In the first moments of the presidential debate between VP Harris and President Trump on September 10, the VP made this accurate prediction:
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: . . . in this debate tonight, you’re going to hear from the same old, tired playbook, a bunch of lies, grievances and name-calling.
She said this with confidence while she effectively dodged questions (following the old, tired political playbook) and rapid fired so many lies and phony grievances herself. She and her campaign continue to double down on these lies. There is still time to dig deeper and expose the lies.
The debate wasn’t a fair fight either. The debate might have been more compelling and swayed more voters had the moderators not acted as biased Democrat Party activists, supporting and adding to Harris’s dishonesty. What is a sporting event if the officials only penalize one team throughout the night?
Who needs moderators anyway? In 1858, Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas followed a better model for political debates, one still used by high school debaters. There were no moderators. America would be far better served with skilled debaters who speak for extended periods of time, think quickly on their feet, articulate actual policy positions, fact check each other in real time, and do not rely on proxies for assistance. Few presidential candidates these days possess these skills because the debate format has been watered down significantly since 1858. We have been lulled into believing the contemporary standard is the only way to conduct a debate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln%E2%80%93Douglas_debates
[There were seven debates between Lincoln and Douglas]. Each debate lasted about three hours; one candidate spoke for 60 minutes, followed by a 90-minute response and a final 30-minute rejoinder by the first candidate. The candidates alternated speaking first. As the incumbent, Douglas spoke first in four of the debates. They were held outdoors, weather permitting, from about 2 to 5 p.m. The fields were full of listeners.
Lies are often not exposed during political debates these days because candidates with little to say can adopt a rope-a-dope strategy (a boxing style created by Muhammad Ali in the 1970s). There is often insufficient time or opportunity to expose lies, so a rope-a-dope strategy, including distractions designed to send your opponent down a rabbit hole, can be quite effective. It is doubly frustrating when the moderators lie as well. Lies are only exposed post debate when far fewer are paying attention and the lies have taken root among millions of voters who didn’t bother to do their own fact checking.
Political debates should be like a classic Ali brawl. Give your best shots, absorb punches, and counter. Dishonest and ineffective candidates cannot hide for fifteen rounds. Rope-a-dope was never an effective strategy for Ali in any case, one that he adopted later in his career when his skills were beginning to wane. It really was not effective for VP Harris either, but is the only strategy she has.
Where do we Begin?
It is oh-so-tempting for Harris to pick from the juicy but dishonest fruit; her credibility should be ruined by telling this many lies. If only more people would notice.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: And as of today, 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.
Let’s do a quick sanity check:
- Several thousand American troops are in Syria, Jordan, and Iraq, a designated combat zone.
- Three American soldiers were killed in Jordan in an Iranian attack in January 2024.
- The Houthis, a terrorist group in Yemen, have routinely launched missiles against American ships in the Red Sea during the last year.
- American warships have been in the Mediterranean Sea since hostilities began in Israel last October 7.
Did she forget these military personnel? She can certainly fool the uniformed. This statement may also “feel” accurate because the US has not declared war with another country. Still, she missed the mark by a fair amount.
Let’s move to January 6, the never-ending hobby horse for the Left.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: On that day, 140 law enforcement officers were injured. And some died.
Officers were indeed injured on January 6, but none died. This particular lie regarding the impact of January 6 has been shamelessly repeated the last four years.
Officer Brian Sicknick died January 7, but Capitol video later proved he was not injured the prior day. The coroner said his death was unrelated to January 6 in any way. https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-of-natural-causes-after-suffering-two-strokes-day-after-jan-6-report/
the D.C. Medical Examiner’s Office reportedly released a ruling on Monday finding that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes after suffering two strokes the day after the Jan. 6th siege.
There were indeed clashes between police and protestors on January 6, but there were no police fatalities. It is too tempting for Harris to pass over this lie. Others in media have repeated it in any case, so she has plenty of cover. This lie advances the bigger lie that January 6 was a serious threat to our democracy. what-did-we-learn-from-january-6-committee
Skeptics will say the few who invaded the Capitol were a dedicated cadre with a plan. How come no firearms were used by protestors? Nobody killed by protestors (one protestor was, in fact, shot by police, and there was one police death, not attributable to the violence)? Some protestors breached the Capitol, but others, ushered in by police, were unaware they were doing anything wrong. Why was that? There was no military or police support for the protestors, no institutional support from any government department. One protestor, a lone wolf apparently, was arrested with a cache of weapons, but those remained in his vehicle and were never accessed by anyone else; this was not good, but also not something which contributed to the events of that day.
