Debate Moderator Fact Checks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “moderators” should have either fact-checked BOTH candidates or neither. Kamala Harris told some whoppers too:

- Trump *opposes* a national abortion ban.
https://apnews.com/article/republicans-abortion-party-platform-trump-rnc-5561e857c5501df9864ab8ca666d8bc5

- He favors IVF and has even said the government should pay for it, for crying out loud!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-wants-make-ivf-treatments-paid-government-insurance-compani-rcna168804

- He *condemned* the Charlottesville neo-Nazis. Her claim that he called them “very fine people” has been debunked.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

Sure would be nice to watch a debate in which both candidates are treated equally. CNN did a good job in this regard.

Trump is a serial liar and has been getting away with it for years because nobody's challenged him on it. He's fortunate he got off this lightly. He lost the debate because he doesn't know a single thing about policy. He lost the debate because he has a "concept of a plan" for health care that he started talking about in 2015 (i.e., he's got nothing). He lost because he couldn't control his emotions. He lost because he was talking about the imaginary eating of pets. But he's got MAGA to make excuses for his failure, of course...

You don’t have to be “MAGA” to understand that BOTH candidates - or neither - should have been fact-checked.

Honestly, the insistence of some of you in calling anyone who dares to disagree with you or puts out an opinion you don’t like, “MAGA,” is tiresome and telling. Some of you seem to have a very narrow vocabulary that relies on that term way more than it should.
DP

I mean if MAGA is going to continue to spin, spin, spin to make excuses for him, it is what it is. His lies are so egregious that he needed to be fact-checked.

Sure. But fact-checking one candidate and not the other is the very definition of biased moderation.

Only if their lies are equal in scale and kind

LOL. Muir fact checked Trump one time on the mere fact that he “couldn’t detect the sarcasm” in trumps voice. What a whopper! This debate was a total hatchet job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “moderators” should have either fact-checked BOTH candidates or neither. Kamala Harris told some whoppers too:

- Trump *opposes* a national abortion ban.
https://apnews.com/article/republicans-abortion-party-platform-trump-rnc-5561e857c5501df9864ab8ca666d8bc5

- He favors IVF and has even said the government should pay for it, for crying out loud!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-wants-make-ivf-treatments-paid-government-insurance-compani-rcna168804

- He *condemned* the Charlottesville neo-Nazis. Her claim that he called them “very fine people” has been debunked.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

Sure would be nice to watch a debate in which both candidates are treated equally. CNN did a good job in this regard.

Trump is a serial liar and has been getting away with it for years because nobody's challenged him on it. He's fortunate he got off this lightly. He lost the debate because he doesn't know a single thing about policy. He lost the debate because he has a "concept of a plan" for health care that he started talking about in 2015 (i.e., he's got nothing). He lost because he couldn't control his emotions. He lost because he was talking about the imaginary eating of pets. But he's got MAGA to make excuses for his failure, of course...

You don’t have to be “MAGA” to understand that BOTH candidates - or neither - should have been fact-checked.

Honestly, the insistence of some of you in calling anyone who dares to disagree with you or puts out an opinion you don’t like, “MAGA,” is tiresome and telling. Some of you seem to have a very narrow vocabulary that relies on that term way more than it should.
DP

I mean if MAGA is going to continue to spin, spin, spin to make excuses for him, it is what it is. His lies are so egregious that he needed to be fact-checked.

Sure. But fact-checking one candidate and not the other is the very definition of biased moderation.

Only if their lies are equal in scale and kind

Wrong. If you want to claim impartiality, then be impartial.

Dp- nah. If you are gonna spew outrageous lies and accuse Democratic governors of murdering babies, you’re gonna get a note.
Sorry not sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The ultimate fact check.

What active combat war zone are they in?

Vice President Kamala Harris claimed in the debate Tuesday night that there are no U.S. troops in active war zones, a statement that obscures how thousands of American service members fight in conflicts around the world.
U.S. sailors and Marines have been defending ships and regional partners from constant attacks by Yemen’s Houthis since last fall. There are at least 3,400 U.S. troops tasked to assist and train local forces to defeat Islamic State in Iraq and Syria—where they have come under repeated attacks. The Biden administration also is quietly moving aircraft and commandos into Western Africa to combat terrorists.

And yet Harris boasted during the debate 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, the first time this century.”

