Marie Harf found herself in a challenging position during a recent Fox News segment as she attempted to downplay the crime crisis in Washington, D.C. This discussion arose after President Trump invoked federal control over the city’s Metropolitan Police Department. His announcement included deploying National Guard troops to combat rising crime, which he described as a “tragic emergency.” Trump asserted, “This city will no longer be a sanctuary for illegal alien criminals.”
Harf countered Trump’s claims by shifting the blame to Republican-led cities, suggesting that they were equally responsible for the nation’s crime rate. “A lot of the cities with the most crime in the country are led by Republicans,” she argued. This line of reasoning drew sharp rebuttals from hosts on the show, particularly Harris Faulkner, who had the facts ready to counter Harf’s deflection.
Faulkner initiated a fact-checking segment, directly referencing the ten cities with the highest murder rates in 2025. She pointed out that most of these cities are, in fact, led by Democrats, challenging Harf’s narrative. As Faulkner highlighted the list, she pressed Harf on the details, stating, “These are real crimes, and the majority of those cities are Democrat-led.” Harf attempted to dodge the truth, arguing about the political affiliation of the states, but Faulkner consistently redirected the conversation back to the leadership of the cities themselves.
The back-and-forth became increasingly intense. “How many of those are red states?” Harf exclaimed, but Faulkner maintained focus on the cities. “I’m just listening to what you said,” she insisted. Faulkner’s persistence underscored Harf’s lack of a coherent response to the numbers presented. Ultimately, Faulkner asserted that not one of the cities on the list voted for Trump in the last election.
In this exchange, Harf’s attempt to redirect the conversation revealed a deeper issue of accountability regarding crime in major U.S. cities. Her arguments fell flat under careful scrutiny, demonstrating the impact of solid fact-based dialogue in political discourse.
"*" indicates required fields
