George Will gives the outgoing Senator, incoming Attorney General, Jeff Sessions a well-deserved poke for the ignorant things he said on the Senate floor about civil forfeiture. They were the sort of words a politician would utter, baseless but designed to appeal to those without a clue. Whether Sessions didn’t know better or was deliberately talking smack is unclear. One would hope a senator wasn’t that clueless, and that at least there was method to his lies.

But then, how can one explain California’s outgoing Attorney General, Kamala Harris, who is on her way to Washington to take her seat in the Senate? After having the bizarrely improper case against Backpage dismissed with extreme prejudice, she decided to take one more shot.

Let’s be crystal clear here: California Attorney General Kamala Harris (who in just a few weeks will become a US Senator) knows that she has no legal basis for arresting the execs behind Backpage. How do we know she knows this? Because three years ago she signed a letter whining about how she had no legal authority to arrest Backpage because it’s (rightly) protected by Section 230 of the CDA, saying that you can’t blame a site for the actions of its users. So it did seem weird, back in October, when Harris — along with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton — decided to arrest Backpage’s execs anyway, and charge them with “pimping.”

So it was no surprise at all when the court quickly tossed all the charges against the execs, and told Harris to take it up with Congress… which, of course, is where she’ll be in a month. However, not content to just try to change the laws, Harris has chosen to file brand new charges against the three execs, Carl Ferrer, Michael Lacy, and James Larkin. The press release from Harris claims that the reason for the new charges is that she’s “uncovered new evidence” but that’s a load of hogwash.

One is a Senator leaving to become Attorney General. One is an Attorney General leaving to become a Senator. Neither is deserving of the public trust. What’s the difference? One has been, is being, and most assuredly will be, lambasted for impropriety, real or imagined, as well he should be.

The other is being groomed to be the first woman president.

Hillary Clinton’s loss came as a devastating blow to many people across the country eager to see a woman take office. But among Tuesday’s winners is California’s new Democratic senator-elect, Kamala Harris, who may be the next best hope for shattering that glass ceiling.

She’s drawn many comparisons to President Barack Obama, who famously ran for president during his first term in the Senate. Her background and her polished yet personable approach to politics embody what many think the Democratic Party should aim to look like going forward. And even before her Senate win, her name was floated for roles including California governor, Supreme Court justice and vice president.

Harris is female. Harris is black. Did I mention that she’s female? Jeff Sessions is the poster boy for the worst of white male southern reactionary. In a nation obsessed with identity, Sessions makes the perfect, as well as deserved, target for scorn. In a nation more concerned with constitutional rights than identity politics, Harris would too. Instead, she’s a darling of the Democratic Party.

Among her more high-profile efforts: waging a statewide campaign to reduce school truancy, eliminating the state’s backlog of untested rape kits, successfully suing the for-profit Corinthian Colleges to the tune of $1.1 billion and negotiating a mortgage relief settlement on behalf of California homeowners (which some critics said made a nice headline but didn’t accomplish much).

She’s also emerged as one of the leading attorneys general standing in solidarity with Black Lives Matter. During a pen-and-pad session with reporters at the Democratic National Convention in July, she spoke at length about police killings of black men and women, arguing that states should take steps like keeping track of the data on officer-involved shootings and increasing training to reduce police bias.

And then there was her Prop 8 position.

Harris refused to enforce California’s Proposition 8, a voter-passed initiative in 2008 that banned same-sex marriage in the state, and in 2011 she pressed a federal appeals court to allow weddings to continue as the court considered the constitutionality of the ban.

This is the same Kamala Harris whose feelings didn’t prevent her from opposing police body cams, giving a pass to killer cops, protecting lying prosecutors, as well as dirty district attorneys offices. But then, Harris has a bright future ahead of her. Sessions will suffer castigation.

The point isn’t that Jeff Sessions is being unfairly maligned. He has earned it many times over, and richly deserves whatever he gets. The point is that Kamala Harris deserved it just as much, except we don’t live in a nation that honors constitutional rights over identity politics.

So millions of words will be murdered to try to turn a turd into a diamond so maybe, just maybe, social justice will prevail in the persona of a black woman president from California. Clothing will be rent, blood will be spilled, words will gush, all to conceal and delude, to pretend that Kamala Harris will be the savior of progressive ideals while Jeff Sessions will be their ruination. The latter may be true. The former is nonsense.

But that won’t stop her star from rising.

Perhaps more than any other rising Democratic star running for federal office this year, Harris embodies the future the party would like to imagine for itself in the fast-­approaching post-­Obama era. One indication of her cachet is the coveted prime-time speaking slot she received at the 2012 Democratic National Convention. Senator Cory Booker told me that he “reveres” Harris. President Obama said of Harris in 2013, “She is brilliant, and she is dedicated, and she is tough.” (He wound up apologizing for adding, “She also happens to be, by far, the best-­looking attorney general in the country.”)

When Kamala Harris’ day comes, the sides will shift. And the argument now called outrageously racist, that black on black crime is the real problem, will be great again.

“Let’s be clear who the victims of crime are — they come from the same communities.”

After all, that’s what Kamala Harris says about it. And she’s black. And female. And she may be the first woman president, which changes everything.