Sen. Kamala Harris was interrupted, told to be ‘courteous’ during Senate hearing

Human Rights Campaign Los Angeles Gala Dinner

I know everyone is focused on James Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, which happens in just a few hours, but we need to take a moment to talk about yesterday’s Senate Intelligence Committee hearing. The committee heard testimony from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, as well as NSA Director Michael Rogers and Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats. And when I say “heard testimony,” I mean that Rosenstein, Coats and Rogers were all like “no comment” and “no comprende.” That kind of prickly stonewalling is usually reserved for airline CEOs testifying before Congress.

The idea behind the questioning was to ask these men directly if the multiple reports are true, that Donald Trump has tried to influence their investigations, whether they feel they can investigate freely, and whether Trump is currently obstructing justice, basically. None of them answered those questions. But a curious exchange did happen between senators. Kamala Harris, the new senator from California and one of only three women on the committee, was questioning Rod Rosenstein about where Independent Counsel Robert Mueller would have “full independence.” Harris is a lawyer, a former district attorney, and she knows how to f–king cross-examine someone. Except that she’s also a woman (not to mention the only woman of color on the committee), so she was interrupted by the committee chairman Richard Burr, shushed, told to be “courteous” and then kneecapped by the chairman.

This was awful of Senator Burr. This is yet another example of Senatoring While Female: Nevertheless, She Persisted.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

52 Responses to “Sen. Kamala Harris was interrupted, told to be ‘courteous’ during Senate hearing”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Alex says:

    When a white man cannot handle a strong black woman. Par for the course. Her colleague asked the same questions and was allowed to continue just like Warren. Why allow female senators if you’re just going to silence them? Men really are so damn fragile
    Also of course it was someone named Burr *rolls eyes*

    • anon says:

      She’s Indian too and was brought up by her Indan mother, when her black father left them. So, why do you call her black and deny her Indianness? I’m Indian and it makes me angry, to deny someone’s heritage and it’s inevitably the mom’s heritage.

  2. Aiobhan Targaryen says:

    Old White Man from the South acting like an Old White Man from the South. No Surprises here. He is trying to stonewall these hearings like all Rethugs and he got what he wanted.

    Rod’s condescending look and response was no better. Or that could just be his resting face.

  3. SusanneToo says:

    There seems to be a pattern to these “Play nice” interruptions. I bet little Richard Burr had a playhouse with a sign nailed on the door, No Gurls Allowed!

  4. Feedmechips says:

    As an attorney, this rings similar to the reaction I get from so many judges during my hearings. It’s still a good ol boys club.

  5. April says:

    She is constantly interrupting others. If she doesn’t like the answer, she interrupts and repeats it again and again.

    • FLORC says:

      Ok a few things…
      She wasn’t interrupting because she didn’t like his answer. He wasn’t answering. So, she restated the key parts. It was a yes or no question. When you don’t answer yes or no, but instead, start speaking at length it’s to conceal and dodge.

      And this tactic of restating questions… It’s all the time. Worse, it’s mixed in with shouting and angry interruptions by so many male committee members when speaking to women. Never the reverse that I’ve seen. And they don’t get called out. Told to be courteous.

      What Harris did was not let him have any slack to weasel and avoid the question which was very clear.

      • third ginger says:

        And “ladies” should never do that!! [As they told us when I was a girl in the 60’s] Carry on, Senator!!

      • Ramona says:

        “When you don’t answer yes or no, but instead, start speaking at length it’s to conceal and dodge.”

        And run out the clock. She has just five minutes and by giving a long windy non answer he can avoid further interrogation from her and have the next friendly Senator pick it up and guide his answer.

      • FLORC says:

        Yes run out the clock also. And by the interruption of the other committee member the door was opened to change direction of his answer. Then he, instead of answering the question, spoke of how he could go at length because he knows so much… but wont…. but needed to tell us he could… eating time.

        Seriously.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        She’s been a career prosecutor and Attorney General of California. She’s had experience with witnesses who refuse to answer the question before! She’s led massive investigations. She knows what she’s doing.

        I’m so tired of competent and experienced women being talked down to.

      • Really? says:

        Burr should really learn some manners for someone from the South. He was interrupting a woman when she had the floor. She had a limited amount of time to ask her questions, and Burr took time from her questioning by interrupting.

