The article was clearly intended to polish Harris’ credentials and assure readers that if they support her, then the nation will have a commander-in-chief who is capable of protecting its citizens. The piece featured comments from various individuals who worked with Harris in the Situation Room and supposedly saw firsthand how wonderful of a leader she is.

The author painted a picture of a vice president who is “more hard-line than most people think,” citing unnamed officials who have supposedly observed her in this capacity.

But it was her focus on adherence to progressive gender ideology that is not only disturbing but damning. Ignatius mentioned a specific instance in Harris’ first year as vice president when she took issue with the language used by a female intelligence briefer when discussing a foreign female leader.

Harris reportedly believed the language used to describe the leader was gender-biased, which prompted her to call for an internal review within the intelligence community to determine whether analysts were committing the unpardonable sin of using biased language in their reports.

Harris got off to what her aides agree was a bumpy start with her intelligence briefer. During the administration’s first year, the briefer was presenting a classified personality profile of a female foreign leader Harris would be meeting. The briefer was a woman, but Harris thought some of the language she was using was gender-biased. Rather than just voicing her discomfort, Harris requested an intelligence community internal review.

The result, never previously reported, was an internal assessment by the intelligence community of whether analysts had routinely used gender-biased language in intelligence reports. The review examined several years of analytical reports, comparing how often certain words had been used about women and men. Harris was so concerned that she asked intelligence agencies to train their analysts to avoid any such bias in the future. She also requested more reporting from the intelligence community on gender issues and sexual violence around the world.

Though she is said to have been pleased by the agency’s responsiveness to her concerns, after that first year she dropped the personal, one-to-one briefing.

A spokesman for Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines declined to comment on the gender-bias review. The ODNI oversees the President’s Daily Brief and other reports to top officials, but many of them are prepared by analysts at the CIA.

So, let’s get this straight. The ostensible purpose of the intelligence community is to collect, analyze, and provide critical information to policymakers, military leaders, and other decision-makers to help protect national security and advance U.S. interests. They are responsible for assessing threats and gathering insights on issues such as terrorism, espionage, cyberattacks, and other potential threats.

But Harris seems to believe that making sure one uses leftist-approved language related to gender should rank higher on the priority list. There are a myriad of problems with the vice president’s approach, and it further reveals that Harris is not the woman for the job.

Yeah, I assumed her gender. So what?

For starters, the work performed by the intelligence community – assuming they aren’t using their positions to spy on American citizens – is critical to protecting us from foreign threats. Harris’ impulse to demand language policing within intelligence reports shows where her true priorities lie. One would think a vice president would be laser-focused on the actual content and insights of those reports, not on whether they used the right words.

Moreover, the purpose of intelligence reports is to provide factual, unbiased information about key figures and global events. Infusing these reports with progressive gender ideology undermines their objectivity. These reports are supposed to bolster national defense, not pander to the wokescolds.

What is truly mystifying about this is that if Harris were genuinely concerned about gender issues, she might choose to focus on different problems. All over the world, women and girls, especially those living in conflict zones, are vulnerable to sexual violence, forced marriages, and human trafficking. Indeed, the Biden-Harris administration’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan made the situation worse for women living in the region.

However, these issues don’t seem to affect folks like Harris and other progressives who pretend to care about women’s issues. When news surfaced detailing the horrific rapes Hamas terrorists inflicted on female Israeli hostages, Harris and her ilk barely batted an eye. Perhaps someone needs to go undercover and expose instances in which Hamas terrorists use gender-biased language in their communications. Maybe then Harris might take the issue seriously?

Ignatius’ puff piece was intended to prop up Harris as a capable leader. But the details about this story expose her as a sanctimonious wokescold who cares more about performative politics than doing her damn job.