328 Comments
User's avatar
Laura Larimore's avatar

She is an absolute nightmare of a woman. She can't answer a question, but she talks down her 'stuffed up' nose as though Bret is a moron.

Expand full comment
Danimal28's avatar

Definition of 'failed upward'. Never done a thing in the real world in her life. No responsibility.

Expand full comment
Nate Hartley's avatar

I hate to bring this up, but it makes sense given she got her start from sleeping with married men, not because of any talent or intellect she had.

Expand full comment
Alan Wolfson's avatar

I don't usually engage in "Ageism", but 29 (her) and 60 (Willie Brown) is just wrong, no matter who or where you are. She was obviously seduced by power to enter that relationship and has never kicked the power addiction.

Expand full comment
Alan Wolfson's avatar

Seriously - Willie Brown was 4 years older than Kamala's DAD. That couldn't have sat really well with him......?

Expand full comment
Nate Hartley's avatar

What she did was gross and weird, but the real problem is that she never had to prove herself. When you get promoted over and over without merit, you end up failing in spectacular fashion once you reach the highest level. I think that's what we're witnessing right. now. The full scale implosion of Kamala Harris. We can all see that the emperor has no clothes, and never really did (especially with Willie Brown).

Expand full comment
Gooddogboy's avatar

No Nate. Who someone is attracted to is their business. And she looks like she cares about him in the video I saw. What I DO have a problem with is Brown putting her on BIG MONEY boards, and clearing the way for her to run for office when she was a baby lawyer!

Expand full comment
Nate Hartley's avatar

She was attracted to Willie Brown just like Bill Billicheck’s 24 year old girlfriend is attracted to him lol

Expand full comment
Matt L.'s avatar

I heard the term ‘Ass Forwards’ to describe her today

Expand full comment
Marilyn F's avatar

OMG!! I laughed out loud when I read your 1st sentence!!!!

Expand full comment
Juju's avatar

Me too!!! I immediately came here to say so. 🤣🤣🤣 Back to reading…

Expand full comment
Juju's avatar

The title could also have been, “Teacher, he started it!” 🤣🤣🤣

Expand full comment
Juju's avatar

She definitely is high on power - of feeling if you cross her she can make your life hell, you know it, she knows it, and she KNOWS you know it. And she revels in that realization. You see it in her eyes as she speaks, almost threatening in her choice of words. “C’mon, you KNOW what I’m talking about…” is code for get your a** on board or you’ll be sorry. Every time I see her with anyone that challenges her she almost has glee in her eyes at the thought of making them pay. She is drunk with her hand on this lever of power and it only makes me want to see her fall harder.

Expand full comment
James David's avatar

The interview came down to we have no fucking clue and don't give a damn... Vote me cuz orange man bad!

Total cunt, 100% DEI.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

"Bret is a moron."

An You Say This...WHY?

Expand full comment
ChatterW's avatar

I think you misread that comment. The comment was making the point that Harris talks to Bret AS THOUGH he were a moron.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

The Light Bulb Goes On! Thanks

Expand full comment
VICKI's avatar

Bret SHOULD have asked her over and over, "How many people came across the border" until she answered and he never did GET an answer,so I think hs IS a moron. He let her take over for him and she won. How many, how many, how many, etc etc. Answer the questions, Madam VP!!!!

Expand full comment
Gloria Fredericks's avatar

She kept talking and talking because she didn’t want him to ask her any more questions. She’s arrogant and entitled. How anyone could vote for this woman is beyond me

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

When you get someone Like Kamala let her keep talking. The More She Talks the Worse She Looks/Sounds

Expand full comment
Alan Wolfson's avatar

SHE'S talking. :-)

Expand full comment
Papi Fresca's avatar

Yeah, I get you. She got away with distorting timeline making '24 look like '21, took no responsibility, then demanded it from DJT but expects to have cake and eat it too ...so she's moral police, lecturing us on behavior and psychology. ..speaking of which my fav takeaway is the following

KH "Donald Trump is threat, he's not stable!!!!"

