In a stunning display of political theater, Vice President Kamala Harris unleashed a barrage of misleading statements and outright falsehoods during her recent debate with former President Donald Trump. The 90-minute spectacle, hosted by ABC News at Philadelphia’s National Constitution Center, saw Harris propagate debunked narratives and make inaccurate accusations while the debate moderators seemingly took a hands-off approach to fact-checking her claims. From rehashing the tired “very fine people” hoax to falsifying details about trade deficits and foreign policy, Harris painted a distorted picture of Trump’s presidency that left many viewers questioning the integrity of the debate process.
As the debate unfolded, it became increasingly clear that Harris was operating under a different set of rules than her opponent. While Trump faced immediate pushback on several of his statements, Harris seemed to enjoy free rein to make unsubstantiated claims without challenge. This glaring disparity in treatment did not go unnoticed by viewers and commentators alike.
One of the most egregious examples of Harris’s unchecked falsehoods was her resurrection of the thoroughly debunked “very fine people” hoax. This tired narrative, which has been repeatedly disproven, attempts to paint Trump as sympathetic to white supremacists after the Charlottesville incident. The fact that Harris could trot out this discredited claim without immediate correction from the moderators is a damning indictment of the debate’s integrity.
Kamala Harris lied 21 times and received 0 fact checks from the unprofessional ABC debate moderators @BreitbartNews https://t.co/XnCVv80jzz
— Katy Grimes (@KATYSaccitizen) September 11, 2024
Harris didn’t stop at rehashing old hoaxes; she also ventured into the realm of economic fantasy. Her claim about the trade deficit under Trump’s administration was a masterclass in cherry-picking data to fit a narrative. The Vice President conveniently ignored the overall trend of the trade deficit during Trump’s tenure, instead focusing on a snapshot that suited her agenda.
“Economists have said that Trump sales tax would actually result — for middle class families — in about $4,000 more a year because of his policies and his ideas about what should be — [on] the backs of middle class people paying for tax cuts for billionaires.” –
This statement by Harris is a prime example of her misleading economic claims. While she confidently asserts this figure, the reality is far more nuanced. The proposed sales tax plan’s impact on middle-class families is a matter of debate among economists, with various models showing different outcomes. Harris’s unequivocal statement ignores this complexity and presents a worst-case scenario as an established fact.
Perhaps one of the most galling moments of the debate was Harris’s attempt to lay blame for the Afghanistan evacuation debacle at Trump’s feet. This revisionist history conveniently ignores the Biden administration’s catastrophic mishandling of the withdrawal, which led to chaos, loss of life, and a severe blow to America’s global standing.
“Sixteen Nobel laureates have described [Trump’s] economic plan as something that would increase inflation and by the middle of next year, would invite a recession.” –
Harris’s invocation of Nobel laureates to attack Trump’s economic plan is a classic appeal to authority that lacks crucial context. While some economists have indeed criticized aspects of Trump’s economic proposals, Harris fails to mention that economic predictions, even from Nobel laureates, are notoriously unreliable and often influenced by political leanings. The Vice President’s selective use of this critique without acknowledging the diversity of economic opinions is misleading at best.
Throughout the debate, ABC’s moderators seemed content to let Harris’s falsehoods go unchallenged. This stark contrast to their treatment of Trump raises serious questions about the network’s commitment to fair and balanced journalism. The American people deserve better than this one-sided approach to political discourse.
As we move forward in this election cycle, it’s crucial for voters to remain vigilant and skeptical of the information presented in these high-stakes debates. The failure of ABC’s moderators to hold Harris accountable for her numerous false claims underscores the importance of independent fact-checking and critical thinking. In an era of rampant misinformation, we cannot rely solely on mainstream media to provide us with the unvarnished truth. It’s up to each of us to dig deeper, question boldly, and demand better from those who seek to lead our nation.
