Image 01 Image 03

Tulsi Gabbard Brutally Destroyed Kamala Harris’s Attorney General Record in Just Two Minutes

Tulsi Gabbard Brutally Destroyed Kamala Harris’s Attorney General Record in Just Two Minutes

Harris had been treated as invincible for weeks, but in the end it took just two minutes for a candidate who few people believed was in her league to prove she could be defeated.

After the first Democratic presidential debate in June, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) became a top contender. She successfully broadsided frontrunner Joe Biden over his remarks about busing and working with segregationist Senators in a moment that was clearly staged, and landed a body blow that helped her campaign funding and poll numbers rise.

But while we political junkies were anxious to find out if we’d see more fireworks between Harris and Biden in Round Two Wednesday night, something unexpected happened.

The unstoppable Kamala Harris got flattened. And not by Joe Biden, who managed to survive last night’s debate simply thanks to the fact that no one delivered a knockout punch against him.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI), whose polling numbers have never been higher than 1%, took down the seemingly untouchable Harris.

Trouble began for Harris after debate moderator Jake Tapper began asked them about the race issue as it related to busing. After saying their positions were not the same, Harris again attacked Biden’s position:

HARRIS: That is simply false. And let’s be very clear about this. When Vice President Biden was in the United States Senate, working with segregationists to oppose busing, which was the vehicle by which we would integrate America’s public schools, had I been in the United States Senate at that time, I would have been completely on the other side of the aisle.

And let’s be clear about this. Had those segregationists their way, I would not be a member of the United States Senate, Cory Booker would not be a member of the United States Senate, and Barack Obama would not have been in the position to nominate him to the title he now holds.

Biden brought up Harris’s problematic record as California’s state attorney general. The back and forth exchange between the two over race and her prosecutorial record set the stage for Tapper’s next question directed at Gabbard:

TAPPER: I want to bring in Congresswoman Gabbard. Congresswoman Gabbard, you took issue with Senator Harris confronting Vice President Biden at the last debate. You called it a quote, false accusation that Joe Biden is a racist. What’s your response?

GABBARD: I want to bring the conversation back to the broken criminal justice system that is disproportionately negatively impacting black and brown people all across this country today. Now Senator Harris says she’s proud of her record as a prosecutor and that she’ll be a prosecutor president.

But I’m deeply concerned about this record. There are too many examples to cite but she put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.


She blocked evidence — she blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from death row until the courts forced her to do so. She kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California.


And she fought to keep …

TAPPER: Thank you, Congresswoman.

GABBARD: Bail system in place that impacts poor people in the worst kind of way.

Here’s how Harris responded:

HARRIS: As the elected attorney general of California, I did the work of significantly reforming the criminal justice system of a state of 40 million people, which became a national model for the work that needs to be done.

And I am proud of that work. And I am proud of making a decision to not just give fancy speeches or be in a legislative body and give speeches on the floor, but actually doing the work of being in the position to use the power that I had to reform a system that is badly in need of reform.

That is why we created initiatives that were about reentering former offenders and getting them counseling.

TAPPER: Thank you.

HARRIS: It is why (ph) and because I know that criminal justice system is so broken …

TAPPER: Thank you, Senator.

HARRIS: That I am an advocate for what we need to do to not only decriminalize, but legalize marijuana in the United States.

Notice what Harris did there. She didn’t refute a single thing Gabbard said. She couldn’t because Gabbard spoke the truth and Harris knows it.

Also take note of Harris’s veiled insult at Gabbard’s standing as a Congresswoman. Instead of tackling her record, which is what Gabbard did, Harris took the low road. “I am proud of making a decision to not just give fancy speeches or be in a legislative body and give speeches on the floor …”

Really? If a male candidate had dared to diminish a female Congresswoman in such a way feminists would have read him the riot act for days on end. Don’t forget that Gabbard is also an Iraq war veteran. So her service to her country hasn’t just been confined to standing in the U.S. House and on debate stages making “fancy speeches,” as Harris snidely insinuated.

