Staff Reports
Vice President Kamala Harris has decided to pull a classic political stunt worthy of a soap opera by using an unfounded narrative from The Atlantic to lash out at former President Donald Trump. The spectacle came courtesy of Jeffrey Goldberg, a writer known for his fondness for Trump-bashing, who spun a yarn about Trump allegedly praising Adolf Hitler. This particular hatchet job relied on the word of two anonymous sources, making it about as solid as a house of cards in a windstorm. Of course, this “exclusive” came at a time when the establishment media seemed ready to bail Harris out after a series of unfavorable headlines following Trump’s successful campaign blitz.
As if on cue, the Trump campaign quickly dismissed the claims, insisting that there has never been any praise for Hitler from their candidate—just another day in the world of political tampering. Critics have speculated that this flimsy article was meticulously crafted to manipulate the media narrative and provide a boost to Harris, who has been struggling to secure a foothold in the polls. That her team would resort to such shameless tactics does nothing to bolster confidence in her campaign, and quite frankly, raises more questions about her judgment.
The Atlantic story is a psy-op. Its immediate purpose was to get the corporate press and the Harris campaign to repeat the lie at the heart of the story, to treat it as fact. Mission accomplished. But its ultimate purpose is to justify the rejection of a Trump electoral victory. https://t.co/BtCysYWJ16
— John Daniel Davidson (@johnddavidson) October 23, 2024
Despite the lack of substantial evidence, Harris sought to weave this nonsensical narrative into her campaign’s closing argument, alleging that Trump is “unhinged,” “unstable,” and ultimately unfit for the presidency. The impression left is that the Vice President’s only strategy involves throwing mud and hoping some of it sticks. One has to wonder if this is more a reflection of her weak candidacy rather than a well-thought-out political strategy.
In her very own melodrama, Harris pointed out how “deeply troubling” it is that Trump would invoke a historical figure associated with immense tragedy. Yet, her emphasis on portraying Trump as a destitute madman feels more like a distraction. With growing evidence showing persistent flaws within her campaign, Harris tries to reframe the dialogue while the spotlight flickers on her own mishaps. The public is left to wonder if this approach could backfire spectacularly, as it often does when politicians choose slander over substance.
Interestingly enough, the Atlantic’s piece has also hit the headlines for misrepresenting facts about Mayra Guillen, the sister of fallen U.S. Army soldier Vanessa Guillen, who accused Trump of exhibiting less-than-ideal behavior over funeral costs. This just adds another layer of irony to the entire debacle—the media’s relentless pursuit of a narrative that lacks credible grounding. The bottom line remains that as Harris looks to deflect attention from her own political shortcomings, the American public is left sifting through a quagmire of misrepresentation where truth ultimately takes the backseat.