BB "When Did You Notice Biden's Mental Faculties Appeared Diminished?"

KH ...wha? huh?

love this so much bc Harris' killer judgment call and "diagnosis" on Trump should be accepted but when confronted about the overt and obvious decline of Joe Biden (he was caught live, talking to a dead congresswoman) .. she's like huh? what? What Me? nothing to see...

The major networks, print news, ...celebrities ...all of the king's men, gen milley. and esp Kamala Harris covered it up and turned a blind eye and lied to the public. And now they want us to "trust the experts" ...she literally lost her case in that one moment.

"Emperor has no clothes" historical moment...and continual covering up "the cover up" of Joe Biden's decline. it's a scandal.

Expand full comment
Cia Parker's avatar

No, she made clear that she would not admit to the crimes she committed no matter how many times he asked. Better to go on and nail her on several more.

Expand full comment
Steve S's avatar

Best to let her keep talking because she talks in circles without making a point. After she drones on and stops for air, then repeat the question. The more she talks the more she says nothing.

Expand full comment
LFPeg's avatar

He’s too much of a gentleman to interview the likes of her. Shoulda been Hannity but that would have lost viewers. She will rule the country in the same manner she overruled Bret.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

Not His Style.

Expand full comment
VICKI's avatar

He has a style? He did NOT do the job. Period.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

You mean he didn't Do The Style You Want.

Expand full comment
VICKI's avatar

No, I mean he didn't do the job. I imagine Jesse Watters could have done the job. You can't back down from a person like she is.

Expand full comment
Danimal28's avatar

I would say Bret is a Fox pension 'moron'; he is preserving his 'legacy' rather than asking the right questions overall.

Expand full comment
Jon's avatar

I don't agree. They came 15 minutes late, and he couldn't extend the interview as it was coming up against his 6pm show time, and then all she did was filibuster and talk over Bret. I can't fault him at all, as he would have been the 'Mansplainer' if he was any more aggressive.

Expand full comment
madaboutmd's avatar

That was all part of the Harris plan. If she can't manage an interview with Bret Baier how in the world can she manage sitting across from Xi or Putin?

Expand full comment
Jon's avatar

Exactly.

I spent many years in executive suites. I've worked with many Kamalas, some male and some female. They're an inch deep and a mile wide. Gavin is in the same mold. They have a very short act, and then they dissolve. The Harris folks came late, and aggresively shut down the interview because she had nothing left.

Like you said, would she be able to talk over Xi and Vlad? Would she be able to drift into totally different topics to avoid hard answers?

If she's elected, we'll never recover, and in a couple hundred years, maybe someone will write a book about how America lost a revolution without even realizing it.

Expand full comment
vader's avatar

Nobody cares about Xi and Putin. The name of the game is to win. That's why they run a candidate who can win not a one who can do the job. Look at Republican primary. DeSantis is a very capable crisis manager but he couldn't even claim #2 in the primary (that was Hailey) because he didn't find a way to project his advantages on the national stage. Skill =/= win.

Mark Halperin explaiend it so well in his interview that Ms Stone posted here yesterday. TDS runs so deep that they see anything, even backing a totally ignorant candidate who could run the country into the ground, as mandatory to defeat Trump. Their single-minded goal is to destroy him even if it means destroying themselves. That's why this interview won't move the needle. She pivoted to Trump-is-bad cause her base thinks that's all she should talk about so her interview is cheered as major success (by Harry Sisson of "Biden [June 2024] debate was a masterclass" infamy, among other usual suspects). OTOH, conservarives call it a train wreck cause she didn't answer any question and lost her composure. Everyone got what they wanted. Sisson got Trump-is-bad, Ed Morissey got a trainwreck of deflection, flaring nostrils and zero substance. What independents got from it is hard to say. Nothing is my guess.

Expand full comment
VICKI's avatar

He was not aggressive but he should have been. Sad to let that opportunity pass him by.

