Here’s why Kamala didn’t hesitate to trust Jussie Smollett| Top stories

Like the trial of Jussie Smollett, the former Empire actor accused of faking his own hate crime, a 2019 tweet from Kamala Harris began Monday calling it a “modern day lynching attempt” and stating that “no one should have to fear for their life because of his sexuality or the color of his skin ”has resurfaced on social networks.

In case you forgot, Smollett, who is black and gay, claimed that two masked men “sprayed him with bleach, put a rope around his neck and said, ‘It’ is MAGA country! “” In Chicago, of all places.

For many progressives, the story was “too good to verify,” so they didn’t.

While Harris was far from the only progressive defending him, her comments were particularly noteworthy because she said Smollett had suffered a “modern day lynching” and because the former prosecutor would, shortly thereafter, become the Joe Biden’s running mate.

Katie Couric’s RBG cover-up shows how we ended up with Trump

As Smollett’s story unfolded, Harris attempted to disinfect his previous statement by fabricating a longer, but without responding directly to his original comments. But her updated statement was right about one thing: When a person “makes false statements to the police,” she wrote, it “makes it harder for other victims of crime to come forward.” .

It also erodes the credibility of prominent politicians who endorse it. And that speaks to a bigger issue for Harris: his habit of flipping comments and clinging to stories that confirm his favorite political worldview.

Regarding Christine Blasey Ford’s rape allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, then-Sen. Harris categorically said, “I believe her” and even walked out of the hearing, calling her a “false. Regarding the women who felt uncomfortable with unwanted touching from Joe Biden, Harris, who was then running against Biden for the party nomination, said: ‘I believe them and I respect them so I can tell their story. story and have the courage to do it. ”But when Tara Reade made a more serious rape allegation, after Harris dropped her presidential candidacy, she was in disbelief (which says a lot about her: that her beliefs can be influenced by opportunism).

The story continues

As was the case with Smollett (“one of the nicest, sweetest human beings I know”), Harris provided a personal testimony to Biden. “The Joe Biden that I know is someone who really fought for women and the empowerment of women and for equality and women’s rights,” she said.

Special prosecutor condemns handling of Jussie Smollett case

So if she knows you and loves you, is that enough?

Of course, Harris is not the only one guilty of questionable judgment.

Before the start of the Derek Chauvin trial, President Biden weighed in, saying “I pray the verdict is the right verdict, which is – I think it’s damning in my opinion.” It was not advised from the leader of the free world, but the jury was sequestered and there really is not (and was not) a big national debate as to whether Chauvin, then a police officer, was guilty of murder of George Floyd. .

A more recent (and disturbing) example occurred during the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. Although Biden never “explicitly” called Rittenhouse a white supremacist, according to Snopes, “on two occasions, Biden made remarks or promoted an ad campaign strongly suggesting that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist, or at least , closely associated with white supremacists and / or militia groups.

Not so long ago, the term “white supremacist” was reserved for … white supremacists. You know, people like David Duke. Today the term is tossed around so indiscriminately that it has lost some of its former power. Thanks to the inflation of insults, many assume that this is a false or exaggerated accusation.

Promiscuous language not only erodes our confidence in the individual guilty of raising the rhetoric, it also serves to desensitize us from real allegations. When everyone is a white supremacist, no one is a white supremacist. You can thank people like Biden and Harris – who at the time she was running against Biden suggested he worked with segregationists to oppose transit to promote desegregation – for this twist.

Another problem is the politicization of everything. At a time when a person’s stance on the COVID-19 vaccine is a fairly good predictor of their political affiliation, it is foreseeable that important court cases would be sucked into the vortex as well. Yet those who oppose tribalism should resist this temptation. What we should stand for is due process and the rule of law. And in fairness to Biden, his initial reaction to the verdict – “The jury system works, and we have to comply with it” – was flawless.

But it’s not enough for our top leaders to say the right things after they have exhausted all other options. When our top elected political leaders are messed up with their prejudiced (and potentially damaging) rhetoric and lawsuits, they contribute to distrust of America’s elites and institutions.

We should expect more from them. Biden and Harris should do better.

Learn more about The Daily Beast.

Get our best stories delivered to your inbox every day. Register now!

Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside digs deeper into the stories that interest you. Learn more.