during her six years as State Attorney General.

From the fact-checker, Politifact:

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/jul/31/fact-checking-democratic-debate-detroit-night-two/

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii on Sen. Kamala Harris’ time as a prosecutor: Harris "put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana."

This claim about Harris putting "over 1,500 people in jail" for pot violations is cited in a February article by the Free Beacon, a conservative online news website. The article says "at least 1,560 people were sent to state prisons for marijuana-related offenses between 2011 and 2016," when Harris was California attorney general. It says the data comes from reports from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

PolitiFact could not immediately access that data during the debate. But we do know that as attorney general, Harris would not have personally prosecuted marijuana cases. Those cases would have been handled by lower-level state attorneys.

[donkeypoofed]

1. Ha ! Busted for reading that rightwing rag, Gabbard!

Drop. Out. Now.

[chimpymustgo]

2. Great catch! nt

[Grokenstein]

3. Everything One Needs To Know About Tulsi

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Hortensis]

52. I was just thinking how often the people candidates draw,

Last edited Fri Aug 2, 2019, 05:24 PM - Edit history (1)

both in enthusiastic support and badly behaved opposition, DO say important things about them.

That was because someone recently was drawn to Biden to bring up the nasty insinuations of child molestation against him. Strictly with appropriate concern, as was carefully explained, but still I have trouble imagining that Biden's good-natured niceness could ever replace the appeal of slandering him to those inclined. Or that significant numbers of supporters of nice candidates would be among the crowds who take advantage of their anonymity to viciously smear others.

[duforsure]

4. Sounds like another tactic taken

Out of putin's play book.

[Demsrule86]

5. This is from the rolling stone...hardly a right wing bastion...

"When seeking reelection in 2014, Harris’s stance on marijuana policy did not evolve, even though her opponent, Republican Rick Gold, was a proponent of legalization. In response to an interviewer bringing up Gold’s stance, Harris literally laughed, saying Gold was “entitled to his opinion” about legalization. (Understandably, this led to her losing a great deal of support from members of the state cannabis lobby, who ended up throwing their weight behind the Republican.)

Perhaps most damningly, in 2019 a Washington Free Beacon investigation found that between 2011 and 2016, while Harris was attorney general, at least 1,560 people were sent to California state prisons on marijuana-related offenses. Although the number of low-level marijuana offenders sent to state prison significantly declined after 2011, that was attributed to a state-wide initiative to curb state prison overcrowding and divert lower-level offenders to county jails."

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/kamala-harris-marijuana-policy-tulsi-gabbard-debates-866102/

[pnwmom]

6. The RollingStone is citing the FreeBeacon, the rightwing site. Laundering it through Rollingstone

does nothing to change the origins of this misleading claim.

[Skya Rhen]

8. Has Harris, unequivocally, denied the claim? Link?

[pnwmom]

9. No. Why should it have been a priority for her in the few minutes of debate time she had? n/t

[Skya Rhen]

21. Why didn't she refute it during her CNN and MSNBC appearances, this morning?

[pnwmom]

22. Did they ask her about it? n/t

[Skya Rhen]

34. CNN asked her about it, showed her the video clip and she still did not refute the claims.

[thesquanderer]

10. But no one is disputing the numbers. The argument is about the spin.

And giving her responsibility for this is, I think, a reasonable way to look at it. If an attorney general is going to claim credit for all the good things that happened in her department under her watch, then she also has to take the blame for the not-so-good things.

If any leader makes a claim about what happened in the department they ran, no one would think that that leader personally took part in every individual event underneath it. The Police Commissioner can boast about how many more arrests were made under a certain statute, nobody is going to think the PC personally made all those arrests. Do you really think that when they say Harris put 1500 people in jail for pot, that this has to mean she PERSONALLY prosecuted each of them or else it's a lie? The department she ran prosecuted them, and that's why it becomes part of her resume, along with every other "accomplishment" of her department while she ran it, whether you think positively or negatively about those accomplishments.

[pnwmom]

13. It wasn't up to Kamala as Attorney General either to prosecute individual cases

or to direct her prosecutors to ignore the law.