Expand full comment
Alice Ball's avatar

100%

Expand full comment
Alice Ball's avatar

My 100% was to Jon, in defense of Bret.

Expand full comment
Burnt taco's avatar

As hard an interview as she ever had. And the gaslighting couldn’t hold up. She tried But the slightest challenge to her script went right through her like a six blade knife

Expand full comment
Matt L.'s avatar

…“You take away my mind like you take away the top of a tin”

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

And The Questions YOU would have asked?

Expand full comment
Dorota's avatar

Why were you in DNC on January 6th instead of being in Capitol? Why did you lie about being there when asked?

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

Do you understand the purpose of the interview? For Brett t was to ask questions Most people are interested in, and affect them. For people like You & I the Whole January 6th 2021 is Still A Big Deal, and for very good reasons. For Your Uncommitted voter (That's Who Matters Now) They really don't care. They should, but they don't.

Expand full comment
Matt L.'s avatar

Probably not a good idea to bring up J6, in general. Unless you want to open the floodgates for more lies to be thrown about, concerning this controversial day.

Expand full comment
VICKI's avatar

Just answer the question asked at the beginning.....How many illegals crossed the border during your administration, repeat, repeat, repeat until she gives you a number that you know is correct. PERIOD.

Expand full comment
Julia's avatar

A prosecutor should never be elected a Senator or VP or President, it's the opposite line of work. A prosecutor works for the government, not for the people, and it shows.

Expand full comment
Ed Y.'s avatar

Let’s hope she fades into obscurity after Nov 6. Sick of hearing her nasally condescending voice.

Expand full comment
Andrew Collins's avatar

The voice! Like getting hit in the forehead with a nail-gun...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMFxjKOZxD8

Expand full comment
KatWarrior's avatar

Described perfectly, Andrew. Thank you for that...

Expand full comment
Mrs Miller's avatar

The whining! Every. Single. Idiotic. Utterance. 🤦🏻‍♀️

Expand full comment
Kidbuck's avatar

DON'T count on it. They have the elections RIGGED. We all witnessed it in 2020.

Why would anyone believe it's going to be any different this time????

Expand full comment
madaboutmd's avatar

I was practicing it while driving today....I think I have it down pretty well. Happy to let it go after November.

Expand full comment
Mrs Miller's avatar

I do that too 😆

Expand full comment
madaboutmd's avatar

It's just very nasally, so it's not difficult. I guess we can thank her for an easy imitation.

Expand full comment
Clarissa Dearth's avatar

I couldn’t agree more

Expand full comment
madaboutmd's avatar

As you said Sasha, she arrived 15 minutes late and already shortened the interview. Her strategy was simple--obfuscate, obfuscate and talk about DJT. She's a nightmare.

Expand full comment
Paul Scofield's avatar

Baier did much better that I expected. Harris? A harridan in the middle of a train wreck.

Expand full comment
Ben Dandebairen's avatar

I used to think like Laura Ingraham said today, 'Kamala isn't dumb, (she's just not very hard-working, but dishonest and conniving and calculating and without real convictions). Not sure any more. Why does she have so much difficulty answering even the simplest most predictable questions? What if I've been wrong all this time, and she's just ...dumb after all?

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

In my line of work, I deal with a lot of lawyers and I can say that without exception, they are some of the laziest professionals I know. They mostly rely on research that their interns and assistants perform and lean heavily on their skills of persuasion and bullshittery... and some are not that skilled. The good ones are $1,500+ per hour.

Expand full comment
Mac Thompson's avatar

Trivia moment: "skills of persuasion and bullshittery" There is actually a term for this, particularly in reference to lawyers and politicians. It's called 'Sophistry.' Comes from ancient Greece. Aristotle hated sophists. He considered them the epitome of falsehood. To them, winning the argument was more important than being honest.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

Perfect! It's been a while since I've read or heard that term, but it is perfect for what I meant. You nailed it!

