ALWAYS with the weird incel-adjacent misogyny, huh, even when it's completely unnecessary and beside the point?
You know people are going to respond to the abundant bait, claiming real Trump is EVEN WORSE than your straw person Harris surrogate and so letting your misinformation stand. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny, though, and I think it's worth very briefly dissecting as a textbook example of how this type of low-level, low effort smear campaign "works".
(1) Not sure if the "sexual favours" comment is an attempt to smear John Meehan or somebody else in his office (Harris wouldn't have reported directly to him straight out of law school), but if you have some proof that she "admitted" to this involvement, characterized it as "sexual favors", AND claimed it's the reason she was hired, I'm sure the US press would love (and pay) to know!!
Still, it's a slight twist on the usual misogynist smear that she got her start by dating Willie Brown - which is hilarious for anyone who knows anything about the scene around Brown in 1990s San Francisco. Brown (despite technically being married) dated so widely it was a running local joke for years, and certainly he pursued just about every young, prominent, left of center black woman he could find. Brown also was a huge champion of getting progressive black people (including men) into office in California, promoting campaigns and providing recommendations and advocacy left and... OK, not right. This was a logical consequence of the extreme race based discrimination Brown himself experienced early in his own legal career, and combating anti-black racism in politics and law was always his driving motivation. While it's almost inevitable that he'd have pursued Harris at some point no matter what, it's even more certain that he'd have promoted her as a candidate even if she'd rebuffed his interest on a personal level. Regardless, women did and do have the right to date and even to have (consensual) sex with whomever they want to.
(2) As for Harris never having been elected - anyone can easily consult the public record. However, armed with the basic knowledge ALL the Attorney General positions in California at every level are elected, you wouldn't even have to do that. (Not to mention VPOTUS, although I guess arguably Biden and his abundant testosterone could've carried that ticket all on his own.)
(3) Harris wasn't in charge of border enforcement, but with investigating the root causes of persistent illegal migration to the US from and via Mexico. And of course she did, with much fanfare, eventually visit the US Mexico border; the standard criticism (which perhaps has some merit) is that she chose to focus on current flashpoint El Paso rather than some of the more stubborn long-term but less visible problem spots, giving her opponents an opportunity to allege that her knowledge of the problem was recent and superficial.
Of course, the "causes" of this net north migration date back to the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny, reinforced by decades of similar policies rammed through by successive presidential administrations of both parties, and so neither party has been able to - nor, more importantly, WILL be able to - "solve" the contemporary consequences while still pursuing and defending legacy neoliberal policies. But cherchez la femme while you can, right?