Congress is the only branch with the authority to declare war, a power it hasn’t exercised since 1942, which means the U.S. hasn’t officially been at war since the end of World War II. But the U.S. has been in combat plenty of times over the decades—from Korea to Vietnam and most recently Iraq and Afghanistan—and there is no question U.S. forces today are in harm’s way. Just last month, the U.S. and Iraq launched a joint raid against Islamic State that saw seven American troops get injured.

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/harris-trump-presidential-debate-election-2024/card/u-s-troops-are-involved-in-combat-despite-harris-s-debate-claims-j5b3ST4WCoIish5ScTPg

Of course there are troops in harm’s way. That’s not the same thing as active combat duty in a war zone. Which war zone are they in with their disposable takeout containers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought they did a great job fact-checking Trump. And, to be fair, a non-existent job of fact checking Harris. And obviously had no interest in pressing her to give a straight answer when she dodged the “do you think voters are better off than they were four years ago?” Question (she doesn’t, but they don’t want to make her SAY that) and when she avoided answering whether she supports limits on abortion in 7th, 8th, 9th month (she doesn’t, but again they don’t want to make her SAY that).

But did anyone think it was weird that they said nothing when she claimed to have been at the Capitol on Jan 6 when she was actually at DNC headquarters???
Why would she say she was there?? And why wouldn’t the moderators correct her in that assertion?

They did a crappy job of muting Trump's mic. In fact they never did and let him ramble on and on and on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The ultimate fact check.

What active combat war zone are they in?

Vice President Kamala Harris claimed in the debate Tuesday night that there are no U.S. troops in active war zones, a statement that obscures how thousands of American service members fight in conflicts around the world.
U.S. sailors and Marines have been defending ships and regional partners from constant attacks by Yemen’s Houthis since last fall. There are at least 3,400 U.S. troops tasked to assist and train local forces to defeat Islamic State in Iraq and Syria—where they have come under repeated attacks. The Biden administration also is quietly moving aircraft and commandos into Western Africa to combat terrorists.

And yet Harris boasted during the debate 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, the first time this century.”

Congress is the only branch with the authority to declare war, a power it hasn’t exercised since 1942, which means the U.S. hasn’t officially been at war since the end of World War II. But the U.S. has been in combat plenty of times over the decades—from Korea to Vietnam and most recently Iraq and Afghanistan—and there is no question U.S. forces today are in harm’s way. Just last month, the U.S. and Iraq launched a joint raid against Islamic State that saw seven American troops get injured.

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/harris-trump-presidential-debate-election-2024/card/u-s-troops-are-involved-in-combat-despite-harris-s-debate-claims-j5b3ST4WCoIish5ScTPg

Of course there are troops in harm’s way. That’s not the same thing as active combat duty in a war zone. Which war zone are they in with their disposable takeout containers?

Tell these Americans they’re not in a war zone.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68122706#

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump was given the last word on multiple topics -- a chance to respond after Harris spoke. She was not accorded the same opportunity. He was given longer to speak than Harris (by about five minutes). Seems like these facts suggest the moderators were biased in favor of Trump, not Harris.

Trump was given the last word on EVERY topic.

DP. Partially because Harris lobbed some false accusations at him that he wound up defending. Had they ALSO fact-checked her, that would not have happened. And before you ask, her false were posted by another poster this afternoon.

Nah. She attacked him with his record. Sorry you don’t like hearing it.
She’s been fact checked by multiple reputable sources, and the verdict is: she told ( mostly) the truth.
Trump was gingerly corrected on 3 outrageous lies. Cry more.

I’ve bolded the only pertinent word in your childish post. Do better.

Get bent. Your boy is a loser who lost. BIGLY. I guess it sucks that there was no chance of him NOT getting checked. He could have hewed in slightly toward the truth. He didn’t. He can’t. He’s a degenerate liar.
Oh…and I couldn’t BE BETTER! This week has been great! Thanks.😉

[Anonymous]

https://www.vox.com/kamala-harris/371497/harris-troops-war-zones

But none of this is “war,” according to the US government. A Department of Defense official, speaking on background, told Vox, “An aspect of military service includes serving in locations where hostile actions may occur. Those locations are designated by executive order and/or the secretary of defense. However, it’s important to note that just because a service member is in one of these locations does not mean they are engaged in war. The US is not currently engaged in a war and does not have troops fighting in active war zones anywhere in the world.”