The FreeBeacon story deliberately misled its readers about this, and so did everyone who repeated the statistic.

[Andy823]

12. Exactly!

Tulsi is never going to go anywhere, but she is doing what Russia wants, and smearing Harris. I am pretty sure that if Tulsi goes after Biden, the Biden crowd will call her a Russian plant, using "right wing" talking points to take Biden down. But for now I guess some will accept anything "negative" no matter what the source, to trash Harris.

Thanks for posting this.

[Demsrule86]

39. The Free Beacon is not the only site either...I tire of sending you stuff you could easily look up

Some of this came out in the last Senate race ...and you were on the thread about the priest abuse...There is a problem and Sen. Harris needs to address it if she can with a plausible explanation. Below is a thread showing the good and the problematic with Sen. Harris's record. If you want a fair telling ...this is it.

https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article224633700.html

[obamanut2012]

68. lulz staaaahp

[ancianita]

7. Attacking her past seems to be her weak point. "I'm proud of my record" needs exculpatory evidence.

[Princetonian]

11. So? The data is not in dispute. Attacking the messenger is what the Harris campaign has done all day

As AG, she is responsible for all that goes on and she certainly would be aware of it.

[pnwmom]

14. The data has not been confirmed, but it referred to all cases done by low level prosecutors,

not Kamala. And it wasn't her job to tell her prosecutors to ignore the law.

[Princetonian]

17. As AG, the buck stops with her. Her office had alot of public issues with prosecutorial misconduct.

If she could not do her job properly as a state AG, then she is not ready to be President, VP, or DoJ AG.

[pnwmom]

24. Her prosecutors were following the then current law. That was doing their jobs properly.

And she had no authority over the police lab that had the tainted results. That was on the police department, not on the Attorney General.

[Princetonian]

33. Federal judges wanted Harris to respond to reports of "prosecutorial misconduct going undisciplined"

This is what I referred to as the buck stopping with her:
"U.S. judges see 'epidemic' of prosecutorial misconduct in state" (LA Times)

Note the huge photo of Harris. Underneath it says: "Federal judges called upon state Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris to respond to reports of a pattern of prosecutorial misconduct going undisciplined in state courts."

Also:

'Judge Alex Kozinski asked Vienna if his boss, Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris, wanted to defend a conviction “obtained by lying prosecutors.” If Harris did not back off the case, Kozinski warned, the court would “name names” in a ruling that would not be “very pretty.”'

https://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-lying-prosecutors-20150201-story.html

This is one of the many problems about her history that Harris has to explain. Democratic voters deserve to know. Republicans will not spare her.

[questionseverything]

50. didnt president obama tell prosecutors to NOT focus on simple mj possession?

I believe he did and we all thought that was a step in right direction

[pnwmom]

54. 1500 cases in all of CA over 6 years tells me they weren't focused on simple possession.

Do you have any evidence that suggests they were?

[brush]

55. I don't know, 1500 cases over 6 years from the 40m Californians doesn't seem like a lot.

But that's just me. She certainly didn't personally handle those cases from all over that very large state. DAs and AGs are not defense attorneys. They prosecute.

[pnwmom]

57. I agree. And she didn't handle any of those cases. But people are trying to smear her

with a story that was first published in the rightwing Free Beacon last February.

[questionseverything]

56. was referring to this

it referred to all cases done by low level prosecutors,

not Kamala. And it wasn't her job to tell her prosecutors to ignore the law.


/////////////////////////

so was Obama wrong to "ignore" the law?


1500 cases at 30 grand a year is foolish and its hypocritical when she smoked pot herself

[mcar]

19. ...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=222951

[treestar]

61. Yes if AG one should

Certainly have a policy for the deputies and know what they are doing. The buck stops there. So she as president would not be responsible for the acts in any executive agency?. Just more proof she is not ready fire this rodeo.

[SunsetDreams2]

15. Tulsi and others are truly

Jumping the shark perpetuating this right wing free beacon bs!

