What happened Wednesday night to Kamala Harris on Fox News may have been the equivalent to what happened to President Joe Biden at that infamous debate in June — irreparably exposed her as unacceptable to voters.

In what was widely seen as a Hail Mary move by Kamala’s campaign, the vice president agreed to an extended interview on Fox News, one of the exceedingly few national TV interviews she’s done since she was anointed the Democrat Party’s post-Biden nominee. Remarkably, she offered nothing new in terms of her weak, often confusing answers to obvious questions, but she did finally face probing lines of inquiry and necessary follow-up when time after time she attempted to change the subject from her performance in the White House to attacks on Donald Trump.

The entire interview was tense, an obvious effort by Brett Baier to wring direct answers out of Kamala on questions that for months she has responded to with professions of her “middle-class family,” and her delight in the “ambitions,” “dreams” and “aspirations” of Americans. She was visibly upset and exasperated by the countless interruptions and redirections, but only because until then she had faced none.

The most plain and self-evident questions a person would have for Kamala are why she’s campaigning as though she’s not currently in the White House; how her administration would be recognizably different from the one in which she serves right now; and when did she decide to take the exact opposite position on several major policy

After twice being pressed to do so in a Wednesday interview, Vice President Kamala Harris only sort of apologized to the families of victims killed by illegal immigrants let into the U.S. by the Biden-Harris administration — and immediately followed the apology with “but…” before launching into tired talking points about Donald Trump.

The moment came during the Democrat nominee’s “Special Report” interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier. After naming U.S. citizens who were allegedly “brutally assaulted and killed” by illegal aliens released by the administration into American communities, the network host asked Harris if she owes the families of these Americans “an apology.”

Baier specifically cited remarks issued by Bill Clinton earlier this week, in which the former president admitted that Laken Riley, a 22-year-old University of Georgia nursing student allegedly murdered by an illegal alien earlier this year, would still be alive had Biden-Harris properly vetted foreign nationals entering America.

While acknowledging there’s “no question” those deaths are “tragic cases,” Harris initially declined to issue an apology to the aforementioned families. Instead, she deflected by hyping a congressional bill introduced earlier this year that would have enshrined the ongoing border invasion into law.

“I can’t imagine the pain that the families of those victims have experienced for losses [that] should not have occurred,” Harris said. “So, that is true. It is also true that if a border security [bill] had actually been passed nine months ago … that [would have ensured] that no future harm would occur.”

Baier pressed

The State Election Board (SEB) passed a rule last month that sought to ensure the number of physical ballots counted matches the Election Day machine count total at the precinct level. But after Democrats launched a lawfare campaign, a Georgia judge blocked the rule on Tuesday despite acknowledging it would simply provide “confirmation that the machine counts match reality.”

Rule 183-1-12-.12 (a)(5) stated that “three sworn precinct poll officers” shall count by hand the “number of ballots removed from the scanner … until all of the ballots have been counted separately by each of the three poll officers.” If the machine count total does not match the hand count total, “the poll manager shall immediately determine the reason for the inconsistency; correct the inconsistency, if possible; and fully document the inconsistency or problem along with any corrective measures taken.”

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney himself acknowledged the rule “may be” “smart election policy,” but that “the timing of its passage make[s] implementation now quite wrong.”

“On paper, the Hand Count Rule — if properly promulgated — appears consistent with the SEB’s mission of ensuring fair, legal, and orderly elections. It is, at base, simply a check of ballot counts, a human eyeball confirmation that the machine counts match reality,” McBurney ruled.

But the judge blocked the rule from going into effect in his Tuesday decision, arguing the rule comes too close to an election and there is not enough time to properly train election workers.

The hand count rule was one