Kamala backtracks on price-gouging, attempts to gaslight

Kamala Harris is making a U-turn once again, this time regarding her proposal to ban “price gouging.”

Sources familiar with Harris’ thoughts on the ban, as reported by The New York Times, indicated that the policy would be specifically targeted at the food and grocery industries and would likely be implemented during emergency situations like natural disasters or pandemics.

The timing of this clarification is noteworthy, coming shortly after criticism of Harris’ plan, including a rebuke from the left-leaning Washington Post, which described her proposals as mere populist tactics rather than effective economic solutions.

Furthermore, industry leaders in the food sector highlighted that the price increases were a result of their rising costs, not unjustifiable profit margins.

It’s clear that Harris introduced her plan, albeit vaguely, to shift blame onto supposed corporate greed for inflation.

This narrative attempts to divert attention from the actual causes of skyrocketing prices for essential goods, namely the spending policies and giveaways of the Biden-Harris administration.

This maneuver by Harris epitomizes Democratic disinformation at its most evident.

Hence, her quick reversal following criticism, attempting to present her price control measures as limited to emergencies — suggesting they would be rarely, if ever, implemented.

However, even in its revised form, the idea remains flawed: Companies adjust prices based on their costs and consumer demand, understanding this dynamic far better than government officials.

Relying on anonymous quotes to retract what seemed like a significant policy statement from Harris herself raises doubts about the accuracy of the message she intended to convey.

Without clarity on what constitutes an “emergency” or “rare” situation, if Harris even used those terms, the industry is left uncertain and forced to divert resources to prepare for potentially harsher measures.

This move appears to be a signal to the media to downplay the discussion around Harris’ price control scheme. However, this lack of transparency only keeps Americans in the dark about her true intentions, beyond mere campaign rhetoric.