Why Can't Harris Answer A Question.

[Audie]

Of course she could have answered that question, but why should she? Her agenda is antithetical to Baier's and Fox's. They're there to make her look bad, not to do an interview or inform their audience, and she's there to promote her candidacy to people that probably never listen to her if she's not on Fox - not to let them control the dialog.

She showed their viewers that she's articulate, informed, and strong - facts that seem to have escaped RF's MAGA contingent who also never listen to her directly, just through a MAGA media filter. Harris was in control during that interview. She called out the host for his bad manners, but took none of his bait.

Fox gave her legitimacy by having her on. It's not their purpose or likely even their opinion, but by having her on, they're telling their viewers that she's a woman who deserves airtime and an audience.

And she was successful. Hear the interviewer lament how well she did. I'll bet she picked up a few votes that would have gone to Trump otherwise:

Fox News’s Brett Baier went on the offensive during an interview with Kamala Harris Wednesday night, but even he had to admit she got the best of him. In a segment reacting to his own contentious interview, Baier conceded that Harris may have gotten exactly what she wanted from that interview.​

​

“I think she had a … a mission, that she wanted to do. And maybe, she wanted to have a viral moment, she wanted to have a pushback,” Baier said. “She came to Fox News and she wanted to have a ‘go after Donald Trump’ viral moment that plays on other channels, and on social media. And I think she may have gotten that.”​

​

During the interview, Baier pushed Harris to respond to several copy-pastes of Trump’s talking points, asking her about gender-affirming care in prisons and if she’d apologize to the family of a child killed by an immigrant. When she responded, Baier interrupted Harris’s answers and, appearing frustrated, formatted his follow-ups like debate rebuttals. Baier later offered a thin defense for his bad form in the interview, saying that he thought Harris would be “tough to redirect without me trying to interrupt,” and complaining that he hadn’t gotten the full time with Harris he’d expected.​

​

At one point Harris even called out Baier for playing a truncated clip of Trump brushing off his “enemy from within” remark, instead of the actual clip itself from earlier this week—perhaps the “viral moment” Baier had referred to. (source)​

I saw part of it.

if a witness in court responded off topic that way, they’d soon be
subjected to some criticism and re education.

 

[Twilight Hue]

"In March 2021, Biden tapped Harris to head an initiative called the Roots Causes Strategy...

...Biden dispatched Harris on a diplomatic mission to work with Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

The goal was to help those countries strengthen their economies and security situations so their citizens could build 'successful lives at home rather than abroad.'

In other words, it was an effort to slow migration at America's southern border by encouraging people to stay in their home countries.

In April 2021, a White House transcript shows Harris told a reporter that Biden asked Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to 'address what is going on at the border' while she was 'dealing with root causes' of migration.

Our partners at FactCheck.org report Harris was not appointed to be in charge of border security.

Therefore, we find that referring to Harris as the 'border czar' is a false claim."

Get the facts: Is Kamala Harris the 'border czar'?

A lot of political ads are already airing ahead of the election in November. News 8's Ad Watch series fact-checks them.

www.wgal.com

Actually it a fact that Biden on camera had said literally he's putting Harris in charge of the Border.

 

[Copernicus]

She sure is long winded.

Yeah, but she misunderstood that it was an interrogation, not an interview. Baer was actually more interested in his own answers to the questions than hers. She kept interrupting his train of thought with answers.

 

[Copernicus]

Actually it a fact that Biden on camera had said literally he's putting Harris in charge of the Border.

No, it is a fact that he only said he was putting her in charge of diplomatic efforts, not border security. That was the responsibility of Mayorkas. You are well into ad nauseam territory now.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No, it is a fact that he only said he was putting her in charge of diplomatic efforts, not border security. That was the responsibility of Mayorkas. You are well into ad nauseam territory now.

That's a lie as she was tasked domestically as well.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's a lie as she was tasked domestically as well.

Citation needed. The sane sources disagree with you. Such as this one:

Kamala Harris’s Border Responsibilities And Results

Illegal migration is perhaps the biggest political vulnerability facing Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign. Under the Biden-Harris administration, there were about 8 million migrant encounters in the three-year period from 2021 through 2023. This is an annual rate about 3.5 times higher than...

www.hoover.org

As to CBN News, that is not a reliable source, they are just short of being tin hat conspiracy loons:

Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) - Bias and Credibility

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence.

mediabiasfactcheck.com

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE​

Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information; therefore, fact-checking and further investigation are recommended per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

• Overall, we rate the Christian Broadcasting Network as a right-leaning promoter of conspiracy theories via Pat Robertson on the 700 Club. CBN News, however, mainly reports accurate news that sometimes does not align with science.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Citation needed. The sane sources disagree with you. Such as this one:

Kamala Harris’s Border Responsibilities And Results

Illegal migration is perhaps the biggest political vulnerability facing Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign. Under the Biden-Harris administration, there were about 8 million migrant encounters in the three-year period from 2021 through 2023. This is an annual rate about 3.5 times higher than...

www.hoover.org

As to CBN News, that is not a reliable source, they are just short of being tin hat conspiracy loons:

Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) - Bias and Credibility

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence.

mediabiasfactcheck.com

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE​

Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information; therefore, fact-checking and further investigation are recommended per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy-Pseudoscience sources.