Key words

Senate Intelligence Committee

Vs

Assad
Putin
RT
Trump

[melman]

16. Interesting that the Harris defenders have all focused on this one thing

when there were several other incidents mentioned. Perhaps those are harder to defend?

[brush]

37. You do realize "progressive prosecutor" is an oxymoron, right?

A state's attorney general is the chief prosecutor in charge of prosecuting crimes. They are not defense attorneys.

What you'll find in researching Harris' AG record won't be atypical of any other Attorney General. Repeat, they are not defense attorneys.

[mcar]

18. Tulsi and right-wing sources

What a surprise!

[Sapient Donkey]

20. I saw these claims coming from certain parts of the "left" too.

or at least people using personas of people on the left. I'm sure some of them are real, but who knows who/what was behind amplifying the messages. I gave up trying to reason with people and get them to explain and think about their criticisms with a bit more depth when it became clear most of the people were not there to have discussions in good faith, but to just spread a specific narrative. It's interesting how the same attacks are coming from all side, though.

[emulatorloo]

23. Yes there were similar charges made in a NYT op-Ed by a progressive author

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html

Kamala Harris Was Not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor’
The senator was often on the wrong side of history when she served as California’s attorney general.

By Lara Bazelon
Ms. Bazelon is a law professor and the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles.
Jan. 17, 2019

more at link

I wish Senator Harris had directly taken these arguments on.

[Sapient Donkey]

26. I am all for fair critique and criticisms

but it really bothers me when they come off as more of smear tactics and more geared toward having the "aaaah gotcha!" instead of exploring the topics and having a conversation about it. I don't know much about specific claims Gabbard made last night, but they sounded similar to the ones I heard earlier this year which were disingenuous and unfair.

I am actually annoyed with the whole thing at this point. I just hate how we do politics in this country. We open ourselves up to this exploitation from outside and from within because we treat it like team sports rather than trying to find the best solutions.

[pnwmom]

25. There was a new poster here today disparaging the Mueller report and pushing Tulsi.

It seems to be a pattern. (That poster is gone now but others will appear.)

[Anon-C]

27. If all things were equal, her deference to Assad, authoritarianism, the alt right and Russia...

...may not be beyond the pale, but all things are not equal.

She is check and mate.

[Me.]

30. Why Aren't They Beyond The Pale?

I certainly think so.

[Demsrule86]

40. The 'attacking the flawed messenger' is not a winning strategy for a Democratic nominee. Tulsi

Last edited Fri Aug 2, 2019, 11:55 AM - Edit history (1)

is flawed...no doubt. But, the 'you are so far beneath me strategy' at the debate did not reflect well on Sen. Harris. She needs to defend her recent record...she called on VP Biden to defend a 50 year old record and yet has so far refused to address her more recent activities as DA and AG...she needs to address this and soon if she is to remain a viable candidate.

[IronLionZion]

28. The Republicans' favorite Democrat

GOPers are gloating about Tulsi's debate performance. She gets a lot of favorable attention from their side.

[Demsrule86]

43. Lower tier candidates will be coming for Sen. Harris in the next debate and her call for a

referendum on Trump won't help her. I hope she is prepared for what will surely come. There is much information out there. She opened the door in the first debate and can't really complain about it...her attacks on Gabbard are not going to work IMHO.

[Demsrule86]

44. What do you think GOP types in a general will do with this sort of information? It is out there...

this is not about Tulsi...Sen. Harris needs to address her record sooner rather than later.

[roody]

29. I'm glad Harris' record in California is being scrutinized.

[brush]

36. What do you think will be found? She was state AG, the chief prosecutor.

You think they're going to find anything atypical of a chief prosecutor?

Hardly likely. Don't believe the repug hype spread by repug favorite Gabbard.

[The Mouth]

41. She was big on Civil Asset Forfeiture, too

Quite OK with the state seizing assets before conviction. That bugged the living hell out of me then, long before she announced even for the Senate.

[Demsrule86]

42. I know what is publicly known as I did research in the heat of anger after the first debate...she

needs to address this. Some of her actions will be difficult to explain...but truth is cleansing and once she puts it out there, it can not be used to destroy her in a general should she win the nomination.

