Democratic California Sen. Kamala Harris’ interrogation this week of Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh has won her high praise from the anti-Trump resistance.
For some on the Left, the Democratic senator’s weird and ambiguous questions about whether the nominee had discussed special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation with anyone employed by the law firm founded by President Trump’s personal attorney, constituted a “yas queen” moment.
But I don’t see the California lawmaker’s interaction with Kavanaugh as particularly praiseworthy. Just the opposite, actually. Harris’ duplicitous and misleading grilling of the nominee serves as a reminder that she has a long history of being a sneaky, self-serving, anti-liberty law enforcement official.
[Opinion: At Kavanaugh hearings, it’s Kamala vs. Cory]
On Wednesday, Harris asked Kavanaugh, “Have you had any conversation about Robert Mueller or his investigation with anyone at” the law firm Kasowitz Benson Torres.
Kavanaugh responded by saying he wasn’t sure who works at that specific firm, which employs an estimated 300 people.
“I’m not remembering, but I’m happy to be refreshed or if you want to tell me who you’re thinking of,” the judge said.
Harris shot back, “You’ve been speaking for almost eight hours to this committee about all sorts of things you remember. How can you not remember whether or not you had a conversation about Robert Mueller or his investigation with anyone at that law firm?”
Kavanaugh maintained that he couldn’t be sure, adding also that her question about whether he had discussed the Russia probe and whether he had spoken to anyone connected to Kasowitz Benson Torres included a carefully placed “or.” He asked again whether the senator had a specific name in mind.
“I think you are thinking of someone, and you don’t want to tell us,” Harris said, keeping at it.
Kavanaugh responded, “I’d be surprised but I don’t know everyone that works at that law firm. I’m not remembering anything like that but I want to know a roster of people and I want to know more.”
Harris moved on, but not before sneering, “Clearly you’re not going to answer the question.”
This isn’t some neutral attempt by a lawmaker to uncover the truth. This isn’t even a supposedly courageous moment of political resistance. This is Harris doing the good cop/bad cop routine, except there’s no good cop in this story.
Harris begins with a vague, leading question that can be misinterpreted in any number of ways. The senator then belittles the witness by claiming the question isn’t complicated. She then offers to clarify the question, all the while pretending to be precise, and then restates her original, confusing line of inquiry almost verbatim.
This sort of interrogation is designed to trick a scared and ill-informed suspect into saying something that can later be twisted and used against him by the prosecution. In many cases, this tactic works. But Kavanaugh was smart enough to insist on precise language, much to Harris’ obvious chagrin. Unfortunately, a lot of the people who get caught up in the criminal justice system don’t have Kavanaugh’s background or presence of mind. These people often find themselves on the losing end of the underhanded word games preferred by prosecutors like Harris.
All of this is to say: Wednesday’s interaction between Harris and Kavanaugh reminds me of the senator’s shameful record when she served as the district attorney of San Francisco and as California’s attorney general.
In that position, she was a petty tyrant who regularly advocated for absurdly harsh penalties, all while protecting her corrupt friends in government. She was a cheerleader for civil asset forfeiture. She championed an anti-truancy law that called for a $2,000 fine and jail time for the parents (by 2012, two mothers were imprisoned in California under this law). She even opposed attempts to do away with the state’s draconian three-strikes law, which called for life sentences for a third “strike” even if it was only a minor felony.
If you don’t believe me when I say Harris is the “bad cop,” you can read about it for yourself in the New York Times, National Review, Reason magazine, or even the socialist quarterly magazine Jacobin. (This write-up of Harris’ history as a brutal, self-serving, and conniving official is especially damning).
But hey, at least she confused Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearing. Slay queen!
