A few hours ago, a friend of mine sent me recent videos (linked below) by Candace Owens where she claims to have found documents allegedly proving that details regarding Kamala Harris' recent ancestry, as reported in her 2019 book 'The Truths We Hold' are inaccurate.
I've only skimmed the videos myself, but among other things, she claims to have found evidence (in the form of birth certificates, marriage certificates, death certificates, travel records, etc.) that
Kamala's reported grandmother Berril Finegan died in 1960, 4 years before Kamala was born, despite the inclusion of photographs of Kamala (as a young adult) with Berril in her book.
The woman pictured as Kamala's grandmother Berril is the same as the woman pictured as her great-grandmother Iris in the book.
Berril was a domestic servant/enslaved person at the Harris household.
Berril's reported husband, Oscar Harris actually married another (caucasian) woman named Vioris "Iris" Cambridge. Kamala's father Donald J Harris claims to have been very close to a woman named Iris, who is reported to have been his grandmother.
Berril Finegan herself married a man called Lawford Newland
Berril Finegan had a son with a man called Albert Harris called Donald (Kamala's reported father's firstname) who died before the age of 2.
Owens also believes it's suspicious that she is unable to find documents confirming that
Berril Finegan ever got divorced from Lawford Newland.
Berril Finegan ever married Kamala's reported grandfather Oscar Harris.
Kamala's reported father Donald J Harris was born when and to whom he claims to have been.
This question asks if there are any inaccuracies in Kamala's recent genealogy as reported in The Truths We Hold and other official reports. If so, did Kamala intentionally misrepresent her ancestry, or was she simply misled by her relatives?
If this is anything like the 2008 birther conspiracy, I expect this topic to stay in the zeitgeist for a while, so I've set the date of closing to 10 years from now. I will resolve to YES earlier if convincing evidence comes out to suggest so AND it is reported as factual by reputable sources. If not, this market will resolve to NO.
Sources:
9/24/24: https://www.youtube.com/live/wOUCxPxEdXs
9/25/24: https://www.youtube.com/live/x4s2aiMwRNg
9/26/24: https://www.youtube.com/live/jy4oHewFH8k
1,000
3.00How could you possibly resolve this?
From Harris' perspective, Candace is a crackpot who is best ignored. She won't answer these question on the basis that the questions and the asker are beneath her dignity. Even if she shows evidence supports The Truths We Hold, it won't help her (just like Obama sharing his long form birth certificates didn't change anything).
Candace is known for provocatively and passionately backing known falsehoods. Even if she finds counter-evidence to her thesis, she either won't believe it or won't share it.
You just have to hope for a reasonable non-partisan sleuth to appear with an unassailable dossier of evidences that also has a good faith analysis of counter evidence. Good luck with that?
@Zhazhir Well, I think there's consensus today that the 2008 birther conspiracy was false. If similar consensus is achieved on this question at time of closing, I would resolve to NO. If this theory remains fringe and never enters the mainstream, I will resolve NO. I will only resolve YES if multiple reasonable non-partisan sleuths / bipartisan entities / someone in or close to the Harris family confirms any alleged inaccuracies.
@LiamZ I feel you. But I feel like this question may not resolve even in the popular consciousness any time soon.
@Endothermia There’s no reason to bet no as it stands because you can only be proven wrong, not proven correct for the next decade when none of us will be here.