'Jane' Comes (Mostly) Forward to Accuse Emhoff of Domestic

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Three weeks ago, a trio of hearsay witnesses came to the Daily Mail to accuse Kamala Harris’ husband of assaulting his then-girlfriend at a Paris fashion event. At the time, the alleged victim refused to comment, and none of the three friends could offer first-hand witness testimony. Doug Emhoff has mainly ignored the allegation, and so did the rest of the mainstream media, and not for nothing either. It looked like a weak attempt at an October surprise, given the timing, as I warned:

[P]erhaps they’re just waiting to see who’s behind the allegation. If it’s Emhoff’s ex-girlfriend, they will likely have to respond. But if this is coming out of left field without her cooperation, then they may be wise to sit tight and wait to see what develops first. This could well be a political dirty trick designed to draw the campaign into a denial that turns this into more of a story than it is now.

Today, however, another shoe has dropped, also courtesy of the Daily Mail. ‘Jane’ herself has come forward, although without revealing her name, to make the accusation directly. Assuming this is on the level, Emhoff’s posing as the New Model For Masculinity catalyzed her decision:

‘Every time I see Doug on TV portraying the persona of a perfect spouse and non-toxic man, I wonder if Najen is watching too and feeling as disgusted as I am,’ Jane said.

Last week, ‘Jane’ recounted her story to DailyMail.com – including that Emhoff ‘slapped me so hard I spun around,’ and that Emhoff told her he was accused by his mistress of causing her to miscarry their baby.

The incident took place at the same time that Emhoff attended the fashion event. Video on YouTube shows him walking past a TV commentator covering the show, along with a woman who may or may not be ‘Jane.’ At some point, Jane tried to give a valet a substantial tip to find them a car rather than wait in line, which is when she alleges it turned ugly:

‘As I’m talking to him, Doug got out of the line, comes up, turns me around by my right shoulder. I’m completely caught off guard, I’m not bracing, I’m in four inch heels, wearing a full-length gown and it’s between 2-3am.

‘He slaps me so hard I spin around, and I’m in utter shock.

‘There had been no fight, no argument. It had been a completely fantastic event. I am so furious. The only thing I could think to do was slap him back. I slapped him on one side, and on the other cheek with the other hand.

‘In that moment, his mask had dropped and I saw his dark side,’ she added.

This does escalate matters — to a degree. At least we now have a direct accusation of assault and domestic violence. However, we still have the problem of anonymity, which means we can’t assess the credibility of the accuser or test her accusation against all other evidence. Anonymity short-circuits any real path to verification.

Even apart from anonymity, we also have the same problem here that cling to the last-minute groping allegations against Donald Trump that popped up yesterday. Why didn’t ‘Jane’ come forward earlier — like in 2019, when Kamala Harris ran for president, or in 2020 when she got selected as Joe Biden’s running mate? Why not in 2016, when Harris ran for the US Senate, or in 2018, when Harris acted as one of the chief persecutors in the Brett Kavanaugh smear-campaign Senate hearings?

Just telescoping this timeline issue to the campaign, why wait this long in this cycle to come forward? Why didn’t ‘Jane’ participate in the story three weeks ago, when the Daily Mail first ran it? For that matter, she could have come forward at any time after Harris got anointed as the nominee in late July. It seems curious, to say the least, that ‘Jane’ waited until the final twelve days of the election cycle to come forward to corroborate the story told by her friends.

Some readers may be frustrated with my skepticism, but we all have a vested interest in retaining some reluctance to leap without looking carefully. These last-minute October surprises will only work if we swallow them whole on the basis of partisanship rather than evidence or common sense. Too many in the media choose to swallow them whole and vomit them out in amplified tsunamis as a means to advance their own narratives and biases. That doesn’t require the rest of us to swallow along with them, even when it might advance our own biases and narratives.

Still, this is at least the same level of accusation that the mainstream media will pursue when it comes to Republicans. Reluctance was understandable when the accusation was only hearsay and unsupported by the alleged victim. At this point, it’s enough to ask Emhoff to comment on the allegation more directly. Let’s see if any media outlet steps up to do so.