How Kamala Harris Disarms Her Opponents on the Political Stage

Lawyers generally like to ask the questions, not answer them, and over the course of her political career on the national stage, Kamala Harris has been no exception.

During her four years in the Senate, Harris earned a reputation among Democrats as one of the sharpest and most effective questioners in high-profile hearings. She also showed off a few moves during the 2020 election cycle.

But her highest-stakes moment yet arrives on Tuesday night, when she goes head-to-head with Donald Trump in the first — and perhaps only — debate between the two candidates before Election Day.

Ahead of that widely anticipated event, we’re revisiting some key moments from Harris’ time in the Senate and on the debate stage to see how she has used her skills as a lawyer to control the room in big moments and to try to get a sense of how she may — or may not — be able to use those same tactics against Trump.

As these clips show, Harris generally excels at making clear and direct points using a professional and controlled tone, even when the underlying substance is dubious. She also tends to home in on narrow but evocative points that can resonate with the audience. Often, she manages to disarm her interlocutors and make them visibly — sometimes admittedly — nervous about responding to her.

The big question, of course, is how effective these particular skills will prove to be against Trump, particularly given the agreed-upon debate rules , which will give Harris much less leeway to tangle directly with her adversary. She will also have to adapt her style to deal with a man whose style — rambling and often incoherent — is almost diametrically opposed to her own.

1. Harris Questions Kavanaugh About the Mueller Probe

Harris drew praise for this exchange with Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings in 2018 about whether he had discussed special counsel Robert Mueller’s Trump-Russia investigation with anyone from a law firm that had worked for Trump. In the clip, Harris is firm, sly and insistent in her questioning — suggesting that she might have had evidence of a bombshell revelation that could derail the confirmation. Kavanaugh did himself no favors by fumbling through his response and appearing confused by fairly simple questions.

That was the good, but then there was the not-so-good. One problem with Harris’ line of questioning was that she slightly changed the wording over time, which made it harder for both Kavanaugh and viewers to follow.

The much bigger problem — fatal to any line of cross-examination — is that there was no payoff . Kavanaugh later clearly denied the suggestion that he had had some inappropriate discussion with a lawyer from the firm, and Harris herself eventually acknowledged that he had put the issue “to rest.”

All in all, the exchange was substantively vaporous, but Harris’ air of confidence did a great deal of work in drawing in onlookers and temporarily damaging Kavanaugh.

2. Harris Challenges Barr on His Decision Not to Prosecute Trump

Harris opened her exchange with Attorney General Bill Barr in classic cross-examination mode — with a direct, yes-or-no question about whether Trump or anyone at the White House had suggested that he investigate anyone. The question was not complicated, but Barr professed confusion, and Harris, banking the win, moved on. When Barr later tried to amend his answer, Harris maintained control of her time and cut him off.

In the remainder of the clip, Harris pressed Barr on whether he “personally” reviewed “all of the underlying evidence” before concluding that Trump should not be charged with obstruction of justice following Barr’s review of Mueller’s summary memo over the course of a single weekend.

Taken literally and on the merits, the line of questioning was not a particularly compelling one. It would be practically impossible and highly unusual for someone in Barr’s position to have reviewed all of the underlying evidence in a large, complex, multi-year investigation, particularly in a short period of time.

But for non-lawyers watching, Harris’ questioning underscored a broader and more politically evocative theme — that Barr had rushed to judgment in order to bail Trump out of a major political and legal scandal.

3. Harris Grills Sessions on His Congressional Testimony

Harris began her line of questioning with Attorney General Jeff Sessions with a common one for lawyers questioning an opposing witness in a trial or deposition: Did you use anything to refresh your memory before your testimony?

The goal in those more conventional settings is roughly two-fold — to further establish the witness’ base of knowledge (or lack thereof) and also to try to force the witness to produce the underlying material, even if it might otherwise have been protected by legal privileges.

