A FAMILY AFFAIR
SHUTTERSTOCK: HARRIS and SMOLLETT ARE RELATED THROUGH MARRIAGE OF THEIR COUSINS.
KAMALA HARRIS LOST THE ELECTION. HER NEICE IS MARRIED TO KENNY HARRIS WHOSE COUSIN IS COUSIN TO JUSSIE SMOLLETT WHOSE CONVICTION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT
BY THE LEGAL EAGLE
Kamala Harris lost her way to the presidency. Now her cousin through marriage, Jussie Smollett’s conviction is overturned by the Chicago, Illinois Supreme Court. The familial connection between Kamala Harris and Jussie Smollett is through marriage ties rather than direct family. They are still “kin” nonetheless. He filed a false “hate” crime, made a plea deal but like it or not, he is Kamala’s cousin through marriage.
For the last four years, when you asked Google a question about who Kamala Harris was it gave you a very wonderful and positive brief bio. When you asked the same question about President Trump, the response was as though the man didn’t exist. When you asked Google about Hunter Biden’s laptop, the response suggested the loss of a laptop was never verified.
JUSSIE SMOLLETT’S DOCUMENTS
Kamala Harris’s niece, Meena Harris, is married to Jussie Smollett’s cousin, Kenny Harris who is Jussie Smollett’s cousin. This makes Kamala Harris and Jussie Smollett related by marriage through their respective family members in spite of her numerous denials.
The optics surrounding Kamala Harris’s involvement in the case of Jussie Smollett are undeniably complicated, especially given the political context of her losing her bid for the presidency and the subsequent legal developments that led to Smollett’s conviction being overturned.
Kamala Harris, as a former presidential candidate and a sitting vice president, is no stranger to public scrutiny. The relationship between her niece, Meena Harris, and Jussie Smollett, who was convicted for staging a hate crime, only serves to amplify the awkwardness of the situation.
This turn of events places Harris in a potentially uncomfortable position, particularly in light of her own high-profile political career and the broader racial and justice-related narratives she has championed throughout her career.
The nature of Smollett’s hoax, in which he claimed he was attacked by two “white men related to the Trump movement” who placed a noose around his neck, made the case an emotional flashpoint in the national conversation on race and hate crimes. As a prominent political figure with a focus on social justice issues.
Harris voiced public support for Smollett when the alleged incident first occurred. She referred to the incident as a “modern-day lynching,” showing her alignment with the cause of combating racism and hate crimes. However, once it was revealed that Smollett had fabricated the story, it raised questions about the judgment of those who had rushed to support him, including Harris.
The awkward optics surrounding her involvement, coupled with her eventual loss in the presidential race, create an uncomfortable narrative where both her political career and her relative’s legal outcome seem intertwined.
The reversal of Smollett’s conviction by the Illinois Supreme Court adds a further layer of complexity to Harris’s political legacy. With Smollett’s case being overturned, some critics have raised concerns about the nature of his release. They argue that a figure with political connections, however distant, could receive preferential treatment within the judicial system.
This perception can tarnish the optics surrounding Harris, especially when she faced public disillusionment after the collapse of her presidential campaign. The idea that a relative of a prominent political figure might escape the full consequences of their actions only fuels existing critiques of inequality in the criminal justice system, which Harris herself has worked hard to address during her career.
Moreover, Harris’s loss in the presidential race magnifies the perception of political fallout. Her campaign, which was built on themes of social justice and equality, faltered under the weight of both personal and political challenges, and Smollett’s case only adds to that narrative. While Harris’s loss was due to a multitude of factors, including her inability to build a broad base of support, the association with a family member involved in a high-profile scandal reflects poorly on her image.
As a public figure advocating for racial justice, having a relative involved in such a controversial and widely condemned case undermines her credibility in certain circles, making it harder for her to distance herself from the negative publicity surrounding Smollett’s actions.
The perception that Harris has suffered both a political defeat and an ethical dilemma due to her family ties to Smollett also highlights how closely personal relationships can be scrutinized in the public eye. Had Harris remained in the presidential race and had Smollett’s case been handled differently, the optics of a politically-charged figure like her defending Smollett’s actions might have been seen as more acceptable within her base. However, given her fall from the presidential race, the reversal of Smollett’s conviction now feels like an unfortunate and ironic turn of events. This raises further questions about her political future, as the optics of family connections in controversial cases can haunt any public official.
Ultimately, the situation surrounding Kamala Harris, Jussie Smollett, and the reversal of his conviction forces a reckoning with the intersection of politics, justice, and family ties. Although there is no direct legal link between Harris’s actions and the outcome of Smollett’s case, the public perception of the situation cannot be ignored.
For some, this chain of events might reinforce suspicions that powerful political families can use their influence to sway outcomes in the legal system, even if such influence is indirect. The world has not forgotten that both Hunter Biden and Harry Windsor are sons of a presidential and a royal family respectively.
Hunter Biden has been plagued by heroin and cocaine crack addicted for decades but has never experienced a serious medical and psychological inpatient rehab program. In spite of that, President Biden placed him in very strong positions in Russian and Chinese businesses where he earned more than $50,000 USD monthly in spite of being a crack head. Harry Windsor similarly has battled drugs and alcohol for 20 years or more.
He too has never been treated in an inpatient drugs and alcohol rehabilitation program. Amusingly, he’s an executive at BetterUp, a self-help and mental wellness organization. He serves as the Chief Impact Officer, focusing on mental health advocacy and personal development.
How someone hooked on drugs that has never attended rehab is helping anyone deal with drug addiction, escapes us. And we cannot forget Prince Andrew’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. Andrew gave a ridiculous interview that prompted his mother, Queen Elizabeth II to relieve him of his working royal duties. She did pay Andrew’s victim’s lawsuit demand.
Kamala Harris’s involvement in the Smollett case could end up as a symbol of the fragile nature of political optics, particularly for a public figure whose political career has been shaped by both her support for social justice and the complex realities of her family ties. She lost on both counts and used her family tie to secure Jussie Smollett’s case to be overturned.