[brush]

45. Prosecutors prosecute crimes. They are not defense attorneys.

[Demsrule86]

46. There is more than that ....i suggest you google it.

[brush]

47. Google the links. Her history as a prosecutor is not atypical. They are not defense attorneys.

https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-kamala-d-harris-releases-%E2%80%9Cback-track-%E2%80%93-los-angeles%E2%80%9D-report

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287225222

[Demsrule86]

51. There are other links...it will come out no doubt. And I doubt she will be the nominee anyway.

I believe more and more that Biden will win the nomination.

[brush]

53. My point is her record isn't as bad as is being portrayed.

A prosecutor prosecutes, but good ones help to reduce recidivism when possible, among other things that are within their power to help so let's not jump on the same right wing bandwagon as Gabbard did in spreading unbalanced, negative info to try to gain attention and save her lagging campaign.

Attack trump not other Dems.

[Demsrule86]

66. I have read extensively since I was really ticked off after the first debate...except for one

slip up, I don't post the negative stuff...but there is a there there...so to speak.Google it. And why has she not addressed this? And it looks bad for her to attack Biden during two debates...and then get some push back in the second debate and say ...no more of this we must go after Trump which Biden said before the first debate. And the attacks on Gabbard do not answer the challenge Gabbard posed during the second debate.......why hasn't she addressed those points?

[brush]

71. Biden set himself up for being challenged in the first debate by appearing to...

Last edited Mon Aug 5, 2019, 05:05 PM - Edit history (1)

reminisce fondly of working with segregationists who called him son and AAs boy.

Come on, that was a huge, self-inflicted wound just before the debate. AAs on the stage were obligated to call him out on that. He never should've opened his mouth about that.

Blame Harris all you want but biden bought that on himself. Gabbard is hardly even worth mentioning as she's a right wing favorite who was on trump's cabinet short list. Why she's even on the stage with other Dems is still a puzzler to me.

[Demsrule86]

72. Fair enough... But she opened the door and now has to address her past as well.

Thus, I think she will find that there will be more questions during the next debate. I don't like it but our candidates as you pointed out must be vetted.

[brush]

73. So will you stop the anti-Harris posts? She rightly called out Biden for his own...

unforced error.

[Demsrule86]

74. I do not post details about her time as DA and AG.

However, I am free to give my opinion...perhaps Gabbard rightly called Sen. Harris out?...Sen. Harris began this and now must face criticism about her past just as Biden did...only his was decades ago. She needs to address this.

[roody]

49. She did not prosecute Steve Mnuchin or West Bank

for foreclosure fraud.

[jalan48]

83. +1

[ancianita]

77. Why can't it be used against her? Do you really think Trump would care? He'd call her Killer Kamala.

Of course she needs to address this.

The other real context of her work is that she was the AG of the 5th biggest economy on the planet. That's a colossal job. All the other positives of her work for what I consider the "country" of California needs to offset these negatives.

Again, we all know that on her worst, worst day she's better than 45 on his best.

It won't go away. It will be uphill. She just has to handle this.

[Demsrule86]

82. I don't disagree with you...and yes she must handle it or she won't be the nominee for sure.

[roody]

48. It is all public knowledge.

People should research the candidates.

[brush]

65. And here is some public knowledge not pushed by Gabbard and right wingers

AGs are not defense attorneys so why would anyone expect them to be.

She did promote anti-recidivism initiatives though. Check the links:

https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-kamala-d-harris-releases-%E2%80%9Cback-track-%E2%80%93-los-angeles%E2%80%9D-report

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287225222

[treestar]

63. You claim it is not true ?

Made up by tulsi?

[brush]

64. Her record as AG won't be much different that any chief prosecutor.

They are not defense attorneys so why would anyone expect them to be. Don't fall for the right wing hype Gabbard pushed.

