It was a gamble for Kamala Harris to agree to this interview – Fox News is the place where no Democrat likes to go.
But in an election so unbelievably close, and with less than three weeks to go, she knew it was a gamble she needed to take.
She needs to reach a new audience. There are undecideds out there. They will decide this election.
Many are staunch Republicans who can’t stomach Donald Trump. Fox News is where she will find many of them.
Was it worth it? Did it pay off?
It was combative for sure. The interviewer, veteran Fox host Bret Baier, gave her a hard time; the sort of grilling she has consistently avoided through this campaign.
And at times you could see why. She was not agile in her answers. She was evasive. She did not articulate clear policy that will improve Americans lives. She deflected to Trump.
More on Kamala Harris
Related Topics:
Image: There are less than three weeks to go until the election, and polls are tight. Pics: AP
Immigration was a dominant focus; the chaos that’s worsened on the southern border through her time as vice president.
Harris dodged a direct question on how many undocumented migrants had entered America.
Advertisement
She had no decent answer when asked about the three young women murdered by undocumented migrants over the last few years.
She could have seen this coming- apparently she didn’t.
There were moments where Harris looked like she knew it wasn’t going well. She lost her temper a few times. That reflected discomfort at the questions, but also allowed her to show her spikiness.
She stood up to many of Baier’s tough questions, often deflecting, yes, but with answers as combative as the lines thrown at her.
To the Fox viewer who’s heard she isn’t tough – she might have surprised. Her prosecutorial side came through, and remember, many of Fox News’ audience won’t have seen her perform like this.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
13:47
Will religion impact the US vote?
However, her defence of her record at the heart of the incumbent administration was tricky for her.
She was rattled and deflected – throwing it back on Trump.
“More than 70% of people think the country is on the wrong track,” Baier put to her.
“Why are they saying that if you are turning the page? You have been in office for three and a half years.”
Picking up on his sentence, Harris said: “And Donald Trump has been running for office since…”
Baier interrupted her: “I don’t know what you are talking about.”
She replied: “What I am talking about is that over the last decade… it is clear to me, and certainly the Republicans who are on stage with me, the former chief of staff to the president Donald Trump, former defence secretaries, national security advisor, and his vice president warn that he is unfit to serve, that he is unstable, that he is dangerous”.
“If that’s the case,” Baier interjected, “why is half the country supporting him? Why is he beating you in a lot of swing states? Why, if he’s as bad as you say, that half of this country is now supporting this person who could be the 47th president of the United States? Why is that happening?”
“This is an election for president of the United States. It’s not supposed to be easy.” Harris replied.
Her unwillingness to distance herself from President Biden partly reflects her lack of agility, but is also partly because she believes admitting faults would be damaging (I don’t think it would at this stage) – as well as the fact that she is proud of core Biden achievements.
Under the Biden-Harris presidency, inflation is down, unemployment is down, crime is down, record legislation has been passed.
That’s the Biden legacy she naturally wants to attach herself to.
Image: Kamala Harris was unwilling to distance herself from President Biden. Pic: AP
Her deflections to Trump exposed insecurity of her own track record but also allowed her to warn of the dangers she sees in Trump.
This was interesting and reflects an urgent shift in strategy by the Democrats.
When she became the candidate, she moved away from Biden’s looped warnings about Trump being a “threat to democracy”. Instead, with her, it was all about “joy” and the future.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Now, with less than three weeks to go and the polls so tight, she has pivoted back to the core of Biden’s “Trump’s a grave danger” argument.
The net outcome of this interview? Anyone she pulls in from the Fox News demographic is a win for her. She may have pulled some with her tough combative style.
But against that, her answers on immigration and her record as vice president will have cemented some other Fox News waverers to Trump.
The trial of a dentist accused of murdering his wife by poisoning her protein shakes has begun in the US state of Colorado.
James Craig denies using cyanide and tetrahydrozoline, an ingredient in over-the-counter eye drops, to kill Angela Craig in a suburb of Denver.
During the trial’s opening statements on Tuesday, prosecutors claimed the 47-year-old was having an affair with another dentist, had financial difficulties and may have been motivated by the payout from his wife’s life insurance.
Image: Angela and James Craig with their six children. Pic: NBC
Assistant District Attorney Ryan Brackley told the jury at Arapahoe District Court that the 43-year-old victim – who had six children with her husband – had been suffering worsening symptoms including dizziness, vomiting and fainting.
She died in March 2023 during her third trip to the hospital that month.
Mr Brackley accused Craig of poisoning her protein shakes – then giving his wife a final dose of poison while she was in hospital, and said: “He went in that [hospital] room to murder her, to deliberately and intentionally end her life with a fatal dose of cyanide … She spends the next three days dying.”
Craig, who shook his head at times during the prosecution’s opening statement, has pleaded not guilty to several charges, including first-degree murder, solicitation to commit murder and solicitation to commit perjury.
More on Colorado
Related Topics:
Prosecutors said Craig had tried to make it appear his wife of 23 years had killed herself. His internet history showed he had searched for “how to make a murder look like a heart attack” and “is arsenic detectable in an autopsy”.
In an argument, captured on home surveillance video, his wife also accused him of suggesting to hospital staff that she was suicidal.
Image: Ryan Brackley claimed James Craig administered poison to his wife while she was in hospital. Pic: Denver Gazette/ AP
After Craig’s arrest in 2023, prosecutors alleged that he had offered a fellow prison inmate $20,000 (£14,993) to kill the case’s lead investigator and offered someone else $20,000 to find people to falsely testify that Angela Craig planned to die by suicide.