    • Beth says:

      That is impolite and not professional to be like that unless there’s a reason. Trump was always interrupting during debates and it drove me and everyone else crazy

    • lightpurple says:

      Hi, Senator Burr!

    • Nic919 says:

      You clearly aren’t a lawyer and have no idea what you are talking about. It’s not about being polite or interrupting but trying to get a real answer from someone who is stonewalling. Cross examination techniques 101. This isn’t a tea party but a hearing to get at the truth about foreign interference in an election and the Cheeto administration’s efforts to hide their corruption.

      But troll on, although the smart celebitchies here will see through your garbage.

      • swak says:

        Also, all she wanted was a Yes or No answer to the question and they were deflecting. When I ask my grandchildren a question that requires a Yes or No and they start in on a long explanation, I stop them and say, “I need a yes or no, not a long story”.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “It’s not about being polite or interrupting but trying to get a real answer from someone who is stonewalling. Cross examination techniques 101.”

        Exactly. Kamala has so much experience as a prosecutor. She worked her way up over many years, was the District Attorney for San Francisco before being Attorney General for California. She has incredible knowledge AND experience. She knows how to legal proceedings work.

      • CynicalAnn says:

        You’re right. Harris is a very experienced attorney-it’s not her job to be “polite” it’s her job to get answers for our country!

  6. anniefannie says:

    Watched this live and she was Boss! Harris handled being chastised w/grace but it was clear she scoring while Rosenstein was filibustering. It was maddening to watch. It appeared to me the panel was exerting executive privilege while never acknowledging it.

  7. No name says:

    I’m a lawyer, I’m a woman, and I’m a liberal. That being said, I’m not sure why Rosenstein was cross examined about whether Robert Mueller would truly be independent of the Justice Department and whether he’d be allowed to bring forth indictments. He appointed Mueller for a REASON. Robert Mueller is by the book, very well respected and if something illegal happened he will root it out. Rosenstein is a lawyer, he’s bound by the same ethics as I am and I’m not going to automatically assume he’s up to no good because he happens to be the AG of the Russia investigation under a Republican administration. Plus, Harris was talking about why he didn’t appoint an independent counsel instead of a special counsel when Congress voted out the appointments of independent counsels in 1999!!! How the f*ck was he supposed to appoint an independent counsel when there’s no such thing? Let’s try to be objective for a second here.

    • anniefannie says:

      Its my understanding she was requesting that Muller have not limited independence but total independence from the AG’s office AND she cited a letter written by the former AG’s office written to Fitzpatrick during the Valerie Plame investigation granting it, so there’s precedence to back her up!

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Yes. She was wondering if they were going to grant similar independence as was granted in a previous investigation.

    • Nic919 says:

      It’s no reason to be shushed. Rosenstein is a lawyer and a big boy and could have provided those answers instead of Burr shushing her. She wasn’t going after an untrained self rep but the deputy AG.

    • Odette says:

      “I’m a lawyer, I’m a woman, and I’m a liberal.” Are you black? Is it possible that even though you’re a liberal, female lawyer, you could actually harbor some prejudice towards black people? Because, come on….a white man wouldn’t have been hushed like this; and I’d venture to say that neither would a white woman. Because it seems like you’re saying Harris should have been scolded.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      “Rosenstein is a lawyer, he’s bound by the same ethics as I am and I’m not going to automatically assume he’s up to no good because he happens to be the AG of the Russia investigation under a Republican administration.”

      Rosenstein said that he wrote the memo suggesting the Comey be fired because of a request from Trump. So he admits that his judgments are heavily influenced by the President. His decisions about firing people have previously been determined by the President. I think it makes sense to clarify whether he will act independently in this area. It is apples to apples comparison.

  8. grabbyhands says:

    Infuriating, but in no way surprising. And that describes not only her being shushed like a naughty child but the whole “Gee, I can’t really say that in public” non-testimony from Rodenstein, Coats and Rogers.

    And that kind of broke me. We’ve all gotten so excited about Comey’s testimony, but let’s face it-he’s not dropping any bombshells. He isn’t going to make 45 look good, but we’ve already pretty much heard what he’s going to say and unless he comes right out and say that 45 threatened him unless he killed the investigation and that he’s seen the piss tape that the Russians have on him, nothing is going to change. Nothing. Yesterday proved that Republican leadership is more interested in chastising their female coworkers than they are putting hard question to these three men. When you’re allowed to say in ten different ways that you just aren’t going to answer a question and there’s no push back to speak of, it is just proof that none of this is going anywhere. The GOP doesn’t want it and right now the democrats don’t have the numbers to fight it and the GOP knows it.

