Up first, with the VP pick behind her, Vice President Kamala Harris is barnstorming the country with her newly minted partner as the Trump campaign lays on the attacks. Questions swirl about what Harris needs to do next.

Welcome the next vice President of the United States. Kamala Harris introducing Minnesota governor Tim Walls as her running mate, then taking the new Democratic ticket on the trail, going on a battleground blitz to several swing states, even ripping a page from the Trump playbook, pulling up to a rally right from the plane.

I couldn't be prouder to be on this ticket.

The selection of Walsh, a former high school teacher and football coach, drew praise from Democrats.

Practical problem solver, 24 years Army National Guard.

Just a heck of a guy.

But Republicans quickly seized on something Walsh said.

We can make sure that those weapons of war that I carried in war is the only place where those weapons were at.

To say, the retired National Guardsmen lied about serving in combat.

I wonder, Tim Walsh, when were you ever in war? What was this weapon that you carried into war?

While the Harris campaign wants to look to the future. We're not going back. Right now, it's what Harris isn't doing that Trump is harping on.

She's not doing any news conference. You know why she's not doing it? Because she can't do a news conference.

Here with me today, New York Times journalist and The Interview podcast host, Lulu Garcia-Navarro. Conservative poster and opinion writer, Kristen Sultis-Anderson, in the chair I usually to sit in, New York Times columnist Jamal Bowie, and John McCormick, senior editor at The Dispatch. Welcome, everybody. So are you going to behave today? Absolutely not. Let's not. Let's just assume we're not going to. So, Kristin, did Harris make the right choice with Walsh? Nearly 90% of Democratic voters says they don't know anything about him, which is maybe a good thing. And Walsh apparently did tell the Harris team about the military service, and so they were ready for the attacks. What are your thoughts?

Well, it's a It's a place that has made both Democrats and Republicans pretty happy. So it remains to be seen who is right about their assessment of the political impact that Walsh will have. This is definitely a pick that seems to have unified Democrats. You are not really hearing any complaints from any fraction of the Democratic Party about the selection, which may be a benefit to having chosen him over somebody like Shapiro, who I think Republicans genuinely were more concerned about. I don't think it's just bluster when you hear somebody like, say, Kelly Ann Conway, tweeting, Oh, he didn't pick Shapiro. I think that was legitimate. They were concerned about him, but only one of those sides will be right.

Which one do you think?

I think ultimately vice presidents don't matter that much. So party unity, probably in the short term, was a smarter play, but he's very unknown, I guess as Shapiro would be, a lot of vetting that's going to happen in real-time in front of voters.

Lulu, what do you think of the controversies around him?

What I think is that he's a good pick. I think he has He's shown himself to be pretty deft in his messaging. I think that the term controversies isn't the right one. This is the usual attacks that happen. This is a man who had served his country for 24 years in the military and then tried to serve his country in another way by going into office. I think these issues are very important to veterans. I don't know how important they will be to the general public.

What about this Swift voting attempt? This, which is what happened to John Kerry? Most people think it's not going to work this time.

Yeah, I don't think that it's really equivalent to exactly the Swift boating attack. I thought the real issue there was Kerry's testimony came back. I think it's wrong to question service in general. I do think that accuracy matters. I think that people, veterans who did serve in war, when people say they serve in war, they feel offended by that. I do think it matters and that he can be held accountable. I don't think it's going to be a huge issue like it was in 2004, because Kerry's Vietnam Service was at the heart at the heart of his campaign, and the Iraq war was at the center of that campaign as well. I think that it's a minor hit on him, and a legitimate one.

Jamal, what do you think? Because it's sometimes certain to work, but they had JD Vance doing it, who himself wasn't really in combat either. I mean, he did serve in Iraq. Talk a little bit about that.

I'm not entirely sure that I find the hit all that impactful for the simple reason that the response which the Harris campaign has had is that, Listen, this guy served in the National Guard for 24 years. He served four years past when he could have retired. His decision to serve that additional four years shows his commitment to serving his country. The notion that this has somehow stolen valor doesn't really I think, land right. I grew up on military basis. My parents serve in the military. When I think about whether my parents would feel offended by that particular language, I don't think they would. I don't think that's something that would get their hackles up. Did you ask them? I I have not asked them, but I think their first response to Walls would likely be like, it's not just good that he served, but that he enlisted as well. He's not an officer. He didn't go-Not fancy. Not fancy. He served, he enlisted, and he worked his way up the ranks.