She did promote anti-recidivism initiatives though. Check the links:


https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-kamala-d-harris-releases-%E2%80%9Cback-track-%E2%80%93-los-angeles%E2%80%9D-report

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287225222

[wyldwolf]

31. "progressives" on DU have never been adverse to the Free Beacon when it suited their needs

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1410802

https://www.democraticunderground.com/12511776194

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10027740583

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1090798

https://www.democraticunderground.com/12511892399

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210982207

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1280105597

And dozens more...

[mahina]

32. Told you guys.

[Hoyt]

35. That claim has been made here for months. It's not new,

although it is misguided.

[bigtree]

38. k&r

[Go Vols]

58. Freedom Leaf requested public records...

from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The request was approved on July 24.

Here’s what we discovered: The total number of people admitted to prison for felony marijuana offenses during Harris’ two terms as California’s attorney general from 2011-2016 was 1,876, not 1,560. Except for one year, the numbers the Free Beacon quoted are incorrect. The offenses include marijuana possession for sale, marijuana sales and other offenses such as cultivation and sales to minors.

The admission numbers from 2011-2016 are:

2011 – 817

2012 – 244

2013 – 210

2014 – 245

2015 – 183

2016 – 137

It’s important to note that, from the time Harris was elected AG to when she left office, admissions to prison for marijuana offenses in California declined by 83.2%.

Also, California further decriminalized its marijuana law in 2010, which may have contributed to this drop in prison admissions.

https://www.freedomleaf.com/kamala-harris-on-cannabis/

[pnwmom]

59. Thanks. This is good information. As I suspected, those prosecutions weren't for simple possession.

And look how the numbers went down over the course of her tenure.

[TheFarseer]

60. But

Was she pushing for decriminalization? Could she have stopped these people from going to prison? Was she breaking the law she was upholding? It’s still hypocritical at least isn’t it?

[brush]

80. Educate yourself. They were drug pushers not users. Prosecutors prosecute crimes.

Duh! Stop being fooled by right wing hype from a right wing candidate with stuff from a right wing site who is pretending to be a Democrat.

Newsflash: Proseutors are not defense attorneys.

Here's some info on her tenure as AG that's not right wing spin:


https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-kamala-d-harris-releases-%E2%80%9Cback-track-%E2%80%93-los-angeles%E2%80%9D-report

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287225222

[treestar]

62. Did the Free Beacon make it up ?

Like the pedophile ring in the pizza shop?

[pnwmom]

70. No. But Harris neither initiated nor approved these prosecutions; that was the job of prosecutors

underneath her.

And the convictions were for sellers, not individual users, which is why there was an average of only 250 a year in a state with 40,000,000 people.

The Free Beacon's article also left the false impression that Harris laughed at the prosecutions. In an interview, she laughed when admitting she had smoked marijuana.

[obamanut2012]

67. I am shocked there is gambling in this establishment!

Shocked!

[Proud Liberal Dem]

69. While many people might understandably have issues with Harris

truth and reality are often more complicated than the soundbites being presented. And our candidates definitely shouldn't be presenting information from right-wing rags.

[Tarc]

75. The Russian Regurgitator

[radius777]

76. Kamala should've expected that attack,

which has been floating around social media for months now.

Kamala's response was good, she was AG of a huge state and her job was to keep people safe.

I think a fuller response, the context of history (historic crime wave during 80s/90s) is what prompted leaders to Get Tough.. even Bernie (reluctantly) voted for the Crime Bill. There was overreach (that needs to be fixed) but hindsight is 20/20.

One has to wonder what Tulsi's strategy is - she strongly opposed Hillary (and now takes aim at Kamala) while seeming to defend Biden at times - Biden who is ideologically similar to Hillary and Kamala.

IMO, the populist left (of which Tulsi is a part) seems to like (or at least not dislike that much) Biden because he - at least stylistically - comes across as a white heartland populist - exactly the type the populist left seems to see as the True Dem Party - that 'identity politicians' like Hillary and Kamala have 'stolen'.

[ucrdem]

79. My heart is breaking

[brush]

81. See post number 80.

1500 cases of drug dealers out of a state with 40,000,000 is not a lot.

And they were drug dealers.