    That’s it. We should just do our best to prepare and fight at the mid-terms, because right now 45 is teflon. He’s not going anywhere.

    • Beth says:

      I wanted to smack those guys who refused to give an answer. They really sounded like they had something to hide

  9. Shambles says:

    #Kamala2020
    #seriously

    • Rapunzel says:

      Shambles- agreed. But imagine the meltdown from the GOP. They can’t handle a black man, let alone a black woman. I’d vote for her, but imagine the s*** that’d get thrown at her.

    • Barbs441 says:

      YES!! I love her so MUCH! #Kamala2020 #Girlpower
      Let’s all imagine the GOP’S reaction when she wins! #priceless

    • adastraperaspera says:

      Yes. It’s way past time.

    • mar_time says:

      I’ve gone to Kamala’s AG and Senate meet and greets, my best friend was her campaign manager, and she is amazing!! She’s smart, she’s kind and engages with whoever she’s talking to. If she ran for president, she might just become our first woman president and I’d be damn proud!

    • CynicalAnn says:

      I’m with her!

    • KLaw says:

      There is NO EXCUSE for these sorry, white privileged male politicians interrupting her like that. It makes me so angry I could “spit nails,” as my grandmother used to say.

  10. OriginallyBlue says:

    She’s better than me. Anytime someone tries to shush me I immediately want to throw a chair at their face.

    • brincalhona says:

      Loved how she raised her eyebrows at the shushing. No words necessary.

    • tmot says:

      Totally! Totally. She’s really good. We’re fortunate to have her.

      She’s also 1/2 Indian… I know most called Obama “black” but how about “brown” for the indefatigable Ms Harris?

  11. third ginger says:

    This nonsense was followed by the spectacle of Chris “I”m getting run out of New Jersey” Christie on MSNBC defending Trump and interrupting as well as scolding a female reporter during her segment. My husband and most of the men I know are great, but the older I get the more radicalized I get about the garbage of the patriarchy!!

  12. Sparkle says:

    Senator Harris is my hero!

  13. Coconut says:

    For the record, prior to becoming senator, Ms Harris was California’s AG.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      And before that she was the District Attorney of San Francisco. She has so much experience.

  14. Magnoliarose says:

    They are disgraceful. She, on the other hand, is great. The good ole days are gone for men like Burr and they aren’t coming back. Kamala is the present and future no matter how much he can’t stand it. He didn’t like seeing a woman make a man look like an idiot and knew she was heading for the kill so he cut her off. Shame on him.

  15. Giddy says:

    We all know the Republican response to women who have the temerity to speak: “Hush, hush, go away, here’s a nice new vacuum cleaner for you!. What? You wanted to speak as an equal? Look! Here’s a used toilet brush. You get to clean all the Congressional toilets! That’s as good as speaking.”

  16. S says:

    Yeah, because why would a former prosecutor know how to get a witness to answer questions? 🙄

    So weird that Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Maxine Waters & Hilary Clinton are always the ones getting chided for “being impolite” or “too aggressive.”

    Very strange how that works. Guess we’ll never, ever be able to figure out the reason and it will remain a mystery forever.

  17. cathy says:

    We need more women in office.

  18. Spike says:

    Hmmm…so in February of this year new Senate Intelligence Committee chair Burr pulls a Nunes and shills for Trump on the exact subject of the current investigation
    – Russia & all the President’s men. So he allegedly understands things like decorum, ethics & his “role” in this investigatiozn
    http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/ned-barnett/article135025359.html

    He lends a hand to a witness who is purposely obfuscating his testimony. He admonishes a former prosecutor who is actually doing her job. She knows a snow job when she sees it.

    This feigned behavior by people in the know keeps reminding me of this key scene in Casablanca –
    https://youtu.be/SjbPi00k_ME

    Dear Sen. Burr – Please can the ridiculously
    patriarchal treatment of a female US Senator. about respect. You are disrespecting & betraying your duties, constituents, and fellow citizens. Why don’t you take a page from Nunes & resign?

  19. HerHign3ss says:

    this reminded me of the scene in wonder woman where she was the only woman. times have not changed.