Craig’s attorney, Ashley Whitham, told the jury to consider the credibility of those witnesses, calling some “jailhouse snitches”.
Ms Whitham argued that the evidence didn’t show that he poisoned her, instead seeming to suggest she may have taken her own life.
Image: Ashley Whitham, defending Craig, argued that the evidence didn’t show that he poisoned his wife. Pic: Denver Gazette/AP
She described Angela Craig as “broken”, partly by Craig’s infidelity and her desire to stay married, since they were part of The Church of Jesus Christ and Latter-day Saints.
Hospital staff had said Craig had been caring and “doting” while Angela Craig was in the hospital, said Whitham.
Follow The World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
The defence argued prosecutors had overdramatised Craig’s financial problems and dismissed the prosecution’s suggestion that Craig was motivated to kill because of an affair he was having with a fellow dentist from Texas.
“That’s simply not the case,” Whitham said, adding that Craig had many affairs over the years that his wife knew about. “He was candid with Angela that he had been cheating.”
Mr Trump is expected to travel to Scotland in the coming weeks to visit his golf courses ahead of an official state visit in September.
“We’re going to be meeting with the British prime minister, very respectful, and we are going to have a meeting with him, probably in Aberdeen, and we’re going to do a lot of different things.
“We’re going to also refine the trade deal that we’ve made.
“So we’ll be meeting mostly […] at probably one of my properties, or maybe not, depending on what happens, but we’ll be in Aberdeen, in Scotland, meeting with the prime minister.”
Image: Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House. Pic: Reuters
The UK and US signed a trade deal earlier this year that reduced car and aerospace tariffs, but questions have remained about a promise from Washington to slash steel tariffs.
In May, the White House said it would exempt the UK from plans for a 25% tariff on global steel imports but that is yet to be ratified and the levy has since been doubled on all other countries.
Mr Trump had insisted that unless Britain could finalise the details of a metals trade deal with the US by 9 July, when wider “Liberation Day” tariff pauses were expected to expire, he would slap the UK with a 50% rate as well.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who will be positively impacted by the UK-US trade deal?
However that pause was extended until 1 August, with the US president saying nations would instead get letters informing them of his plans.
Downing Street is still hoping it can secure 0% tariffs on steel.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
On Tuesday, a Downing Street spokesperson played down the significance of the meeting in Scotland, stressing it was a private trip so it “will not be a formal bilateral”.
Since taking office in January, Mr Trump has imposed tariffs on countries across the world in a bid to boost domestic production and address trade deficits.
As well as sector specific tariffs, there is a baseline tariff of 10% for most other imports, though some countries face higher rates.
The UK was the first to hash out a deal on exemptions after a successful charm offensive by Sir Keir.
Mr Trump has praised the PM, telling the BBC earlier on Tuesday: “I really like the prime minister a lot, even though he’s a liberal.”
There are also plans for Scottish First Minister John Swinney to meet Mr Trump during his trip.
It will be followed by the official state visit between 17-19 September, when Mr Trump will be hosted by the King and Queen at Windsor Castle and accompanied by his wife Melania.
It will be Mr Trump’s second state visit to the UK, having previously been hosted during his first term in 2019.
Donald Trump has agreed to send “top of the line weapons” to NATO to support Ukraine – and threatened Russia with “severe” tariffs if it doesn’t agree to end the war.
Speaking with NATO secretary-general Mark Rutte during a meeting at the White House, the US president said: “We’ve made a deal today where we are going to be sending them weapons, and they’re going to be paying for them.
“This is billions of dollars worth of military equipment which is going to be purchased from the United States, going to NATO, and that’s going to be quickly distributed to the battlefield.”
Weapons being sent include surface-to-air Patriot missile systems and batteries, which Ukrainehas asked for to defend itself from Russian air strikes.
Mr Trump also said he was “very unhappy” with Russia, and threatened “severe tariffs” of “about 100%” if there isn’t a deal to end the war in Ukraine within 50 days.
The White House added that the US would put “secondary sanctions” on countries that buy oil from Russia if an agreement was not reached.
Later on Monday, Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy thanked Mr Trump and said he was “grateful” for the US president’s “readiness to help protect our people’s lives”.
Analysis: Will Trump’s shift in tone make a difference?
As ever, there is confusion and key questions are left unanswered, but Donald Trump’s announcement on Ukraine and Russia today remains hugely significant.
His shift in tone and policy on Ukraine is stark. And his shift in tone (and perhaps policy) on Russia is huge.
After criticising Vladimir Putin’s “desire to drag it out”, he said he appreciated “preparing a new decision on Patriots for Ukraine” – and added Kyiv is “working on major defence agreements with America”.
It comes after weeks of frustration from Mr Trump over Mr Putin’s refusal to agree to an end to the conflict, with the Russian leader telling the US president he would “not back down”from Moscow’s goals in Ukraine at the start of the month.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:28
Trump threatens Russia with ‘severe’ tariffs’
During the briefing on Monday, Mr Trump said he had held calls with Mr Putin where he would think “that was a nice phone call”, but then “missiles are launched into Kyiv or some other city, and that happens three or four times”.
“I don’t want to say he’s an assassin, but he’s a tough guy,” he added.
After Mr Trump’s briefing, Russian senator Konstantin Kosachev said on Telegram: “If this is all that Trump had in mind to say about Ukraine today, then all the steam has gone out.”
Meanwhile, Mr Zelenskyy met with US special envoy Keith Kellogg in Kyiv, where they “discussed the path to peace” by “strengthening Ukraine’s air defence, joint production, and procurement of defence weapons in collaboration with Europe”.
He thanked both the envoy for the visit and Mr Trump “for the important signals of support and the positive decisions for both our countries”.