Expand full comment
Ben Dandebairen's avatar

great word. Now we say sycophants, similarly., but sophistry adds a nice pretentious layer they deserve.

Expand full comment
Paul Scofield's avatar

Alex, I'll take "bullshittery" for $1000. LOL. Well done, Mr. Keener!

Expand full comment
Richard's avatar

And the really lazy ones get to be judges.

Expand full comment
AJC's avatar

The two Judges that I personally know and have worked with and for are some of the brightest most hard working women I have ever met and learned much from. They also both raised several children, albeit sacrificing a lot of time with their families in the pursuit of their careers. I defer to my below commentary; and whether the hard working and/or adept Judges are anomalies or not I leave to the opinions of others.

Expand full comment
Richard's avatar

Perhaps my experiences are anomalies and would agree that others should opine. Looking at their schedules is a piece of evidence too. The Supreme Court takes 3 month vacations. When Scalia died, they were supposed to be in session and he was in Marfa, TX. I have been there and it is the edge of nowhere and he was 20 miles out of town. A college roommate wound up as a judge after 20 years in a water law practice. He said it was like part time work with a full time salary.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

Ooof!

Expand full comment
Ben Dandebairen's avatar

also... (but per Hatch Act, I cannot say more about it, and ALL of my opinions on here are 100 percent my own). I know Mark Twain said some funny things about the profession, but I always thought being a lawyer was like any other job: the best ones worked harder at it, the worst ones...tended to meet their clients in the waiting room on the day of the hearing. With the exception of memory skills. I have seen evidence of that...perhaps, would you say 5 percent, maybe? have really good memory skills and those are the ones worth $1,500 an hour.

Expand full comment
AJC's avatar

While Khameleon is definitely on the lazy, inept, opportunist, and corrupt side emanating from the legal community, a bit of broad brushing to state or imply that all attorneys are cut from the same cloth or that "most" do this or that or are "not that skilled." While generally many paralegals perform a great service for attorneys, i.e., researching and drafting pleadings, attorneys more often than not revise and finalize pleadings prior to them being filed with the Court; and many partners do not rely on paralegals, but associates (other attorneys) to perform research and perform other work. While many people hate attorneys, that only holds true until they need one, and sometimes they are retained to intervene in life altering and life saving situations. While there are certainly sharks, ambulance chasers, and lazy attorneys, there are also many who are dedicated to their work and actually help people, including many who perform pro bono work. I can think of a few off the top of my head of the many, i.e., ACLJ or the Pacific Justice Institute just to name a few; not to mention former attorneys who become judges or justices, like the late Antonin Scalia, Justice Thomas, and many others. Many of the major battles of good vs. evil, dependent upon your world view, are fought in the court systems by attorneys. I am sure President Trump would concur, as would many of you! Without law, and attorneys to defend and prosecute, we would have anarchy. I would also add that more often than not, the hours involved are far, far greater than most vocations, leaving many to not seek or abandon careers in the legal profession. Thus, yes there are certainly "lazy" attorneys who like Khameleon find paramours to support the advancing of their careers, I would surmise many lazy attorneys, like lazy people in general, or in any other profession, reap what they sow.

Expand full comment
Kristin Glover's avatar

Possibly dumb but VERY DANGEROUS!

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

She doesn't answer the questions because she doesn't want to. She knows that by answering questions she will only lose votes. No matter what she says. So she is trying to run out the clock.

Expand full comment
Kari Hartman Williams's avatar

I was going to go with shrewish but ‘harridan’ is much better.

Expand full comment
Paul Scofield's avatar

Either one works! Lady Macbeth also comes to mind (though Hillary seems more deserving of that).

Expand full comment
Kathleen Janoski's avatar

Dr. Jill is Lady Macbeth.

Expand full comment
Kate Cahill's avatar

yes- Hillary fits that bill perfectly!

Expand full comment
Kristin Glover's avatar

Shrew is apt.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Janoski's avatar

Love that word "harridan."

We could call her a childless cat lady too.

