August 11, 2024
Special Edition
Ten Questions for Kamala Harris:
By: Victor Davis Hanson
Here are ten inquiries for Harris:Special Edition
Ten Questions for Kamala Harris:
By: Victor Davis Hanson
1. Vice President Harris—you have boasted that you were the “last person in the room” when Joe Biden finalized his plans for the abrupt August 2021 humiliating pullout from Afghanistan. That pullout, as you know, resulted in abandoning some $80 billion in American munitions to the Taliban. You also are on record that you wished to force (“mandate”) Americans who own “assault weapons” (the nature of which was undefined) to sell them to the federal government for assumed destruction. I assume that anyone who refuses would face mandatory confiscation.
But, given such opposition to allowing law-abiding Americans to keep their own purchased semi-automatic weapons, why then did you approve such a reckless withdrawal from Kabul that left in the hands of the terrorist Taliban some 360,000 “assault weapons” (in addition to nearly 65,000 machine guns)?
Are the Taliban more careful custodians of “assault weapons” than American citizens? Why would you confiscate what Americans freely under the Second Amendment purchased but then give away even more deadly versions of such weapons for free to terrorists?
2. Given the hyperinflation of your administration that saw Americans paying over $20,000 more for new trucks during your tenure since January 2021, why did you and Biden abandon 42,000 late-model trucks to the Taliban (along with over 22,000 Humvees, 8,000 heavy transport trucks, and 1,000 armored vehicles)? When Americans cannot afford to buy a pickup, why does the government give them away to its worst enemies?
Part Two - August 7, 2024
3. You say you will compare your record to Trump’s on the border anytime. Can you please then answer “yes” or “no” to the following questions:
a) Did you support canceling the Trump border wall mid-construction when your administration took office? And if you refused to continue building the wall, do you now support tearing down those sections that were recently rebuilt as useless?
b) Why did you bring back “catch-and-release” that forced the border patrol to release arrested illegal aliens?
c) Did you advocate abolishing ICE when you declared we needed to “start from scratch” on border enforcement? Do you now wish to apologize to ICE officers when you compared the border enforcement agency to the KKK and suggested that they whipped immigrants from horses in ways reminiscent of slavery?
d) Why did you oppose requiring potential immigrants to apply for refugee status in their home countries rather than applying for it after illegally entering the U.S.?
e) Did you oppose deportations for those who entered the country illegally during your tenure as Vice President?
f) Was the reason you opposed deportation because you stated that illegally entering the United States was not a crime? Is there a statute that says anyone without permission can enter the United States from a foreign country anytime and anywhere he chooses? Can U.S. citizens do that as well?
g) Did you say that Americans were not to use the term “illegal alien,” and your administration would thus not use it about foreign nationals who illegally entered the United States? Are foreign nationals crashing the border then entering the U.S. legally, or are they not legally “aliens,” as the IRS and Supreme Court have previously defined non-U.S. citizens of foreign countries?
h) Have you previously supported sanctuary cities and given local and state jurisdictions the power as a state attorney general to nullify federal immigration laws? Do you support the general practices of state and local entities deciding which federal laws they may choose to obey, and would that include federal gun registration laws or the federal EPA’s endangered species lists?
i) Did you support the extension of de facto free federal health care via the envisioned Medicare for All plan to illegal aliens? If so, did you offer ways to pay for the projected cost to insure 10 million more illegal aliens in addition to the 20-30 million already residing in the U.S.?
4. Are you still for abolishing private health care plans for Americans, or do you now support abolishing them only for some Americans?
5. Do you still support, as you did when an elected official in California, the banning of all fracking, horizontal drilling, and offshore drilling—de facto the three primary ways the United States provides oil to its citizens? What methods would you allow for American drillers to recover oil and natural gas?
6. During the four months of violent protests in the late spring and summer of 2020, did you help galvanize your supporters (e.g., “If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota”) to contribute to the Minnesota project to bail out protestors and demonstrators accused of using violence?
Were you aware that those and other protests that summer led to 1,500 injured police officers, 35-40 deaths, $2 billion in property damage, 14,000 arrests, and attempts to burn down a federal courthouse, a police precinct, and a historic Washington, D.C. church, as well as to storm the White House grounds and reach the president (removed to an underground bunker given the violence)?
Part Three - August 9, 2024
7. Given you have been critical of Donald Trump for addressing protesters on January 6 and have criticized as reckless his warning to them, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard,” you surely must have known that by June 2020, when for nearly a month nationwide protests had turned violent, it was reckless of you to urge on such continued disruption and turmoil and warn Americans the street tumult should not cease:
“This is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not going to stop. And everyone beware because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not going to stop after Election Day. And that should be—everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they’re not going to let up, and they should not, and we should not.”
More specifically, what did you mean precisely by describing the Antifa/BLM-led protests as a “movement”? What sorts of movements were they exactly?
Why did you urge that these by now often violent protests “should not” stop? Was that reckless, given the violence that had already occurred?
Why did you warn Americans with the word “beware”? Beware of what exactly?
Why did you invoke Election Day as the critical date to remind Americans that the street demonstrations would continue over the next four months to Election Day and then beyond it? Did you see the tumult as politically useful for your party?
8. You endorsed the George-Soros-backed radical George Gascón for Los Angeles County District Attorney and Kim Foxx for Cook County (Chicago) State’s Attorney. Since crime soared in both jurisdictions while laws were selectively enforced, do you regret those endorsements? Will you again endorse Gascón? Why did you support in 2020 a massive $150 million cut in the police budget of Los Angeles County? Would you do so again?
9. Why did you tweet out this complete falsehood about Jussie Smollett?
"[Jussie Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern-day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or the color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”
Why did you think Smollett was almost lynched? And by whom? And what is the “hate” that you believe led to Smollett’s staged attack? Have you ever formally apologized for this rush-to-judgment tweet?
10. In the past, you have objected to the description “radical Islamic terrorism.” Why? Were the murderers on 9/11 or those on October 7 not Islamic radicals? Did they not engage in terrorism?
Do you object to the word “radical” or “Islamic” or “terrorism”—or all three?
Are those who have habitually murdered Americans and Europeans in the name of their religion not radically Islamic? Do they kill in a moderate fashion? Or on behalf of Christianity or Judaism? Or is their killing of civilians not terrorism? Or do you believe it is rare? What term do you suggest the public use instead for those who murder, such as those on 9/11 or October 7?
Perhaps “militants”—as if they kill indiscriminately on behalf of any cause or religion or do not engage in terror? Are “Muslim militants,” “moderate Islamic terrorists,” or “religious terrorists” acceptable, and if so, do they accurately describe the motives and agendas of those who committed murder on 9/11 or October 7?
