Harry Sisson Short-Circuits When Presented With Evidence of Democrats Calling Trump Hitler
A Piers Morgan panel put a young Democratic influencer on the spot when he challenged whether prominent Democrats had directly compared Donald Trump to Hitler. The exchange turned into a clear moment of cognitive dissonance once specific examples were offered. The clip has circulated because it highlights how mainstream left rhetoric can collide with simple documentary evidence.
“When did Kamala Harris call Donald Trump, Hitler?” Sisson said, before repeating his question.
Isabelle Brown, a Gen Z conservative commentator and new host at the Daily Wire, responded with a precise citation from the campaign trail and left no room for vagueness. She said, exactly, “October of 2024, Kamala Harris said on the campaign trail, ‘Donald Trump vowed to be a dictator on day 1. His former Chief of Staff said he wanted generals like Hitler’s. Donald Trump openly admired dictators, including Adolf Hitler.’ Last October, that was said on the campaign trail, from the Democrat nominee.” The clip played out like a fact-check in real time.
Sisson’s face registered the moment and he stammered through a short rebuttal, offering only, “Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly,” before the panel pressed on. The awkward pause underscored how defensive talking points can fail when matched with direct quotes. People noticed because it showed the difference between rhetorical denial and factual accountability.
Jack Posobiec, who often appears at conservative events, added context about timing and intent, noting that Harris made the remarks late in the campaign as part of a final pitch. The point was less about theatrical timing and more about the language choices leading up to the election. That framing pushed the discussion from who said what to how often and why such comparisons are used.
Piers Morgan weighed in with another contemporary example, saying, “Hillary Clinton literally compared Trump’s rally in Ohio last week to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler’s speeches…She made reference to Hitler speeches, which saw people raise their right arms in the air in the Nazi salute.” He followed up bluntly: “It happens all the time.” The panel’s examples stacked to show a pattern of aggressive rhetoric from prominent Democrats.
The distinction some on the left try to draw — that someone compared his style to Hitler without actually saying “Hitler” directly — is a weak dodge. That framing treats proximity to a comparison as exculpatory when it is not; the effect on public perception is the same. When the calibrated language shifts from critique to caricature, political discourse pays the price.
Other Democrats have been less coy. Representative Jasmine Crockett called the president “Temu Hitler” in an August 2025 video, and she has characterized him as a wannabe Hitler. Texas State Representative Ana-Maria Ramos used similar language, and a small but notable number of Democratic officials have not shied away from outright dictator labels. Taken together, these comments form more than a one-off talking point; they show a pattern of escalation.
Many Democrats who avoid the explicit H-word still routinely label Trump a dictator, fascist, or authoritarian in public statements and on social platforms. That steady drumbeat normalizes extreme comparisons and makes more extreme rhetoric easier to deploy. A democracy needs clearer, more responsible language from its public figures.
Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.
The panel exchange is a small but useful example of why rhetoric matters and why evidence matters even more. For those watching, the clip was a reminder that public claims should be testable against what was actually said. When commentary meets quotation, rhetoric either stands up or it doesn’t.