Expand full comment
Andrew Collins's avatar

"Harridan" is a great word but my go to is "harpy," particularly of the shrieking variety.

Expand full comment
Paul Scofield's avatar

Right on. Harridan - Harpy. Terms of a feather. Well done!

Expand full comment
MarrHar's avatar

That was my word for the pink hatted ladies on their marches v Trump: “a swarm of shrieking harpies.”

Expand full comment
Andrew Collins's avatar

It would make a great name for a band!

Expand full comment
Paul Scofield's avatar

Thanks and woof!

Expand full comment
Jon's avatar

Each base has tons of material from that interview that supports their position, and will claim victory.

I can't see how any Independent/undecided voter could lean Kamala after that show.

She still never answers any questions. Every answer (Obama was famous for these) was a prepared talking point that she immediately segued to, that didn't address the question, then filibuster as long as she could. She tried to turn an interview into a campaign speech, and I'm sure her base loved it, but logical people saw it for what it was,

Expand full comment
madaboutmd's avatar

Yep, learned from the best of them....Obama.

Expand full comment
ChiChi's avatar

Scary that half of our country is as dumb as she is.

Expand full comment
JBell's avatar

I cannot believe that someone else hadn't noticed her homage to Obama in that interview. Her cadence was to emulate him.... six words, pause .... six words, pause...... six words, pause. It was driving me almost as crazy as when Obama does it!

Expand full comment
Jack Carone's avatar

How can anyone not see how bankrupt and dishonest she is?

Expand full comment
DLEducator's avatar

They don’t care. They are voting for her for one of two reasons: 1) they think she will insure the legal right to an abortion anytime, anywhere, 2) virtue signaling because they want to say that voted for a black female. Listen to interviews… no thought about foreign policy or the economy.

Expand full comment
Kate Cahill's avatar

or-- they have such a bad case of TDS they HAVE to vote for her!

Expand full comment
GabeReal's avatar

I think that’s the #1 reason…

Expand full comment
Libertarian's avatar

The primary reason people will vote for her or any Democrat is because their government welfare check depends on it. Federal/state/city/local employees like teachers, academics, cops, bureaucrats, etc. Then add overwhelming dependence of blacks on gov education, healthcare, jobs and EBT.

Sinclair said something like a person will believe whatever the money tells them to believe. Could change “believe” to “vote” and be accurate still.

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

I disagree. There are some that do that, but it does not explain the "highly educated" voters who lean heavy to Kamala. They think they are helping the poor. Their idea of help is for the Government to do it.

Expand full comment
Libertarian's avatar

No Orenv, they depend on the government

Expand full comment
Mrs Miller's avatar

Because they don't look. All those dummies with their Kamala lawn signs are only reading the msm about how demonic Trump is while they ignore anything firsthand about either candidate. I witness this daily. They're afraid of project 2025 ffs. 🤦🏻‍♀️

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

She cannot deal with tough questions and gives answers to questions that haven't been asked.

Expand full comment
bean's avatar

I drive around my city and just can't believe how mant Harris signs I see. It just amazes me that there are that many idiots out there. I want to scream.

Expand full comment
HL3's avatar

About half the country is liberal

Expand full comment
Seva's avatar

And they support open borders, the demonization of “Whiteness!” and the war on meritocracy which is being replaced with Equity aka race based Equal Outcomes. In what sense is this still a country?

Expand full comment
HL3's avatar

I think open borders are a problem but demonization is politics today get used to it.

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

How do you think the open borders problem should be solved?

Expand full comment
HL3's avatar

1. Setup an elaborate network of ground drones to patrol the border

2. Deal with the current inside the country immigrants by offering citizenship with the conditions of service to the government.

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

Don't you think offering citizenship will cause more to come? What about them? What about everyone who is currently going through the legal process at great expense of time and money? We outlawed slavery a long time ago.

