Quote:
Originally Posted by adav8s28
There is a big difference between "At Cost" and "For Profit". If Tesla only sold all of their electric cars "At Cost" Elon Musk would not be the worlds richest person. Doing something at cost is partly charitable.
You have Oprah confused with a guy like Rev Al Sharpton the civil rights activist and part time talking head at MSNBC. Sharpton as you put it "Came to eat". His interview with Harris was done solely for Profit. His organization pocketed some $500,000. This is an example of how the Harris/Waltz campaign fund almost ran out of money, after raising a Billion dollars .
|
So you know that Oprah did the interview "At Cost" Could you provide a link to this information. This is what was widely published.
Citing the Washington Examiner, Harris campaign spent 15 Million on “event production” with One Million allocated to Winfrey’s Harpo productions
The Harris campaign paid Oprah $1 million to do that interview, and she spent $100,000 building the set of the Call Her Daddy podcast so Kamala Harris wouldn’t have to fly out to LA to film it.
"Oprah had to basically guide her through puff ball questions and she still had no answers"
Almost everyone knows Sharpton is a crook, apparently Oprah is not much different.
Assuming you are not worth 3 Billion like Oprah, did you request Harris pay for your time posting to defend her