The reviews have been coming in since yesterday evening of Bret Baier's interview with Kamala Harris on Fox News. As we reported, Senior Advisor for Kamala for President, David Plouffe, said that a strong Harris "handled an ambush Fox interview." We need them to get their story straight: was it an ambush, or did Harris bravely enter the lion's den?

The Harris campaign is spinning the interview as a huge success, but most of social media doesn't see it that way. Harris tried to filibuster as she had no answers to Baier's questions, some of which delved into her flip-flops from her 2020 presidential campaign.

The Guardian's Margaret Sullivan has come up with a new one, calling the interview "grievance theater."

"The press should be tough on Harris, but it needs to be much tougher on Trump" is a way better argument than this alternative formulation, which treats legitimate scrutiny of e.g. Biden's age or Harris’s shifting positions as off-limits. pic.twitter.com/3Kr1uuIC1a

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) October 17, 2024

The press is tougher on Donald Trump. But Sullivan believes it was just grievance theater: "Immigrant hatred. Transphobia. And later, Joe Biden’s age. Baier was running through the Fox News greatest hits playlist."

Sullivan writes:

Bret Baier started off his Wednesday evening interview with Kamala Harris with a barrage of combative questions about immigration, designed less to elicit substantive answers than to prove what a tough guy the Fox host could be.

His aggressive approach was understandable, in a way, since Baier had been under pressure for days from the Donald Trump faithful; they were convinced he was going to go easy on the Democratic nominee for president, and maybe even allow her campaign to edit the interview or see the questions in advance.

So, Baier came out guns blazing, barely allowing the vice-president to finish a sentence before jumping in with objections and arguments.

After 10 minutes of playing immigration “gotcha”, Baier pivoted to the obvious next subject, airing a video clip in which Harris expressed support for transgender people in prisons.

Recommended

Advertisement

Yes, she expressed support for taxpayer-funded sex changes of convicts and illegal immigrants. We don't want that. We admit it. Call it transphobic if you like. Harris even hedged her support, declining to say she supported the sex changes but that she would "follow the law."

Nate seems like he is always like one step away from getting red-pilled.

— Jonathan Toronto (@MythicalExegete) October 17, 2024

They’re appalled anyone would dare to give Kamala anything but softball questions

— 🇺🇸 The American Culturist 🇺🇸 (@MericaCulture) October 17, 2024

The ABC debate moderators literally fact-checked Trump with dishonest crime data and started debating him for Kamala. How much tougher do you want the “press” to get on him, exactly?

— Excelsior Strategies (@Excelsior_PR) October 17, 2024

The media has been harder on Trump than any politician in history. lol

— ThePCGamer89 (@Gamer89PC) October 17, 2024

"but it needs to be much tougher on Trump"

The press has brainwashed half the country to believe Trump is literally Hitler...which is why he almost had his head blown off.

If you believe the press has been easy on Trump, you have no credibility Nate.

— Damian Tysdal (@DamianTysdal) October 17, 2024

It's an argument. A retarded argument considering how murderous the media is toward Trump and Vance at every opportunity they get, but even a false argument is an argument.

— After Dinner (@AfterDinnerCo) October 17, 2024

Why should they be way tougher on Trump, Nate? 70% of the country doesn’t like the direction the country is headed and Harris/biden should have to answer to that. They’re in charge

— Dave Ruggles (@adiosillinois) October 17, 2024

The funny thing is that the "soft on Dems" strategy has finally come back to bite them. It's a big advantage when someone who has been through the gauntlet emerges and is then cushioned (Obama, Biden, Clintons). It's a disaster when you get a Harris or even a Walz.

— AmishDude (@TheAmishDude) October 17, 2024

Sullivan's the braindead broad who came up with the "journalists get back on the job now that Trump's here" idiocy. The only surprise would be if she weren't ladling out partisan slop like this. https://t.co/nCinWlk74u

— Varad Mehta (@varadmehta) October 17, 2024

I found the interview, and questions, to be rather fair. We hardly know Kamala… who didn’t exactly go through a primary. Any fair minded person must desire a few more interviews that have the gall to ask tough questions.

— Mark Mathis (@MarkDMathis) October 17, 2024

This concept makes no sense. Why should they be tough on one and tougher on the other?? This is the same problem (directionally speaking) as what you are criticizing.

How about this novel idea: they do their job and are equally tough on both.

— noman (@Brittan81401496) October 17, 2024

She didn’t get away with the filibuster- that was the issue from the get go. Bret knew what she as doing, didn’t back down and it broke her rhythm of memorized content.

— FreeThinker (@wla1103) October 17, 2024

When did “opinion” articles become news? The problem with journalism is not tough versus hard. Ask about their records and be fair. Don’t let them filibuster and skate away without answering. Baier was fair. She tried hard to filibuster and redirect and dodge every question.…

— ALC Trades🛡️ (@ALCTrades) October 17, 2024

"Orange man bad" is not a rational response to questions about policy you advanced that resulted in negative consequences.

— Steven woolery (@Stevenwoolery) October 17, 2024

Asking Harris to explain her performance as vice president for the past three-and-a-half years isn't "grievance theater."

***