Let's talk about something that is getting a little bit more purchased, or at least among journalists and pundits, is does Harris do an interview, a press conference, which Trump and Vance and GOP complain that she hadn't done a formal interview press conference. Others say She doesn't need to do it. Lulu, you, of course, want an interview. So do I.

I want an interview, of course. So do you. But the reason we want interviews as members of the media is not because we're greedy, is because we represent people. We are there to inform the public, and there are a lot of questions that actually she needs to answer. I mean, if I'm a strategist, I would say, No, of course not. She shouldn't be giving interviews because at this point, she has a lot of goodwill, and what's going to happen in any interview that she does is that's going to be clipped, it's going to be pushed She's being forced out by the opposition, and right now, she's riding a wave. If I was a strategist, I understand why they're not running towards that. But as a journalist, we don't know her positions on, I don't know, the Supreme Court. We don't know her positions on statehood for DC. Just because I happen to live here, I'm curious. Loads of things that are really important for the general public to know, and so therefore she does have to sit down, and we do really need to hear from her in that format.

John, does that matter? Do you think it matters? Because I hate to turn in my journalist thing, but If I were her, I wouldn't do it until after the convention, at least.

I mean, it's been good politics for her. No one can lie that she's had a good couple of weeks, but she did skip the traditional media vetting process that companies a primary campaign. I mean, so which of these positions that she took in 2020 does she no longer hold? She's been putting out statements through AIDS, background quotes in the press, but she needs to put this in her own words. Tell us where she stands. As Lulu said, I reached out to the campaign last week. She endorsed this idea of Supreme Court term limits. Now, that could be an idea that's a constitutional amendment that would take three quarters of states and bipartisan buying, or it could be, from my view, a fairly radical plan to effectively pack the Supreme Court and remove conservative justices. I think she needs to be clear on those things like that.

But does it matter with voters, Kristen?

I think it will matter. I think eventually, she's going to have to answer these questions. I don't know if it matters if she answers them this week or next week or the week after, but at a certain point, it does begin to seem like, wait a minute, what are they hiding? Remember, for a lot of voters that didn't like Joe Biden and very much wanted him to step aside, the hit on him was, what is being hidden here from voters? Eventually, it became clear, oh, goodness, he is not in good shape, and hence he had to step aside. If Harris is also still being concealed from the public in some way, now, I don't know if your median voter is going to see it that way because she is certainly out. You see her a lot.

She answers questions.

But it will be a shame if we have to get all the way to the September 10th debate before she's actually asked, Hey, you opposed fracking, now you support it. When did you change your mind and why? Hey, you supported this, now you oppose it. When did you change your mind and why? It would be a shame if we have to wait all the way till September.

I don't think it's a shame, though. I will say, just as a counterargument, we are about to have the Democratic Convention. That's going to be a big ad for Democrats, so that's in two weeks. That's momentum up to that. Then there's the glow that comes after that. We're already into September. Early voting starts in September in many states. Then we're just in the last push to the election. This actually short run has worked in her favor because it's all momentum.

Yeah, exactly. Jamal, one of the things, the DNC, the conventions next week. Should Dems pack it with celebrity? How should it go here? To me, they should be talking about policy, but should they pack it with celebrity? Some have speculated Taylor Swift or Beyoncé or something like that. What do you think should happen?

I think it would be a mistake to pack it with celebrities. I think that when you look at the message the ticket is clearly trying to push, and that's apparent with the choice of walls, which is that this is a ticket of normalcy. These are normal people. Walls' attack on Republicans, that they're weird, that Trump and Vance are weird. I think you would want to emphasize that in a convention by focusing on normal people. I think one of the strengths of the Walls' pick is that since it's clear message that you can be a regular white guy.

There's nothing in normal about Thierry Swift. But go ahead, keep going.

You can be a regular, basic white guy and still be a loyal Democrat. You still have a part in this party, and not just a part, but you can be at the very top of the leadership. Emphasizing that message, I think, is what they should do with that convention.