Expand full comment
Doctor Hammer's avatar

Leftist, not liberal. They threw off the term liberal in the late 90's/early 2000's after soiling it and went back to "progressives" from the early 1900's. I only bring it up because they stole the term liberal in the late 1800's from those who actually believed in liberty as a cover; the leftists are more authoritarian Marxists, but of course that doesn't sell well!

Expand full comment
HL3's avatar

I think people have issues or cant concept the differences of Liberal and Libertarian. Most of these former Democrats who they called "liberal" are actually libertarians. The funny thing is you have to have laws and a strong government to have liberal progressive stances.

Expand full comment
Doctor Hammer's avatar

I wouldn't say that. The Clinton's were called 'liberals', and they were far from libertarian. The American left started using the term liberal for themselves in the late 1800's, while at the same time advocating imposing all manner of restrictions and violating property rights. You would be hard pressed to see much relationship between Adam Smith's liberal system and anything the Democrats were pushing from FDR forward, which is why in 1968 Milton Friedman identified as a "classical liberal", i.e. of the Smith bent not the modern use of the term in the US.

In Europe the term liberal seemed to keep most of its tone, and I am given to understand that liberal there does mean roughly libertarian here. Admittedly, to a rural American everything in Europe seems a fair few steps more towards authoritarian than what the word means here :D

Expand full comment
Richard's avatar

Orthodox Marxists look sane compared to these people.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

I was hopeful that Baier would raise the issue of migrant child sex trafficking, which has tripled under her watch. Madeleine Rowley published a blockbuster report on this on Monday in The Free Press. Her report hit me to my core and I can't stop thinking about it. Of the number of villainous legacies of the Biden-Harris administration, this atrocity will stand as one that will crash on America for decades to come. Downright evil. In all her stupid rhetoric about a broken immigration system, she never once said, "first, we'll harden the border and stop illegal immigration." If a presidential candidate does not have that as a primary goal, I have no interest in them.

Expand full comment
Matt L.'s avatar

Me thinks Bret/Fox highlighting the dead women at hands of illegals (Riley) and flashing their nice happy faces makes the case. But yes, pointing out the trafficking of kids is another bad ripple in the open border. Just ‘harder’ to prove in this kind of interview vs. dead bodies which do not lie.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

Perhaps, but we're talking about tens of thousands of child sex-slaves amounting to a billion dollar criminal enterprise that has been enabled by Biden-Harris border policies.

Downright evil and unforgivable.

Expand full comment
La Gata Politica's avatar

I'm not a Bret Baier fan, but to be fair, Kamala deliberately showed up late and allowed less than 30 minutes. She's the queen of filibustering.

Expand full comment
JBell's avatar

Don't forget the 300k kids that are "missing".... this administration has simply lost them.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

Haven't forgotten. Heavy on my mind.

Expand full comment
Matt L.'s avatar

It is evil. But it doesn’t get any airplay on MSM. And don’t get us started on Hollywood… you’ll recall how much The Sound of Freedom’ was ignored/suppressed.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

That's right. Still can't understand the left's reaction to the film.

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

You have to imagine there are some Big Guy cuts involved since it is so much money.

Expand full comment
GabeReal's avatar

Definitely. I read that FP article, and it was a real eye opener. The child and drug trafficking across our open border should be at the top of issues being discussed during this election. It’s crickets from the Dems but I don’t hear Trump & Vance talking enough about it either, only personal attacks and pet eating and gangs taking over apartment complexes (which yes are bad too). And don’t get me started on MSM, it’s why I mostly get my news here on Substack.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

I caught a segment of today's Fox town hall for women in which Trump did mention the dramatic rise of sex trafficking during the Biden years in a larger discussion about fentanyl deaths, but that's as far as it went. It deserves much more attention.

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

And what do you think they are doing in those apartments?

Expand full comment
GabeReal's avatar

Good point

Expand full comment
Chana's avatar

That and medical experiments on children. Aka affirmative care.

