Posts
The claim naming Larry Wallace arrived at the California Department of Justice in October 2016, three months before Harris left the attorney general's office in 2017. Harris lied saying that she had no knowledge of the claim or alleged harassment.
The newspaper had reported that in December 2016 an employee of Harris' office filed suit against Wallace. It accusing Harris' aide of harassment and retaliation.
The suit itself was made just as Harris left her post as attorney general to serve as California's annoying junior senator. Wallace served as her director of the California Justice Department's law enforcement division.
The Washington Free Beacon reported that Harris has known Wallace for fourteen years, and she hired him in March 2017 as a senior adviser in her Sacramento field office. Wallace settled with Harris' replacement at attorney general for $400,000 two months later, in May 2017.
Wallace worked for Harris but resigned earlier this month.
Harris "took responsibility" for the incident, but blamed staff for failing to inform her in the 26 months since the victim's first notice--which means that she didn't take responsibility, and probably she lied because she had a good motive to lie.
Tweet
Wallace worked for Harris but resigned earlier this month.
The Washington Free Beacon reported at the time:
The latest information, however, reported by the Bee suggests that Harris knew about the allegations longer than previously reported, and she did not act on the allegations.
Harris' office claimed it was unaware of a lawsuit filed in December 2016 by Danielle Hartley against Larry Wallace, who was director of the California Justice Department's law enforcement division under Harris. At that time, Harris had just been elected to the U.S. Senate and was preparing to transition to Washington.
"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," Harris spokeswoman Lily Adams wrote in an email to the Sacramento Bee, who broke the story.
The latest information, however, reported by the Bee suggests that Harris knew about the allegations longer than previously reported, and she did not act on the allegations.
It's pretty amazing that Harris could have been unaware of the misconduct in her office. If you believe that, then you have to believe she is a total incompetent and was uninvolved with the daily business of the office she ran.
But really now, to think Harris knew nothing about Wallace's behavior is as naive as anyone who believes that Michael Cohen is courageous and never actually lied to the FBI.
"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."
"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 widely known to others in the office Harris ran 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--which means that she didn't take responsibility, and probably she lied because she had a good motive to lie.
"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 claimed to all who would believe her or give her the benefit of the doubt--liberals who want to believe her.
Harris will probably run for president in 2020, but her claimed ignorance of employee misconduct and the concomitant lawsuit potentially clash with her vocal support for the #MeToo movement.
Harris will probably run for president in 2020, but her claimed ignorance of employee misconduct and the concomitant lawsuit potentially clash with her vocal support for the #MeToo movement.
The Bee‘s editorial board worried that the disinfectant of sunlight cast upon the situation will ruin her chances for her presidential ambitions. "This is hardly a propitious beginning to a presidential candidacy," they wrote.
So, do you believe Harris' claim that she was in the dark about Wallace the whole time she ran the office, or do you think she's fibbing?
Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand-out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do.
I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.
Tweet
No comments:
Post a Comment