Harris does appear to have carefully chosen her wording — “active duty in a combat zone in any war zone”

So… fact checking is hard, and Kamala is good at this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.vox.com/kamala-harris/371497/harris-troops-war-zones

But none of this is “war,” according to the US government. A Department of Defense official, speaking on background, told Vox, “An aspect of military service includes serving in locations where hostile actions may occur. Those locations are designated by executive order and/or the secretary of defense. However, it’s important to note that just because a service member is in one of these locations does not mean they are engaged in war. The US is not currently engaged in a war and does not have troops fighting in active war zones anywhere in the world.”

Harris does appear to have carefully chosen her wording — “active duty in a combat zone in any war zone”

So… fact checking is hard, and Kamala is good at this.

DP. No, she's not. She's being protected. It would have been quite easy for Muir to fact check her on that statement. There are "war zones" all over the world at or near where U.S. troops are stationed (and where they operate). They may not be war zones declared by Congress, but they are war zones nonetheless. If you deny this, tell that to the families who live there. But they're not Americans, so you don't really care what happens to them. More importantly, tell that to the families whose loved ones continue to get injured at our military bases around the world from terrorist strikes. But again, go ahead and hang your hat on a technicality because reality doesn't matter to you either.

Also, don't look far for someone who misrepresented he was in a war zone carrying "weapons of war"....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “moderators” should have either fact-checked BOTH candidates or neither. Kamala Harris told some whoppers too:

- Trump *opposes* a national abortion ban.
https://apnews.com/article/republicans-abortion-party-platform-trump-rnc-5561e857c5501df9864ab8ca666d8bc5

- He favors IVF and has even said the government should pay for it, for crying out loud!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-wants-make-ivf-treatments-paid-government-insurance-compani-rcna168804

- He *condemned* the Charlottesville neo-Nazis. Her claim that he called them “very fine people” has been debunked.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

Sure would be nice to watch a debate in which both candidates are treated equally. CNN did a good job in this regard.

Trump is a serial liar and has been getting away with it for years because nobody's challenged him on it. He's fortunate he got off this lightly. He lost the debate because he doesn't know a single thing about policy. He lost the debate because he has a "concept of a plan" for health care that he started talking about in 2015 (i.e., he's got nothing). He lost because he couldn't control his emotions. He lost because he was talking about the imaginary eating of pets. But he's got MAGA to make excuses for his failure, of course...

You don’t have to be “MAGA” to understand that BOTH candidates - or neither - should have been fact-checked.

Honestly, the insistence of some of you in calling anyone who dares to disagree with you or puts out an opinion you don’t like, “MAGA,” is tiresome and telling. Some of you seem to have a very narrow vocabulary that relies on that term way more than it should.
DP

I mean if MAGA is going to continue to spin, spin, spin to make excuses for him, it is what it is. His lies are so egregious that he needed to be fact-checked.

Sure. But fact-checking one candidate and not the other is the very definition of biased moderation.

Only if their lies are equal in scale and kind

LOL. Muir fact checked Trump one time on the mere fact that he “couldn’t detect the sarcasm” in trumps voice. What a whopper! This debate was a total hatchet job.

+1
Unfortunately, they were all too eager to fact-check Trump and in doing so, let Harris's lies slip on by. It did not go unnoticed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump was given the last word on multiple topics -- a chance to respond after Harris spoke. She was not accorded the same opportunity. He was given longer to speak than Harris (by about five minutes). Seems like these facts suggest the moderators were biased in favor of Trump, not Harris.

Trump was given the last word on EVERY topic.

DP. Partially because Harris lobbed some false accusations at him that he wound up defending. Had they ALSO fact-checked her, that would not have happened. And before you ask, her false were posted by another poster this afternoon.

Nah. She attacked him with his record. Sorry you don’t like hearing it.
She’s been fact checked by multiple reputable sources, and the verdict is: she told ( mostly) the truth.
Trump was gingerly corrected on 3 outrageous lies. Cry more.

I’ve bolded the only pertinent word in your childish post. Do better.

