How about the fact that she didn't even know the history of previous directors (e.g. the Director who resigned following the attempt on Reagan)? You'd think some staffer would have given her a little primer. Again. These people operate with impunity. They will never be held to account for anything no matter how massive the screw up. See exhibit A: Anthony Fauci, exhibit B: Deborah Birx.
Regardless of the politician, regardless of the party, and regardless of the crisis, making a trip to the site is usually little more than a photo op. A statement that they "care". And with filming and photos of the realities at the site, the politician can usually get an even better viewing of situation than the one or two staged photo op photoshoots provides. So even if Kamala did go to the border, it would have been a meaningless gesture of concern. What is more helpful would be an accurate assessment of the problems and issues by authorities, citizens, and victims on the ground. But "a man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest". (Simon & Garfunkel) And when maintaining an agenda is the priority, that's all that matters.
She never even went to the scene.
How about the fact that she didn't even know the history of previous directors (e.g. the Director who resigned following the attempt on Reagan)? You'd think some staffer would have given her a little primer. Again. These people operate with impunity. They will never be held to account for anything no matter how massive the screw up. See exhibit A: Anthony Fauci, exhibit B: Deborah Birx.
Someone needs to check her timeline about her career.
What year did she first retire from the Secret Service?
Was it the year Trump was elected?
What time frame did she work for Pepsi?
What year did she leave Pepsi and go back into government service?
Was it when Joe Biden stole the election?
LIKE
well Harris never went to border, yet she was the "border czar". Why do they need to go? Their actions and answers will be the same
Regardless of the politician, regardless of the party, and regardless of the crisis, making a trip to the site is usually little more than a photo op. A statement that they "care". And with filming and photos of the realities at the site, the politician can usually get an even better viewing of situation than the one or two staged photo op photoshoots provides. So even if Kamala did go to the border, it would have been a meaningless gesture of concern. What is more helpful would be an accurate assessment of the problems and issues by authorities, citizens, and victims on the ground. But "a man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest". (Simon & Garfunkel) And when maintaining an agenda is the priority, that's all that matters.
Like I said, the answers will be the same whether they go or not