Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro just unleashed a scathing critique of former Vice President Kamala Harris, accusing her of peddling outright fiction in her latest book.

In a hard-hitting interview published Wednesday by The Atlantic, Shapiro ripped into Harris’s portrayal of his vice-presidential vetting process as detailed in her book "107 Days." He claims she’s spinning stories for profit, not truth.

Harris’s book suggests Shapiro pestered her staff with odd requests, like securing Pennsylvania artists’ works from the Smithsonian. She also wrote that he wanted a say in every decision, leading her to remind him a vice president isn’t a co-president. That’s a bold narrative—but Shapiro calls it pure fantasy.

Shapiro rejects Harris’s account as fiction

Shapiro didn’t hold back, flatly denying Harris’s version of events. “She wrote that in her book? That’s complete and utter bull----,” he told The Atlantic’s Tim Alberta.

He conceded to asking numerous questions during the vetting process, but insisted that’s only logical for such a partnership. “Wouldn’t you ask questions if someone was talking to you about forming a partnership and working together?” Shapiro added, making a reasonable case for due diligence.

Harris’s account, however, frames Shapiro as overreaching, which smells more like dramatic flair than fact. One can’t help but question if this is about crafting a bestseller rather than recounting reality.

Profit motive behind Harris’s words?

Shapiro pointed to a possible ulterior motive, suggesting Harris’s priority was commercial success. “She’s trying to sell books. Period,” he stated plainly to Alberta.

The Atlantic’s reporter noted that staff from both sides described the meeting in similar terms, muddying the waters on who’s recalling events accurately. Is Harris embellishing for effect, or is Shapiro downplaying his own zeal? The public deserves more than political page-turners.

In her book, Harris also discussed passing over former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg as a running mate, citing concerns about a ticket without a straight white male. She admitted Buttigieg seemed ideal, but felt the demographic risk was too steep. It’s a frank take, though some might argue it prioritizes image over substance.

Harris’s final pick and Shapiro’s broader critique

Ultimately, Harris chose Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate, a decision later tainted by negative headlines over Walz’s past misleading claims about his military record. That pick hasn’t worn well under scrutiny.

Shapiro, meanwhile, has aired other grievances, revealing in a September interview that he privately questioned former President Joe Biden’s fitness to run again. He emphasized handling such matters directly, not through media leaks.

Harris’s office has stayed mum on Shapiro’s accusations, offering no response when pressed about the book’s claims. That quietness could be strategic, hoping the controversy fades without further fuel.

Political narratives clash in public view

This clash between Shapiro and Harris isn’t mere personal drama; it exposes the murky world of political storytelling. Shapiro’s sharp rebuttal challenges the progressive habit of shaping history to fit a narrative, a practice conservatives often criticize.

Readers are left to parse through conflicting accounts, weighing whether Harris’s book is a genuine reflection or polished for profit. Shapiro’s response casts serious doubt on her credibility here.

Ultimately, this episode serves as a reminder that in politics, truth can get buried under ambition and agendas. While both deserve to be heard, conservatives might see this as yet another case of the left favoring optics over integrity.