Report: Editor scrubs Kamala Harris’ Wikipedia page as VP speculation grows

The Democrats haven’t decided which square peg that they are going to pound into that round VP-slot. All their senators have these things called voting records. Even Susan Rice has made so many taped public appearances that she has a trail of embarrassing statements that later turned out to be untrue (or were so ridiculous they were in dispute when she made them). Biden said it will be “a woman” and that’s pretty much an acknowledgment of reality within the party ‘leadership’. But what ‘leader’ is actually going to make that pick given Biden’s obvious mental deficiencies?

Cut to the chase. Obama and his carnival circus of political advisors will have to make the VP pick for Biden unless they choose to leave it up to the convention (unlikely). That would be a messy fight and out in the open. So Michelle Obama. If not here then Susan Rice (even with all her baggage and no elective office). Perhaps Stacy Abrams (which would be slightly more of a joke that Rice).

And it won’t matter. Trump will be re-elected easily. The game will be to try and take the senate so that they can have another go at impeachment.

Can compare using archive.org. Just copy and paste the URL into the wayback machine there, and pick a date. I picked early Feb:

Kamala Devi Harris (/ˈkɑːmələ/ KAH-mə-lə;[1] born October 20, 1964) is an American lawyer and politician serving as the junior United States Senator from California since 2017. A member of the Democratic Party, she previously served as the 27th District Attorney of San Francisco from 2004 to 2011 and 32nd Attorney General of California from 2011 until 2017. She ran as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States in the 2020 election, before dropping out on December 3, 2019.[2]

Harris was born in Oakland, California, and is a graduate of Howard University and University of California, Hastings College of the Law. In the 1990s, she worked in the San Francisco District Attorney's Office and the City Attorney of San Francisco's office. In 2004, she was elected District Attorney of San Francisco.

Harris won the election as California's Attorney General in 2010 and was reelected in 2014 by a wide margin. On November 8, 2016, she defeated Loretta Sanchez in the 2016 Senate election to succeed outgoing Senator Barbara Boxer, becoming California's third female U.S. Senator, and the first of either Jamaican or Indian ancestry.[3] Since becoming a Senator, she has supported single-payer healthcare, federal descheduling of cannabis, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, the DREAM Act, a ban on assault rifles, and lowering the tax burden for the working and middle classes while raising taxes on corporations and the wealthiest one percent of Americans

Today:

Kamala Devi Harris (/ˈkɑːmələ/ KAH-mə-lə;[1] born October 20, 1964)[2] is an American lawyer and politician serving as the junior United States Senator from California since 2017. A member of the Democratic Party, Harris is the first woman of Jamaican or Indian ancestry to represent California in the United States Senate.[citation needed]

Born in Oakland, California, Harris is a graduate of Howard University and University of California, Hastings College of the Law. Harris began her career in the Alameda County District Attorney's Office before being recruited to the San Francisco District Attorney's Office and later the City Attorney of San Francisco's office. In 2004, she was elected the 27th District Attorney of San Francisco, serving until 2011.

Harris was elected Attorney General of California in 2010, and was re-elected in 2014 by a wide margin. On November 8, 2016, she defeated Loretta Sanchez in the 2016 Senate election to succeed outgoing Senator Barbara Boxer, becoming California's third female U.S. Senator. As a senator, she has supported single-payer healthcare, federal descheduling of cannabis, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, the DREAM Act, a ban on assault weapons, and progressive tax reform. She gained a national profile after her pointed questioning of Trump administration officials during Senate hearings, including U.S. Attorneys General Jeff Sessions and William Barr, and Associate Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh.[3]

She ran for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States in the 2020 election, briefly becoming a frontrunner before ending her campaign on December 3, 2019.[4] She is widely considered one of the top contenders to be chosen by Joe Biden as his vice-presidential running mate.[5][6][7]

Early Feb:

Campaign spending violation
Harris was found to be guilty, by the city's Ethics Commission, of violating campaign spending limit of $211,000, of which Harris had agreed to abide by before the campaign commenced.[48] Harris had overspent the pledged amount by nearly $100,000. The Commission's own staff was later accused of abusing its discretion, and favoring Harris, when it retroactively lifted the campaign spending limit after Harris' campaign had spent over the limit, and when Harris' campaign said that it was recognizing the Commission as the authority of the limit's forms rather than the Department of Elections.[48] The Commission denied the accusations, saying that its staff acted with its authority under local law.[48]

Harris' supporters said her campaign mistakenly violated the spending cap due to a "misinterpretation of confusing law changes" on the forms.[48] They also argued that the cap put lesser-known candidates at a disadvantage, which was unfair since Harris had to spend more to increase her profile. However, critics charged that the forms were straightforward for any attorney to understand. Critics were also adamant that Harris willfully violated the spending cap and argued that, even if Harris mistakenly overspent the cap, that doing so was indefensible under the law.[48]

Harris ran a "Notice to Voters" in newspapers stating that she never agreed to limit her campaign spending, but said her failure to file the form (to decline the campaign spending cap) on time on was "due to errors by her campaign."[49] Harris' campaign lawyer also argued that the spending cap violated the First Amendment. Harris' campaign was questioned on why she would agree to the spending limit if it was, in fact, unconstitutional. Harris' campaign responded that political candidates face political pressure "to accept rules that hinder their constitutional rights."[48]

Harris was fined nearly $35,000 by the Commission and ordered to alert voters, in her mailers, that she had violated the spending limit. The mailers, subsequently produced by her campaign, were said to have displayed her spending violation with "the smallest font in America."[48] Harris, who the San Francisco Examiner called "a relative unknown", went on to spend nearly $625,000 throughout the campaign while Hallinan spent just over $285,000.[50] It was more than four times more than any candidate had raised in the history of running for the office.[37]

Now:

In October 2003, the San Francisco Ethics Commission found that Harris unintentionally[31] violated the city's campaign finance law by exceeding the voluntary $211,000 spending limit. In what was thought to be the largest fine to date under that law, the Ethics Commission levied up to $34,000 in penalties and corrective measures, and ordered her to buy newspaper ads informing voters about not abiding by the spending cap. Harris accepted full blame, saying, "Leadership isn't about being perfect. Leadership means taking responsibility."[31] Harris spent nearly $625,000 while Hallinan spent just over $285,000; both advanced to the general election runoff with 33% and 37% of the vote, respectively.[32]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.