I’ve often assumed Harris didn’t want to insult her boss by going against him, because I got the impression she was planning to give Netanyahu what for once she took over - especially with him escalating things further and further. Did anyone else get that vibe, or was it just wishful thinking on my part?
Yes. It’s a bit like interviewing for your boss’s job while your boss still signs your checks. Your boss can still fire you or make your life miserable if you openly trash the job (s)he’s doing.
People don’t seem to understand that when you sign on to be someone’s VP you sign on to support everything they do in public, even if you offer different advice in private. She’s simply not in a position to call the shots, even if she thinks her boss is stupid. I have total confidence that in-office Harris would have made different decisions than on-campaign Harris.
Alaska.
Edit: Not to mention the fact that public statements by the VP that directly contradict the President could present very real national security risks and seriously undermine foreign policy and diplomacy.
Once she was selected as the nominee she could have said anything she wanted. She’s only VP for a few more months.
Not as a representative of the US government receiving classified information, no. That’s absolutely not how this works.
Are you suggesting that its illegal for the VP to publicly disagree with the President?
It’s total bullshit
When Obama drew a line in the sand on Israel/Palestine, Biden publicly and repeatedly told any journalist who would listen that the only way to deal with Israel is give them everything they want.
If Kamala can’t do it now, Biden couldn’t have done it then.
Instead he got rewarded with the party backing another presidential run despite him always performing terribly.
It sure as shit looks like it helped his career when he disagreed with the president as a VP
But “moderates” will always bend over backwards to defend pulling the party right when anyone left of Richard Nixon tries to move the Overton window suddenly it’s the end of the world.
There’s no logical consistency to it, just saying what makes them sound right in the moment.
In a way that could jeopardize ongoing negotiations? Very well might be. Or at a minimum could actively undermine arguments being made by the State Department so that they lose their leverage.
By that logic any presidential candidate would be banned from disagreeing with the president on active foreign policy issues which is absolutely not true. There’s no legal reason why the VP can’t disagree with the president.
Any Presidential candidate in the current administration. Why do y’all keep skipping over that part?
Because your explanation didn’t demonstrate why that matters. Any candidate’s position can jeopardize ongoing negotiations if its contrary to the current admin.
The VP is very much at liberty to sabotage the current admin. There’s illegal ways to do it sure. Like if Harris said “Bibi openly admitted on a confidential line that he’s doing genocide.” That might be illegal because it was confidential. But she could say “I think Bibi is doing genocide. Biden doesn’t, but I think he’s wrong”. That wouldn’t violate any laws, even if it did effect negotiations. Remember the VP is an elected position, not a cabinet member. The president can’t fire them.
If you’re just speculating then its baseless speculation. You might be right, but you’ll have to point to an actual law to prove your point.
No, the position of a sitting Congressperson is irrelevant to negotiations that are ongoing between the President and another country. The VP is literally the President’s surrogate, acting on his behalf and as a member of the National Security Council. That cannot be said about literally anyone else, at least as it pertains to foreign diplomacy. I’d even go so far as to state that the Secretary of State would have the same troubles articulating a vision distinct from the President under which (s)he’s actively serving.
Which is what I said.
Which is also what I said.
So…I guess…glad we agree?
Edit: In foreign relations, at the will and as the representative of the President, the Vice President may engage in activities ranging into the highest levels of diplomacy and negotiation and may do so anywhere in the world.
Negotiations. Ha.
Biden wasn’t negotiating shit.
She literally can. There’s absolutely nothing preventing any member of the government from lying for any reason, no matter what, unless they’re on the stand. Campaigning is not a court room.
she receives classified info because she’s the backup in case the president dies, not because Biden allows it or controls it. You are simply making stuff up and dont understand the role of VP at all.
Tell the DoJ they’re wrong then:
In foreign relations, at the will and as the representative of the President, the Vice President may engage in activities ranging into the highest levels of diplomacy and negotiation and may do so anywhere in the world.
Yeah, but her boss is Biden…
The worst that would happen is some journalist reports he mumbled something under his breathe.
If he wouldn’t do more about Bibi and Republicans, why would he do more if he didn’t like what Kamala said?
The State Department could step in with Biden and order her to stop as a member of the administration and one of the President’s official foreign policy representatives.
I seriously wonder where y’all come up with the notion that the Vice President can simply tell the President of the United States to go fuck himself. Obviously none of you served in the military.
Edit: More knee-jerk insta-downvotes from givesomefucks. I’m constantly reminded not to even try.
Blinken?!
Next you’ll say Garland is going to finally do something lol
She can disagree with him on policy.
It’s not normal but Biden literally did it with Obama about Israel’s abuse of the Palestinian people.
How would this be any different?
You’re getting downvoted because your understanding of the government is just made up. The vice president is an elected position, not an employee of Biden and not under some legal obligation to not contradict him. Until the Twelfth Amendment the vice president was just the person who got the second-most votes, often an actual opponent of the president.
Horseshit. The VP is chosen by the Presidential candidate to serve on his ticket, and does not run independently and so is not directly elected. They are indirectly elected. They can’t be fired, but they also can’t just go their own way, consequences be damned, because they are an official “representative of the President” of the United States.
JFC, don’t posture like this when you’re just guessing about how things work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
It’s two separate votes. Presidents and vice-presidents running as a combined ticket is custom, but the vote in the electoral college is separate votes and doesn’t need to conform to the wishes of the president, and both the president and vice president are elected positions.
https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/15407/can-the-vice-president-of-the-united-states-be-fired
And to respond to your edit, you’ll note how that says “outside of those enumerated in the Constitution”. The VP just does senate stuff and succeeds the president if needed, but the president can give them other tasks to perform, just like they can give any random person in their administration. Those are at the discretion of the president, not the vice president’s position.
They’re just making excuses because they were happy with how Harris didn’t change on Gaza.