In this instance, Harris managed to turn a fairly simple process question into an embarrassment for Sessions, who struggled to provide direct answers and — more importantly — to maintain his composure. “I’m not able to be rushed this fast,” he conceded. “It makes me nervous.”

Here too, form triumphed over substance. Harris did not get a commitment from Sessions to produce any new material to the committee, but the firm tone and brisk cadence of her questioning made Sessions look evasive and ill-equipped for the moment.

4. Harris Interrogates Haspel About CIA Interrogations

In this brief clip, Harris once again opened her line of inquiry with a direct, yes-or-no question to Gina Haspel, Trump’s nominee to lead the CIA: “Do you believe that [the CIA’s] previous interrogation techniques were immoral?”

That question had taken on considerable political significance at the time since there were serious concerns about whether Haspel had been involved in authorizing or overseeing harsh interrogation tactics during the George W. Bush administration that were tantamount to torture .

Unlike some of the other memorable moments in Harris’ time in the Senate, there was a clear, valid and unmistakable point: If Haspel could not clearly disavow those techniques, which had since been discarded, how could she be fit to lead the agency?

That point came through as Haspel appeared to feign confusion about the question and eventually avoided answering it altogether. Harris, however, effectively closed out the question without needlessly drawing out the exchange. She had made her point: “You’ve not answered the question, but I’m going to move on.”

5. Harris Skewers Biden During the 2020 Democratic Primaries

In what may be Harris’ most memorable TV moment to date, she took direct aim at Joe Biden — then her rival in the fight for the 2020 Democratic nomination. In a pointed line of questioning, she asked whether he regretted his opposition to federally mandated busing used to desegregate schools after the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education.

Several things stand out here. The first is Harris’ effective use of her apparent anger and indignation to drive the conversation forward and draw in the crowd while refusing to cede the point.

More significant, however, was Harris’ ability to weave her own personal story as a schoolchild at the time into a broader political argument and attack. In politics and the law, a compelling personal narrative can prove highly effective at persuasion, and Harris was clearly attuned to that fact.

Another plus for Harris in this exchange was that she provided legitimately new information to many viewers — both about Biden’s record on this point and her own experience at the time as a child.

Unfortunately for Harris, it is far from clear that the rules for Tuesday night’s debate with Trump will be conducive to another breakout moment like this.

Despite her campaign’s initial objection, it eventually agreed that each candidate’s microphone will be muted while the other speaks. There will also be no audience in the debate hall. Both conditions could make it much harder for Harris to attempt to disarm or attempt to interrogate Trump in similar fashion.

6. Harris Holds Firm Against Pence

Harris’ one-on-one debate with then-Vice President Mike Pence was not particularly memorable, but her response to Pence when he at one point interrupted her — “Mr. Vice President, I’m speaking” — stood out even then . Harris recently repurposed it on the 2024 campaign trail to similar acclaim among her supporters.

As the clip shows, Harris used variations on that response throughout the debate with Pence when she wanted to stop his interruptions, and it proved effective for several reasons. First, it was relatable: As anyone can attest, it is legitimately annoying when someone interrupts and tries to speak over you when it is your turn to speak. It’s a phenomenon that is far too familiar to women in the workplace.

Second, if you can effectively and politely brush back your interlocutor — as Harris did — it has the effect of making the other person look small, uncontrolled and defensive, perhaps even nervous.

And third, Harris projected confidence and composure in what could otherwise have been a challenging forum, going head-to-head with the sitting vice president despite her own limited experience as a federal politician at the time. Under the circumstances, what was essentially a draw for Harris in the debate proved to be a win for the campaign.

Vice presidential debates, however, are notoriously low-stakes affairs. And again, she may not be able to have such a back-and-forth with Trump if their mics are muted in between questions.

On Tuesday, when Harris takes on Trump, the country will get to see how she performs in the most challenging — and by far the most consequential — public outing of her lifetime.