Expand full comment
Juju's avatar

Watch “LINE in the SAND” and you’ll see exactly how it’s easily done and ALL the many parties that benefit, both small potatoes and big potatoes. It’s disgusting.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

🙏

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

What is worse is that we are all profiting off of it, especially our leaders. Does anyone think that the cartels are untaxed?

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

I don't know... good question.

Expand full comment
Orenv's avatar

Keep in mind that the US and Mexican governments can legally use lethal force to collect taxes.

Expand full comment
Mike McGlothlin's avatar

That’s a woman who’s gotten away with bullying anyone who gets in her way and never had anyone challenge her. Doug better stay in a hotel tonight.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

Well, let me tell you, she couldn't bully Tulsi Gabbard, who quite literally ended her previous presidential aspiration in less than two minutes. That's the thing about bullies. At their core, they're cowards.

Expand full comment
Formerly_Known_As_Someone's avatar

Doug gives as good as he gets.

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

Best description of the situation: "She's been a career bitch."

Expand full comment
Matt L.'s avatar

'Bish' you mean

Expand full comment
Jeff Keener's avatar

👍🏽

Expand full comment
PAULA ADAMS's avatar

I’m hoping that it’s true that we as a nation have turned a corner , away from woke, away from believing campaign promises, away from the Democrats for a long time.

Expand full comment
Kristin Glover's avatar

She is a FUCKING NIGHTMARE!!!

GOD HELP US ALL!!🙏👍👍

Expand full comment
Ashby McDonald's avatar

No way in hell she’s going on Rogan now.

Expand full comment
Greg's avatar

We can only hope. I need the entertainment.

Expand full comment
Matt L.'s avatar

She should skip Rogan and have a chat w/ Theo Von. That would be wild.

Expand full comment
Stephen Carter's avatar

Rogan could just leave her a list of 5 questions & let the bish talk to the walls for 3 hours.

Expand full comment
Ruth H's avatar

Good grief it was only 26 minutes and her team was eager to stop the interview. Bret held his own as Kamala insisted on talking over him. She spent all her time attacking Trump and couldn’t explain her policies. What a rude ugly person. We got to see her persona she displayed when attacking Kavanaugh all come back to life as she talked about Trump.

Expand full comment
Stephen Carter's avatar

At times she's rude & abrasive. At other times she's cloyingly insincere. Or she strings 4 abstract nouns together & thinks herself clever; it's embarrassing. Or she plods through a long torturous circumlocution. She's a loser, a cackling ex-whore with a heart of lead.

Expand full comment
vader's avatar

That persona is why she polls so well with white educated feminists. That's a textbook strong woman persona to them. You may not like it but understanding why some demos are drawn to her or that type (HRC as well) is important when analysing presidential race.

There's also contrast with the white male host. It isn't coincidental but very calculated.

Expand full comment
Stephen Carter's avatar

We live in demonic, satanic times. Democrats' souls are abysmal pits of depravity. There's no negotiating with evil. All you can do is kill it. Killing evil is just a necessary task, for better or worse.

Expand full comment
Suzanne-Marie English's avatar

One thing is totally clear to me: Bret Baier was phenomenal & you did an outstanding job of compiling & sharing all of this for us! Thank you!

Also clear to me: Harris is the same self-serving person she’s been since CA politics, still avoiding answering questions as she was years ago & just tap dancing as when she was first running for President, then the VP. I was astounded then that she’d have even been considered for anything, then that she’d been picked as Biden’s running mate. I see she now has the bit in her teeth & is running for the home stretch, focusing on her goal as always no matter the “inconvenient details” crucial to the American People. Her goal is what it’s always been, as she clearly states — herself. It’s all about Kamala. That must be why The Inner Circle chose her way back: she’s a the Deep State’s willing Trojan Horse! Just let her achieve her Kamala Goal, let her get in and she doesn’t care what’s unleashed!

She and “Aw, Shucks Tim Walz” are a nightmare that seems too incredibly ridiculous to be even considered — but, dangerous and horrid as this is, here we are! Shaking my head. The stakes couldn’t be higher.

Expand full comment