Get bent. Your boy is a loser who lost. BIGLY. I guess it sucks that there was no chance of him NOT getting checked. He could have hewed in slightly toward the truth. He didn’t. He can’t. He’s a degenerate liar.
Oh…and I couldn’t BE BETTER! This week has been great! Thanks.😉

Ok, I see you really are twelve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.vox.com/kamala-harris/371497/harris-troops-war-zones

But none of this is “war,” according to the US government. A Department of Defense official, speaking on background, told Vox, “An aspect of military service includes serving in locations where hostile actions may occur. Those locations are designated by executive order and/or the secretary of defense. However, it’s important to note that just because a service member is in one of these locations does not mean they are engaged in war. The US is not currently engaged in a war and does not have troops fighting in active war zones anywhere in the world.”

Harris does appear to have carefully chosen her wording — “active duty in a combat zone in any war zone”

So… fact checking is hard, and Kamala is good at this.

DP. No, she's not. She's being protected. It would have been quite easy for Muir to fact check her on that statement. There are "war zones" all over the world at or near where U.S. troops are stationed (and where they operate). They may not be war zones declared by Congress, but they are war zones nonetheless. If you deny this, tell that to the families who live there. But they're not Americans, so you don't really care what happens to them. More importantly, tell that to the families whose loved ones continue to get injured at our military bases around the world from terrorist strikes. But again, go ahead and hang your hat on a technicality because reality doesn't matter to you either.

Also, don't look far for someone who misrepresented he was in a war zone carrying "weapons of war"....

LOL. I don’t know, Vincenza, Italy is probably a little scary for a guy from Minnesota.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.vox.com/kamala-harris/371497/harris-troops-war-zones

But none of this is “war,” according to the US government. A Department of Defense official, speaking on background, told Vox, “An aspect of military service includes serving in locations where hostile actions may occur. Those locations are designated by executive order and/or the secretary of defense. However, it’s important to note that just because a service member is in one of these locations does not mean they are engaged in war. The US is not currently engaged in a war and does not have troops fighting in active war zones anywhere in the world.”

Harris does appear to have carefully chosen her wording — “active duty in a combat zone in any war zone”

So… fact checking is hard, and Kamala is good at this.

From your source:

“The lighter footprint and the smaller number of casualties makes it easier for the administration to downplay these conflicts’ significance and keep them out of the public eye,” Brian Finucane, a former State Department legal adviser now with the International Crisis Group, told Vox. “It lets them off the hook from actually having to explain why US forces are in harm’s way, or why they’re bombing the Houthis, or what the plan is to bring an end to this.”

Biden and Harris can fairly claim to have presided over the end of an era of warfare that began with the 9/11 attacks and the invasion of Afghanistan as well as the beginning of a new one in which US forces in the Middle East are engaged in a much lower but still significant level of combat with terrorist groups and state-backed militias, more or less indefinitely and with little public debate.

Admittedly, though, that’s not as pithy a debate line.

[Anonymous]

It's hilarious to me that people are like why didn't they fact check Harris? If she had said that Haitians in Springfield Ohio were eating people's pets, she would've been fact checked as well. Trump was fact checked 5 times, and they were for his most egregious lies. He had 30 or so other lies that were not fact checked. He lied over 50 times during the Biden debate that went unchecked, so maybe the few checks he had on him did rein him in a little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious to me that people are like why didn't they fact check Harris? If she had said that Haitians in Springfield Ohio were eating people's pets, she would've been fact checked as well. Trump was fact checked 5 times, and they were for his most egregious lies. He had 30 or so other lies that were not fact checked. He lied over 50 times during the Biden debate that went unchecked, so maybe the few checks he had on him did rein him in a little.

DP. The fact checks weren't equal, plain and simple. She lied numerous times, but wasn't called out on it. That was clearly by design from ABC. The moderators were clearly prepared to fact check Trump. They were not prepared to fact check Harris.

Harris couldn't even answer the moderators' questions. Today's local Philadelphia ABC interview confirms that she can't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious to me that people are like why didn't they fact check Harris? If she had said that Haitians in Springfield Ohio were eating people's pets, she would've been fact checked as well. Trump was fact checked 5 times, and they were for his most egregious lies. He had 30 or so other lies that were not fact checked. He lied over 50 times during the Biden debate that went unchecked, so maybe the few checks he had on him did rein him in a little.

DP. The fact checks weren't equal, plain and simple. She lied numerous times, but wasn't called out on it. That was clearly by design from ABC. The moderators were clearly prepared to fact check Trump. They were not prepared to fact check Harris.

Harris couldn't even answer the moderators' questions. Today's local Philadelphia ABC interview confirms that she can't.

Wah! It’s just so not fair!
😂