Embarrassing interview admission shows that Kamala Harris is not ready for prime time

In a little-noted TV interview last week, Senator Kamala Harris executed a deeply embarrassing face-plant. Harris is supposed to be a leading contender for the Democrats’ presidential nomination in the view of a lot of pundits. But in my view, this must be based on nothing more than her status as an identity politics twofer (actually, a three-fer: a woman, a black, and an Asian-American). As an actual living, breathing politician, she is an embarrassment, electable in the one-party state of California after sleeping with the state’s political boss to launch her career, but unable to handle sustained scrutiny. And guilty of what must be termed political malpractice directly related to one of the Democrats’ biggest issues. In an English Language interview on Univision last week (hat tip: Weasel Zippers), she demonstrated utter political incompetence, revealing her reliance on platitudes, and her negligence -- a failure to go even an inch deep on a scandal that has rocked her candidacy.

The Washington Post explained the background last December: A longtime senior aide to Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) resigned Wednesday amid allegations of sexual harassment while working for Harris during her tenure as attorney general of California. The resignation of Larry Wallace, who served as director of the division of law enforcement in the California Department of Justice, came after the Sacramento Bee inquired about a $400,000 settlement reached in response to a lawsuit filed by Danielle Hartley, who served as Wallace’s assistant, against the state of California. The December 2016 lawsuit was settled in May 2017 by Harris’s successor as attorney general, Xavier Becerra, according to the Bee. So, what has Harris, ostensibly a crusader for justice for victims of sexual harassment, done about this situation? What has the woman who made her career as a prosecutor done to get to the bottom of it. And what abut the victims? She has plenty of rhetoric, but the UNivision interviewer presses right to the heartof the matter: She hasn’t even spoken to the victims! Her own employees who were victimized by their boss (who she put in a position of authority over them): Any competent politician by now would have prepared herself for these questions, and would have done everything possible to reach out to the victims. But Harris has never been tested, so she thinks that rhetoric and benign neglect will get her through the problem. I don’t see Harris getting the nomination, but if I am wrong, imagine her facing Donald Trump in presidential debates: she’s just not up to the job.