Straight Talk: Kamala's First Solo Post-Biden Interview

From the Daily Tech News Thread this morning:

Now that's what America needs to see more, the Real Kamala. She can't handle friendly questioning, she certainly can't handle adversarial questioning. Posted by: San Franpsycho at September 14, 2024

***
I laughed at her answer to "how would you reduce prices?"

Laughter aside, it is amazing this is her first solo interview since deposing Biden

Collin Rugg:

NEW: The Trump campaign has shared Kamala Harris' entire interview that was released today, saying their "newest ad just dropped."

Brutal.

In the interview, Harris gave confusing answers to a variety of questions:

Gun Control: Harris says she *does* think America needs an "assault weapons" ban despite saying during the debate that Trump was lying when he said she wanted to ban guns.

Economy: Harris responded to a question about bringing down prices by talking about how she was raised in the middle class.

Harris on Unity: Harris said she is the unity candidate and then cited her endorsement of Dick Cheney. She said Trump is the only one who "points fingers."

From the thread:

MUST WATCH!!: Active duty military IN A WAR ZONE are SHOCKED to hear VP Kamala Harris claim they’re NOT in a war zone! One soldier asks, “Where the F*** are we right now?”

Does anything stand out to you from her interview?

Yesterday, Matthew Continetti wrote that practically everybody connected to Washington thought that Kamala had won the debate. But maybe not everybody outside the beltway.

For my sins, I read the transcript of the debate after watching it live. Harris didn't answer a single question the moderators asked her, no matter the subject. Are Americans better off than four years ago? Why did the Biden-Harris administration wait three and a half years to address the border crisis? Why exactly has Harris junked her socialist policies from four years ago? Does she support a single restriction on abortion? OK, Trump asked the last one. The ABC anchors didn't follow up.

This is The Atlantic's cover for October.

Some of the thoughts Walter Kirn had. There are others in the twitter thread.

So Trump is winning, you're telling us

And he's probably unstoppable, as there is no visible opposing force

And the parted waters before him mean heaven is with him?

And the light is set to break through when he arrives?

Iconography

The Atlantic initially said that this cover may have been the first in its history to be published without a headline or typography. After criticism for their laziness in failing to look through their archives, this is what it says now:

On the cover: The illustrator Justin Metz borrowed the visual language of old Ray Bradbury and Stephen King paperbacks to portray a circus wagon on its ominous approach to a defiled Capitol. Something Wicked This Way Comes, Bradbury’s 1962 masterpiece, was a particular inspiration. Over the course of The Atlantic's 167-year history, only very rarely have we published a cover without a headline or typography.

Do they think Trump is unstoppable even though they hate him?

Mischief is important.

I'm moving the update on last week's thread up a little higher, because nobody ever asks Kamala about free speech or related topics. Also, Eric Weinstein, no fan of Trump, thinks that Kamala's cackling, talking to people like they are in kindergarten, etc. have been affectations to keep people from focusing on Kamala's true positions and danger (as a Marxist, basically). Notice that those have decreased recently? How about the regional accents?

Last week's thread, September 7, The "rules-based international order" vs. free speech?

Comments are closed so you won't ban yourself by trying to comment on a week-old thread. But don't try it anyway.

Update:

Stacy McCain also posted a piece on that three-and-a-half hour Chris Williamson interview of Eric Weinstein last Saturday. It came up in his Google algorithm.

He includes a link on the Weinstein family history of "Rebellion against the Empire of Woke". Plus a 10-minute clip about Big Tech trying to influence the 2024 presidential election. Google gets special attention. This is the same Google whose algorithm recommended the interview to McCain. Hmmmm.

Chris Williamson's opening statistics and commentary for this segment (leading to further conversation) are quite striking, and critical of Google.

In this clip, Weinstein also discusses control of the media "You're in the magic show, baby" (7 minutes) and says that "responsible conspiracy theorizing is very much an adult activity". You'll have to watch it yourself for the details.

This is a different clip than the 16-minute clip I posted last week, introducing the topic of the "rules-based international order", which Weinstein seems to revisit below.

Monday before the debate, Eric Weinstein spoke at length with Piers Morgan. Kamala has become a meme of a meme of a meme.

Tuesday, before the debate:

Eric Weinstein with some further details:

A lot of Kamala supporting skeptics are asking me what I mean by “Donald Trump may not be allowed to become president again” in 2024

I think I am going to use this opportunity to show you why many sceptics, debunkers and educated people who reflexively and derisively target others as conspiracy theorists, are rapidly losing *everyone* smart and independent. Here goes:

I am suggesting that the 2024 election may be “Saved”. I am suggesting that our U.S. democracy may be “Fortified” between now and November. That right now there is a “conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes”. I am suggesting that Americans may be saved from “Russian electoral interference” by an “informal alliance” involving tech “business titans”.

I am suggesting that the possibility of “a vast, cross-partisan campaign” representing an “an extraordinary shadow effort” hidden, against all odds, from public view by complicict journalists who make sure not to write stories about it and editors who spike any remaining stories that mention it until after the election.

In short I am suggesting that there is right now a massive “conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes”. That “shadow campaigners” are secretly engaged in work that has “touched every aspect of the election” despite the lack of any stories from complicit mainstream news desks.

So what has all this to do with the army of insufferable character-assassins clothed as skeptics who laugh and laugh and laugh at conspiracy theorists?

Well, the conspirators confessed to the above after the 2020 election cycle. That is, it is those actually running cover for conspiracies that most aggressively label and smear those trying to piece together the shadow efforts as “conspiracy theorists”. Imagine a world so perverse where *correctly* labeling an actual conspirator is turned into an act of reputational self destruction even though the conspirators will later confess and brag about the whole thing while taking open victory laps.

Genius no? Diabolical genius, is still genius.

If that sounds far fetched, pathological, improbable, and diabolical to you, welcome to the club. It does to me too. But THAT *IS* WHAT HAPPENED exactly back in 2020.

The conspirators still aren’t really telling the truth. But what they *admit* to while bragging and taking victory laps is jaw dropping all the same.

Don’t believe it? Read the confession

Music

Jay and the Americans: Walkin' in the Rain

Hope you have something nice planned for this weekend.

This is the Thread before the Gardening Thread.

posted by K.T. at 11:17 AM

| Access Comments