Just as her cheap shot against Biden at the first debate demonstrated, Harris’s condescension towards Gabbard spoke volumes about her character. It revealed how she will go for the jugular in order to get ahead even if it means stabbing an ally in the back by dishonestly playing the race card or treating another woman of color like an empty suit for daring to criticize her record.

Gabbard was given the chance to respond to Harris’s comments:

GABBARD: The bottom line is, Senator Harris, when you were in a position to make a difference and an impact in these people’s lives, you did not. And worse yet, in the case of those who were on death row, innocent people, you actually blocked evidence from being revealed that would have freed them until you were forced to do so.


There is no excuse for that and the people who suffered under your reign as prosecutor owe — you owe them an apology.

In turn, Harris gave another defensive answer that did not refute any of what Gabbard noted, but which included another dig at Gabbard for giving a “fancy opinion:”

HARRIS: My entire career I have been opposed — personally opposed to the death penalty and that has never changed. And I dare anybody who is in a position to make that decision, to face the people I have faced to say I will not seek the death penalty. That is my background, that is my work.

I am proud of it. I think you can judge people by when they are under fire and it’s not about some fancy opinion on a stage but when they’re in the position to actually make a decision, what do they do.

When I was in the position of having to decide whether or not to seek a death penalty on cases I prosecuted, I made a very difficult decision that was not popular to not seek the death penalty. History shows that and I am proud of those decisions.

Watch the exchange below:

I have to admit that when I watched this segment it was like watching that scene from Rocky IV when Rocky landed the first direct hit on Ivan Drago. “He’s cut!” you can hear exclaimed in the background.

It was like the shot heard round the world. The mainstream media and Democratic commentators had been treating Harris as invincible for weeks. In the end, it took just two minutes for a candidate who few people believed was in Harris’s league to prove them wrong.

Harris did not take it well. She and Gabbard reportedly did not shake hands after the debate was over, and when questioned about the exchange in the spin room afterwards, here’s how the California Senator responded:

Her comms team embarrassed themselves, too. Harris’s national press secretary wrote this:

When all else fails, blame Russia? Not a good look, said NRSC senior advisor Matt Whitlock:

A CNN panel of Democrats weren’t impressed with Harris’s performance at all:

If Google Trends are any indication, Gabbard had the best night of any of the candidates in terms of exposure and voters wanting to know more about her:

To rub salt in the wound, at the time of this writing #KamalaHarrisDestroyed trended on Twitter.

In summary, this is probably the best take on Harris’s debate night disaster:


— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


2smartforlibs | August 1, 2019 at 3:25 pm

When your polling at 0 % and you have 45 days more or less to make hay you better be bold.

inspectorudy | August 1, 2019 at 3:35 pm

In any endeavor in the world that a person tries out for there is a credibility factor that must be applied. Harris has made so many gaffs about policy that she must be rejected as a total incompetent. They tore Palin up for getting dates wrong or mixing up the words North instead of South, but Harris makes basic mistakes on the foundations of the policies she attempts to offer adjustments to. A day later, she tries to undo the blunders from the day before. This woman is in so far over her head that it is mind blowing that she is given any attention at all.

    Head? Blowing?

    I see what you did there.

    Massinsanity in reply to inspectorudy. | August 1, 2019 at 5:23 pm

    Her attempts to explain her health care “plan” over the past few weeks have been downright laughable… keep your plan, Medicare for all, Medicare for all with a private option…

    Just another lightweight with no chance in the end.

They may call Trump a racist. Yet Harris has put more black men in prison on minor charges than Trump ever will. And she giggles about it.

So Harris and Warren are the only self-identifying female gendered persons left in the running? Other than Hillary and Michelle?

And Harris would qualify as a Nixonian moral majority crusader?

And Warren? Is she a Souix-in for VP?

JackinSilverSpring | August 1, 2019 at 4:26 pm

Why doesn’t anybody ask her why she hasn’t paid reparations to descendants of the slaves owned by her family?

Bless you, Stacey, for watching this. I just didn’t wanna.

I believe Gabbard is on Joe Biden’s team. Everyone knows she will not be elected president this time. She’s very young and she’s only a congresswoman. She’s never been a mayor or governor, nor senator, nor run anything.

Biden is the classiest politician on that stage (and would have been on last night’s stage too.) He’s been around politics forever because he’s very good at it. He has a heart of ice and a very friendly demeanor. He remembered a vast number of things in this debate — not as great as Trump, but very good. He didn’t bumble at all. He didn’t even act like “Sleepy Joe”.

Biden needs a running mate. It looks to me like he’s picked Gabbard and they have agreed. Did you notice Gabbard going gratuitously against Harris, about a week ago? Gabbard went againt Harris again in this debate, this time for the kill. I’d say Harris is probably done. Those attacks were substantive and she had no answer.

And when Biden was forced to admit that he had voted in the Senate to go into Iraq under GWB, and that it was a mistake, CNN called on Gabbard next who said “We were all lied to”, defending Biden.

Toward the end of the debate, Biden started acting as the presumptive nominee. He told Gillibrand he “didn’t know what had happened” when she dared attack him, and didn’t answer her directly. He even threatened De Blasio about something or other.

Kamala Harris has been accurately assessed by Willie Brown as not having the class to win the presidency. Not now, not later. She should count her blessings that she slipped into a US Senate seat. Advisors will tell her this. So why was she so aggressive in the first debate, attacking Joe Biden?

Joe Biden probably turned her down for VP before that debate, selecting Gabbard. Harris is very unlikable, and what she tried to Kavanaugh in the Senate Judiciary hearings need not be forgiven. Gabbard is likable, she doesn’t have anything disgusting in her background, she’s tall (much taller than the other women), she’s not completely white, and she’s military — as well as being quite a solid leftist. So I think that in Biden’s shoes, I’d pick Gabbard too.

I think also that Gillibrand may have been working together with Harris. She tried attacking Biden at the end, even though it didn’t get much response. Harris and Gillibrand embraced after the debate, touching cheeks, and I think I recall seeing a broad smile on Gillibrand’s face.

CNN is favoring Biden. They called on Gabbard right after asking Biden about going into Iraq, so she could provide the defense she did. And they intentionally embarrassed Gillibrand (who may be working with Harris) by calling on her totally out of the blue when she had not asked to speak — the instance shown on Mark Dice’s video, where she looks shocked because she is.

The others on stage, all the guys except for Biden, are irrelevant. So is Klobuchar.

Biden’s peculiar weakness is that he seems unwilling to talk about his own contribution as VP during Obama’s presidency. He would not talk about his own position on some issue, instead boasting of Obama’s decision in that case. It wasn’t classified; he could have talked. Obama doesn’t seem to like him, so if he tries to fudge that at all, Obama will probably come out quickly with a rebuttal to debunk it.

    nomadic100 in reply to artichoke. | August 1, 2019 at 5:25 pm

    Biden’s only contribution as V.P. was commenting to Obama that the passage of Obamacare was a “big f****** deal.” Otherwise, nothing he did or said was remarkable. I suspect that Obama selected Biden to be his running mate because he surmised that Biden, who had been the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, actually knew something about international relations. Obama quickly learned that Biden knew nothing but, by then, he was stuck with him.

      artichoke in reply to nomadic100. | August 1, 2019 at 5:37 pm

      Biden certainly seemed in command of a lot of facts last night. Obama was never so sharp with facts actually.

      We don’t know how much of what Obama did was from himself, or Valerie Jarrett, or Biden, or someone else, because unlike Trump they weren’t spied on.

    Barry in reply to artichoke. | August 2, 2019 at 12:16 am

    “He didn’t bumble at all.”


    Didn’t bumble.

    At All.


    CKYoung in reply to artichoke. | August 2, 2019 at 9:56 am

    I like your analysis a lot. It’s almost a shame kamala got destroyed by Gabbard, I would have enjoyed watching President Trump debate her. kamala is a fake, as phony as they come.

Massinsanity | August 1, 2019 at 5:28 pm

Harris treats busing as if it were some great success that led to lifting millions of minorities out of poverty when the reality is that busing was an abject failure dreamed up by wealthy, suburban, white judges to alleviate their white guilt (see judge Garrity in Boston who I believe lived in Wellesley).

Biden was right to oppose forced busing, all it led to was white (and people of color with means) flight from the cities or to urban parochial schools.

As pointed out by one of the 0-1% candidates last night, urban schools are as segregated as ever because forced busing is a horror (for everyone) that should never have been used in the first place.

At the next debate someone ought to ask Biden about his habit of swimming nude much to the discomfiture of female Secret Service agents present. On behalf of all women, of course.

    artichoke in reply to nomadic100. | August 1, 2019 at 5:38 pm

    Agree. He may not be sleepy, but he is definitely creepy.

    Not an accident that those rhyme.

    tom_swift in reply to nomadic100. | August 1, 2019 at 6:35 pm

    So who the hell draws up the Secret Service duty roster? Or does SS now stand for “Super Sensitive” women? It’s incredible that a government agency can’t figure out how to deal with some creepy old coot.

Massinsanity | August 1, 2019 at 5:39 pm

And what was she referring to when she said:

“Had those segregationists their way, I would not be a member of the United States Senate, Cory Booker would not be a member of the United States Senate, and Barack Obama would not have been in the position to nominate him to the title he now holds.”

Obama went to a private school in HI. Harris grew up in Berkeley, her mother had a PhD from UCB and her father also graduated from UCB and taught at Stanford. Booker’s parents were IBM executives and he attended a nice suburban HS.

She is so desperate to be a victim when she is nothing close to the sort. She has lived a life of privilege afforded her because her parents worked hard and are clearly in the top 0.1% when it comes to educational pedigree. The way she tells it one would think that she, Obama and Booker grew up in the post re-construction south where Democrats made life a living hell for African Americans.

    Rick the Curmudgeon in reply to Massinsanity. | August 1, 2019 at 11:46 pm

    Wasn’t that the old term for “Democrats”??

    artichoke in reply to Massinsanity. | August 4, 2019 at 4:28 pm

    Are we all supposed to applaud that Kamala Harris and Spartacus are members of the US Senate? They have very big flaws. But you’re not supposed to push back on that idea that it’s righteous for them to be there, obviously because of skin tone — esp. in the case of the descendant of slave-owners, Harris.

For posterity, I want to say this. I do not doubt that Russian propagandists want Gabbard promoted as much as possible, because her foreign policy seeks to halt America from projecting power beyond its borders. However, in addition to this, Harris’ record as a prosecutor provides ample ground to attack her from the left. It is not impossible or even inconsistent for Gabbard to seek to weaken America internationally, and at the same time, for her criticisms of Harris on domestic policy to be well-founded.

I mean, Pelosi famously met Assad back in 2007. Was it even controversial among Democrats at the time?

    Massinsanity in reply to JBourque. | August 1, 2019 at 6:38 pm

    I believe John Kerry was friends with Assad and may have even attended Assad’s wedding.

    artichoke in reply to JBourque. | August 4, 2019 at 4:31 pm

    Agree. There was an intensity in Gabbard’s eyes, about opposing our current foreign policy.

    Perhaps she wants to turn more toward Iran and away from Israel.

    She can say we should bring the troops home, but those are volunteer troops, and if we don’t deploy them we should lay them off. So it’s hard for me to know what’s really behind that comment.

I warned everyone about Gabbard over a year ago She seems pre-selected to me. I find it even more suspicious that they are headlining their articles with “she will never be president but…”

I hope the Trump team is ready too shoot down her “Did I mention I was in the military” spiel and show what a loyal prog she is.

My fear is they are keeping her under wraps until the last minute so there will be no time to expose her true colors.

Maybe she will just be a Veep nominee, but for heaven’s sake, they pulled the exact same trick with Obama. Fooled me once…

    artichoke in reply to elle. | August 2, 2019 at 1:12 am

    She has significant upsides:

    (1) female
    (2) tall — much taller than the other women
    (3) easy on the eyes, for men at least — she gets an automatic hearing from men
    (4) no big problems discovered in her past — Kamala Harris could not shoot back with some matching accusation against Gabbard
    (5) doesn’t look completely white
    (6) military officer, albeit not close to flag level, just a “working” officer now in reserves

    Most of the others are governors and senators; Gabbard is a mere congresswoman. Her accomplishments, objectively, are less.

    What she said last night about Trump betraying us and supporting al Qaida, I won’t give her the benefit of the doubt and will assume it was intentional.

    She needs to provide some pretty convincing documentation of that claim. Fast.

she blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from death row until the courts forced her to do so.

I’m not familiar with the details. Is this just the usual leftoid spin of something non-controversial, or was there real prosecutorial malfeasance involved? If it’s real, even the most slavishly unimaginative Dem voter will have to realize that we can’t have such a villain in the White House.

It is easy to forget, because she is never called upon except when strictly necessary, that Tulsi, as she is known in Hawaii, speaks in whole sentences and thinks in whole thoughts. Which is why one pundit last night said she was the only person on stage who came for a debate.

    artichoke in reply to puhiawa. | August 2, 2019 at 1:05 am

    I heard prepared speeches from “Tulsi”, whom I will call Gabbard consistently with using the last names of all candidates so as to be less personal and more professional.

    I didn’t hear any debate, any flexible response to others’ questions, because nobody asked her any questions to respond to. She had mostly prepared comments for the topics that came up, too.

Anyone thinking about voting for any of the Demoncrats is looking for their next welfare freebie (a.k.a., the Demoncrat plantation drug fix to buy a vote) and certifiably nuts. Gabbard claims she is the only Demoncrat qualified to be Commander in Chief. That claim is based on her Army Reserve status.

Publius_2020 | August 2, 2019 at 6:43 am

Next time, someone needs to hit Harris for shielding priests in San Francisco.

That should be the end of her.

The Democrats have collected all the money from their loon bird base and now they are taking a hard right to the center. Harris’ sole purpose in this campaign was to be loud and looney straw woman of color that the pre-selected Gabbard, dressed in white, could ride in to slay.

Warning – she’s a loyal prog. A female Obama. Trump better make people aware of it and fast. He’s wasted so much time. He should have seen this coming a mile away.

The democrats are nothing if not predictable.

    artichoke in reply to elle. | August 4, 2019 at 4:22 pm

    Gabbard is barely old enough for president and just a Congresswoman. Obama had been pre-selected long ago with his spooky non-past. Maybe Gabbard is more than a home-grown Hawaiian congressperson, but I have the impression she was selected, to whatever extent, lately when Hillary didn’t win. Maybe VERY late because Jussie Smollett looked to me like the anointed one, but his big star turn was revealed as a hoax and the Dems had to scramble.

    If Gabbard were really bright, we’d have seen some breakout smart-girl moments. This was just a prepared speech, and she gave too much of it by going after Trump at the end. I still really doubt she’s ready for prime time at a presidential level.

    But I agree, she should be forced to back up her indefensible comment about Trump supporting al Qaida. He should be able to show that’s the sort of naive comment of a well meaning but not very clueful member of the lower legislative body, far from readiness to run our foreign policy on the big stage.