Fact-checking Kamala and the Debate Moderators: I Have Plenty of Fodder
The moderators "fact-checked" Trump at least 5 times but couldn't "fact-check" Kamala a single time? Bruh.
My initial thought with the Trump-Harris debate is that Harris looked polished and confident, far more than I have seen her in recent years, THOUGH her smirking, raised eyebrows and hand under the chin was a bit too contrived and theatrical, and took away from the professionalism she tried to present.
Trump seemed to be on the defensive almost the entire night, succumbing to Kamala’s baiting of him with her unnecessary comments about crowd sizes at his rallies, among other topics; however, I was still very impressed with some of his recall of very specific facts and figures.
The pet-eating comment was unfortunate, as that took away from the far more important issues affecting Springfield, Ohio and other towns that have to grapple with accommodating large influxes of illegal immigrants without buffering the infrastructure first. (An upcoming Substack will address this issue.)
The ABC moderators were clearly biased. I counted at least 5 “fact-checks” (some of which I will debunk) and “follow-ups” that they aimed at Trump—and not a SINGLE fact-check of Kamala—even though she clearly told some easily provable untruths. Perhaps it had something to do with the moderators’ fealty to Kamala’s best friend of 30 years, Disney exec (including the overseer of ABC News), Dana Walden. See photo below:
Or perhaps it is the fact that moderator Linsey Davis is an AKA sorority sister of Kamala’s. Kamala’s chapter was at Howared University while Linsey’s was at UVA. (Linsey explained the connection when she covered Kamala’s inauguration.)
The moderators could have asked more substantive questions besides rehashing Jan 6, 2020 election, and others in that vein. Not once did they address the assassination attempt, a recent seminal event in our lives.
Not once did they challenge Kamala on her non-answer about whether or not we are better off than 4 years ago, or of the missing 323,000 illegal immigrant children for which her administration cannot account.
SEE MY RECENT SUBSTACK BELOW:
To show just how egregious the one-sidedness permeated the debate, “The Federalist” put together a thorough reference of 25 of Kamala’s lies that were allowed to stand without any pushback from the moderators. I will expand upon several of them in this Substack. (I used italics to delineate “The Federalist” words from mine.)
https://thefederalist.com/2024/09/11/25-lies-kamala-harris-told-in-her-debate-against-trump/
5. Project 2025
Harris claimed Trump will implement Project 2025 if elected. Trump has repeatedly said he has nothing to do with Project 2025.
BELOW IS MY SUBSTACK ABOUT TRUMP’S ACTUAL PLATFORM—WHICH IS NOT PROJECT 2025; IT’S CALLED AGENDA47.
8. Trump’s Abortion Stance
Trump, Harris told Americans on Tuesday night, will sign a national abortion ban and hire a national “abortion … monitor that would be monitoring your pregnancies, your miscarriages” if he is elected.
The Republican’s 2024 abortion platform, however, explicitly states decisions about ending life in the womb should be left “up to the states” and mentions nothing about crowning a national pro-life coordinator. The GOP presidential nominee has also sworn multiple times that he would not sign federal legislation curbing abortion.
9. Ninth Month Abortions Don’t Exist
Harris also used her time on the debate stage to assert that “nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion.”
“That is not happening. It’s insulting to the women of America,” Harris claimed.
Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, however, shows that thousands of abortions are performed after 21 weeks gestation. The CDC’s findings do not include reporting from at least four abortion-friendly states (California, Maryland, New Hampshire, and New Jersey), which suggests the number of late-term abortions in the U.S. is likely much higher.
Moderator Davis “fact-checked” Trump when he said that babies are being executed after they are born: “There is no state in this nation where it is legal to kill a baby after it is born.” HER FACT-CHECK IS NOT TRUE. See video and article below.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/08/06/under-gov-tim-walz-babies-born-alive-in-botched-abortions-were-left-to-die-then-he-removed-reporting-requirements/
12. Fracking Ban
Kamala Harris claimed she made herself “very clear in 2020.”
“I will not ban fracking,” she said.
But her position was clearly against fracking as she ran for her party’s 2020 presidential nomination when she said, “There is no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.” (Click on link below the screenshot.)
Kamala Explicitly Stating That She Would Ban Fracking (click on link)
14. Trump’s Role in J6
Harris claimed that Trump “incited” the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.
That is false. Trump specifically told protestors to “peacefully and patriotically make [their] voices heard” and sought to deploy 10,000 National Guard troops to the Capitol ahead of Congress’s certification of the 2020 election results.
https://thefederalist.com/2024/03/08/exclusive-liz-cheney-january-6-committee-suppressed-exonerating-evidence-of-trumps-push-for-national-guard/
16. ‘Fine People’ Hoax
Harris repeated the debunked lie that Trump praised white supremacists marching in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 when he said there were “fine people on both sides.”
This is false, as Trump was referring to both sides of the debate on whether to allow historic monuments to remain standing.
SEE MY SUBSTACK BELOW ON THE TOPIC:
17. ‘Bloodbath’ Hoax
Harris regurgitated the false narrative that Trump claimed there would be a “bloodbath” if he loses this November.
The vice president took Trump out of context. The 45th president was not calling for violence but was discussing the economic disaster that awaits Americans if Democrats win the election.
SEE ALSO MY SUBSTACK ON THE TOPIC:
20. Combat Zones
Harris claimed that “there is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world [for] the first time this century.”
That isn’t true. As noted by former U.S. Rep. Peter Meijer, R-Mich., the United States has “troops in Syria and Iraq who are routinely attacked by Iran-backed militias.”
“Three soldiers were killed in Jordan earlier this year!” he wrote on X.
Former Navy SEAL and current congressman from Texas, Dan Crenshaw:
22. Gun Confiscation
Harris claimed that she doesn’t support mandatory gun confiscation.
That is false. She has openly expressed support for such a policy.
Even though the debate was stacked against him—3 against 1!—Trump still had opportunities to land some significant blows but got bogged down in defending himself. For instance, when he started talking about illegal immigrants eating cats and dogs in Springfield, Ohio (a claim with no hard, visual evidence, THOUGH residents did mention it at a city commission meeting, as well as stated that the immigrants were eating ducks and geese from Snyder Park), a stronger case would have been his discussing the devastating impact of 15-20,000 illegal immigrants descending upon a city of 60,000 residents in the last few years, and the strain on social services, schools, housing, and skyrocketing car insurance rates, because the Haitians have been involved in a number of auto accidents.
(I will be dedicating a future Substack to the Springfield, Ohio situation.)
All in all, I believe Trump voters will still vote for him and Harris voters will still vote for her. The key is the Independents: How did they view the debate? Did it move the needle at all? Some polls suggest it is still status quo, though more than one Independent who watched the debate has mentioned not hearing enough specifics from Harris about her policies. I concur.
November 5 can’t come soon enough.
You're on fire. Another great post.