Media To Kamala: Be Presidential For SCOTUS Hearings

Media To Kamala: Be Presidential For SCOTUS Hearings

Media To Kamala: Be Presidential For SCOTUS Hearings

Kamala Harris needs to be Presidential during the Amy Coney Barrett SCOTUS hearings this week. When the media goes into overdrive to prop up Kamala, you know they are worried. The NY Times:

“Today, she remains the lowest-ranking Democrat on the panel. But when the Judiciary Committee convenes on Monday to consider the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, Ms. Harris will take on an outsize role in the proceedings as the party’s vice-presidential nominee. Almost as many eyes will be on her as on Judge Barrett.”

The Washington Post:

“Starting Monday, Harris will again be at the center of an explosive nomination battle — this time in an unprecedented role as a member of a presidential ticket participating in a divisive Supreme Court hearing just three weeks before Election Day.

As Joe Biden’s running mate, she faces an especially delicate task: appearing tough enough to satisfy liberals upset with Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination, but restrained enough to support Biden’s outreach to disillusioned Republicans.

At the same time, she is auditioning as a possible future president. “If I were Kamala Harris, I would try to [give] off the most presidential demeanor possible,” said Mike Davis, a Republican Judiciary Committee counsel during the Kavanaugh hearings. “Her job is to be presidential.””

Both the WaPo and The NY Times are here to tell us that Kamala’s demeanor at the Vice Presidential debate last Wednesday elevated her to the top of her game. Likewise, she had scored such huge points during the Kavanaugh hearings, that she should do the same this week with Amy Coney Barrett. 

Let’s break this down shall we?

The VP debate:

“I’M SPEAKING!” was uttered in snide tones by Kamala several times throughout the debate. 

The sighs and facial expressions were, in my opinion, not Presidential. 

Focus groups, particularly the one run by Frank Luntz, were unimpressed and in fact turned off by her attitude, her demeanor, and her tone.

For someone who is supposedly knowledgeable about the Constitution and SCOTUS history, she completely got her little story regarding Abraham Lincoln wrong. No, he didn’t wait until after the election to nominate someone to the court because of fairness or something. No, Lincoln waited as Congress was already in recess, and he needed time to get information and draw up a list of nominees. 

Furthermore, she along with Biden remain dead silent on whether they’d work to pack the court if they are elected. However, their campaign staff is trying to tell us that Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination is the definition of packing the court. An appointment to the court is very VERY different from ADDING more seats on the court. 

So no, Kamala was NOT Presidential whatsoever during last week’s VP debate. 

Kavanaugh Hearings:

Kamala Harris was a disgrace during those hearings. 

“Just seconds into the Supreme Court confirmation hearing of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh in 2018, Senator Charles E. Grassley, then the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was interrupted by a sharp demand to be recognized from far down the Democratic side of the dais.

“We cannot move forward, Mr. Chairman, with this hearing,” Senator Kamala Harris of California, the most junior Democrat on the panel, insisted after Mr. Grassley tried repeatedly to silence her — first by ignoring her and then by declaring her out of order.”

That entire exchange was infuriating. And for those who thought and still believe that it made her look like a rock star…no, no it did not. 

Her questioning of Brett Kavanaugh wasn’t prosecutorial nor professional by any standard. 

First, it was her questioning of and essentially demanding that Kavanaugh admit speaking with anonymous people at a law firm about the Mueller Russia investigation. She really wanted Kavanaugh to admit he is unfit because he somehow had inside information regarding the Russia investigation. 

Then her questioning regarding the salacious and unfounded allegations against Brett Kavanaugh was again, not professionally prosecutorial, ignored the presumption of innocence, and most definitely NOT Presidential. 

Furthermore, if she’s asked, I bet her answer is still yes to impeaching Justice Kavanaugh.

Kamala Harris tried to run for President. Her numbers, the support, and the fundraising were running out of gas by the third quarter, and she finally dropped out in December 2019. 

But now she is the candidate for Vice President and is a member of the Judiciary Committee. The media has decided that THIS is the time for her to look and be Presidential!

One NY Times columnist believes Kamala should be the sole questioner of Amy Coney Barrett given that she is aspiring to the highest office in the land and needs to hold to account an unelected judge. 

Of note – a Supreme Court judge is APPOINTED, not elected per our Constititon. 

I wonder how that will work given that Kamala has condescendingly announced she will participate in the hearings remotely due to Covid issues. I give it exactly ONE day and Kamala will be regretting that stance, and try to wiggle her way out of it. 

The fact is, Kamala doesn’t know how to act Presidential. Her fall backs are always condescension, interruptions, and sneering facial expressions. 

The media can try to make Kamala SHINE, but that shine will wear off very quickly once the hearings start tomorrow. 

Feature Photo Credit: Original Artwork by VG Darleen Click

Written by

  • Scott says:

    “The media can try to make Kamala SHINE, but that shine will wear off very quickly once the hearings start tomorrow.”… Does that make anyone else think of “polishing a turd”?

  • Chad King says:

    The Supreme Court is supposedly critical to the Democrats because of the need to protect “the right to abortion.” Hence they justify the use of bad behaviors at confirmations.

    I don’t think that one American in ten understands the “right to abortion.” Simply put, overturning Rowe v. Wade (and its progeny), doesn’t “outlaw” abortion. It simply makes it a political issue for each state to determine. What sane person doesn’t understand that every single blue state would legalize abortion within 30 days of an adverse Supreme Court ruling? If the Democrats were really concerned about access to abortion, why wouldn’t they simply pass those laws now (some states have–but you never hear about that from the MSM) and moot Rowe?

    My personal belief is that abortion would be legal in 45-50 states within 90 days (with sensible restrictions like parental notification, limits on late term abortions, and short cooling off periods before the procedure takes place in most of the red states) and the residents of the other 0-5 states would be no more than a couple of hours of travel from an abortion center in another state. The pro-lifers can make their political arguments and fight it out in the political arena. I wish them well, but I much prefer a political fight in the state legislatures to the Supreme Court concocting constitutional rights out of thin air. We’ve seen how well that works out.

    Obviously, the Democrats don’t do so to preserve abortion as a political tactic. I’m not arguing that abortion is right or wrong (personally, it’s way down on my list of things that I care about). I’m just observing that the judiciary’s usurping of political power in 1973 has led to 47 years of the politicizing the judiciary to no useful end.

  • David Lentz says:

    If Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was but smart, he would replace Kamala Harris on the Judiciary Committee thru the election, citing her need to campaign. Harris is a rabid anti-Catholic bigot, who else would attack the Knights of Columbus. She is utterly incapable of controlling herself.

    • Scott says:

      You’re right.. good thing for us, Ole Chucky is NOT smart, or even close to it.. (devious yes, but not smart)… Here’s hoping that Kamela-toe beclowns herself, and shows what a bigot she is to the world.. Many more people than usual will be watching these hearings, and this will be even better exposure that debates or other avenues to see how destructive she would be for the nation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner