While rightly questioning the bypassing of the Afghan government and concessions to the Taliban in the Doha deal, Harris overlooks input from foreign policy experts who saw potential merit in the agreement as an imperfect path to withdrawal, fails to acknowledge Biden's continuation of the deal after taking office, and resorts to unsubstantiated accusations of Trump disparaging the military as a whole.

1. cherry picking • Harris's argument contains some valid criticisms of the Doha deal negotiated by Trump, such as bypassing the Afghan government and making concessions to the Taliban. However, her portrayal is one-sided and omits important context.

Donald Trump when he was president negotiated one of the weakest deals you can imagine. He calls himself a dealmaker. Even his national security adviser said it was a weak, terrible deal. And here's how it went down. He bypassed the Afghan government. He negotiated directly with a terrorist organization called the Taliban...

And the president at the time invited the Taliban to Camp David. A place of storied significance for us as Americans... And this former president as president invited them to Camp David because he does not again appreciate the role and responsibility of the President of the United States to be commander in chief with a level of respect.

There are legitimate points here, along with a good deal of cherry picking:

1. Harris highlights former national security advisor John Bolton's hawkish criticism, but doesn't acknowledge that other foreign policy experts saw potential merit in the deal as an imperfect but pragmatic way to facilitate a U.S. withdrawal. ​
2. She doesn't mention that Biden chose to uphold and implement the deal after taking office, rather than scrap it entirely. ​
3. Her rhetoric employing personal attacks on Trump's respect for institutions detracts from a more substantive discussion of the deal's pros and cons.

Overall, while raising some legitimate concerns, Harris's argument lacks nuance and objectivity. It appears aimed more at scoring political points against Trump than having a balanced assessment of a complex foreign policy decision made by both administrations.

2. straw man • Harris depicts Trump's attitude toward military personnel in a way that makes him easier to attack, but probably does not match reality.

...he has consistently disparaged and demeaned members of our military, fallen soldiers, and the work that we must do to uphold the strength and the respect of the United States...

Although Trump infamously made insensitive remarks about the military service of his political rival, John McCain, for Harris to portray Trump as having a broader pattern of "consistently" demeaning the military as a whole is likely an overstatement and mischaracterization of his record.

The fact that Trump maintains a significant lead over Harris in support among active military members and veterans, as evidenced by recent polls, undermines Harris's blanket accusation. It suggests her statement is exaggerating and distorting Trump's relationship with the military to make it easier to attack.