• Overall, we rate the Christian Broadcasting Network as a right-leaning promoter of conspiracy theories via Pat Robertson on the 700 Club. CBN News, however, mainly reports accurate news that sometimes does not align with science.

Sorry the media is lying for the left.

If you don't like CBN. Here another non Christian report then . Sky news Australia.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry the media is lying for the left.

If you don't like CBN. Here another non Christian report then . Sky news Australia.

Sorry, you need to find reliable sources. Try Reuters or the AP. Neither one of those is left wing or right wing. Skye News is anotherfar right source of mixed reliability:

Sky News Australia - Bias and Credibility

RIGHT BIAS These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may

mediabiasfactcheck.com

By the way, the source that I used was a conservative source. The Hoover Institution is right center in their media bias. It is only the Loony Toon right that agrees with you. That is a very bad sign.

Hoover Institution - Bias and Credibility

RIGHT-CENTER BIAS These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[Copernicus]

That's a lie as she was tasked domestically as well.

OK, I watched this report from CBN (Christian Broadcasting Network), which is owned by Pat Robertson's right wing evangelical organization, the 700 Club. What I looked for was anything at all to support your claim that Kamala Harris was in charge of anything other than a diplomatic mission, which had nothing to do with border security. In fact, there was not a scintilla of evidence to support your claim, just Biden saying that "she speaks for me" and Harris saying that "the work will not be easy". Just what both would say about a purely diplomatic mission. That's it. Nothing to back up your debunked claim that she was appointed to be some kind of "border czar". Nada.

If that is all you can come up with, you really have drunk the extremist rightwing Kool Aid.

 

[Copernicus]

Sorry the media is lying for the left.

If you don't like CBN. Here another non Christian report then . Sky news Australia.

Well, this was another hit piece with a talking head lying that Harris was given the "informal title" of "border czar". Then there were all of those conservative talking heads repeating the fabrication, and all of the liberal ones denying that she was ever appointed "border czar". Nothing factual, just opinions going back and forth without anything to back them up. Yet, if you go back to the source of Biden's announcement, there was nothing announced other than a diplomatic mission to look into root causes and try to stem the flow of refugee immigrants at the source. Mayorkas, head of Homeland Security, was the only thing close to a "border czar" in the Biden administration, and that "informal title" was one conferred exclusively by Republicans. Harris was never assigned to go to the border or play any role in dealing with the situation at that level.

 

[Tomef]

If one watched the interview with VP Harris and Fox News reporter Bret Baier interview ask youself if Harris is she able to answer a question. Can she?
If you missed the interview here is the link.

Full interview: Vice President Kamala Harris sits down with Bret Baier in 'Special Report' exclusive | Fox News Video

Vice President Kamala Harris discusses immigration, the economy, responding to U.S. adversaries and more with Fox News chief political anchor Bret Baier on 'Special Report.'

www.foxnews.com

You could make some kind of point by providing a comparison, an instance of an interview with a politician where the politician just goes wherever the interviewer leads and answers every question directly, like a junior staffer dealing up facts and figures. Politicians do these interviews to put their own agenda forward. It's disingenuous to suggest Harris doing the same thing every politician does is somehow exceptional.

 

[Tomef]

Well, this was another hit piece with a talking head lying that Harris was given the "informal title" of "border czar". Then there were all of those conservative talking heads repeating the fabrication, and all of the liberal ones denying that she was ever appointed "border czar". Nothing factual, just opinions going back and forth without anything to back them up. Yet, if you go back to the source of Biden's announcement, there was nothing announced other than a diplomatic mission to look into root causes and try to stem the flow of refugee immigrants at the source. Mayorkas, head of Homeland Security, was the only thing close to a "border czar" in the Biden administration, and that "informal title" was one conferred exclusively by Republicans. Harris was never assigned to go to the border or play any role in dealing with the situation at that level.

I've seen that over and over from people who rely on the conservative media in the US for news. The typical line is 'this proves (whatever)', but when watched or read it's just some collection of characters saying something is the case, with zero evidence. The accepted standard of proof is 'someone said it, then they got someone else, and they said it too, and then someone else did'. There appears to be no understanding in consumers of this sort of thing that somebody saying something over and over is not a substitute for providing some evidence. The conservative media have clearly long since cottoned onto this. It certainly makes their job easier, no need for journalistic integrity or the hard work of putting evidence together.