An insurrection with no firearms, no institutional support, and nobody killed by the insurrectionists was a piss poor insurrection.
This next lie was executed by Harris Proxy, moderator David Muir:
DAVID MUIR: I just want to clarify here, you bring up Springfield, Ohio. And ABC News did reach out to the city manager there. He told us there have been no credible reports of specific claims of pets being harmed, injured or abused by individuals within the immigrant community —
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Well, I’ve seen people on television
DAVID MUIR: Let me just say here this …
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: The people on television say my dog was taken and used for food. So maybe he said that and maybe that’s a good thing to say for a city manager.
Just prior to the presidential debate, this very story was in the news. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/09/09/full_replay_residents_of_springfield_ohio_speak_about_wave_of_haitian_migrants_at_city_commission_meeting.html.
Per Springfield residents’ reports:
- Haitian immigrants camped in other residents’ yards.
- Several brandished machetes and threatened violence. Ducks in the local ponds were decapitated and eaten for food.
- Stray cats are gone from the city. Springfield Ohio Pet Snatchers (youtube.com). The same stray cat claim was leveled during a March city council meeting directly to the city manager quoted by Mr. Muir.
President Trump simply repeated what he had heard on the news. This is not a story he invented himself. VP Harris was shocked by this comment, but this is not an outrageous claim by any means.
David Muir correctly states the city manager does not believe claims about stray cats and dogs, but the city manager was contradicted by numerous residents. Why should millions of Americans, most of whom tune into politics only for events like this, be told Trump is lying because one-channel media believes the city manager over other city residents?
There are conflicting accounts from Springfield itself, so ABC News cannot legitimately fact check based on the comments of one individual. It would have been appropriate for VP Harris to raise the point herself. The two candidates could have debated the matter. Instead, Mr. Muir pounced on his long awaited opportunity to discredit President Trump. In addition, he interrupted the president when he attempted to respond. Return to the Lincoln Douglas debate format! Leave these awful biased journalists out of the discussion.
Still, the real problem in Springfield isn’t the missing pets. That’s a symptom of a much larger problem President Trump was attempting to highlight. Springfield, a city of 57,000, had its population increased by 35% virtually overnight. How are schools, hospitals, and other services supposed to respond to the increased demand they were unprepared for? Building homes or apartments for 20,000 people in a town this size would take years. Immigration has a long tradition in America, but immigrants have always come to America with the intent of assimilating into American culture. It is impossible to assimilate this many people into a small community this quickly. Furthermore, this administration places no such expectations on any new immigrants. Americans welcome strangers, but don’t want large immigrant populations to supplant our culture with theirs.
Beating the Abortion Drum
VP Harris and the moderators sought a debate on abortion. They think it is a winning issue for their side. However, if people knew the whole truth of abortions, it would have almost no support. Therefore, she must continue to lie about abortion to keep voters on her side.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: And now in over 20 states there are Trump abortion bans which make it criminal for a doctor or nurse to provide health care. In one state it provides prison for life.
This vague, emotionally charged statement is designed to inflame. While it is true abortions are banned in 13 states, no state bans health care for women with complications. States allow abortion exceptions when a mother’s life is in jeopardy, including ectopic pregnancies. No state denies a D and C procedure for spontaneous miscarriages or for miscarriages after taking an abortion pill (a story after the debate tried to make this false claim regarding denied health care: Amber Thurman Died From The Abortion Pill, Not Pro-Life Laws (thefederalist.com))
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Understand in his project 2025 there would be a national abortion ban. Understand in his project 2025 there would be a national abortion — a monitor that would be monitoring your pregnancies, your miscarriages.
Governor Walz made a similar claim days later. I know little of Project 2025 because it’s agenda is a thousand pages I will never read and because President Trump immediately disavowed himself from it as soon as it was raised during the campaign. In any case, I wonder what does Project 2025 actually say about this issue? I cannot imagine a serious proposal to monitor pregnancies and miscarriages, so I did a quick internet search.
Did VP Harris not read the document either? Play on people’s fears for this emotionally charged issue and you may discredit your opponent enough to dishonestly win a few votes.
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: . . . her vice presidential pick says abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine. He also says execution after birth, it’s execution, no longer abortion, because the baby is born, is okay. And that’s not okay with me.
LINSEY DAVIS: There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born. Madam vice president, I want to get your response to President Trump.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Well, as I said, you’re going to hear a bunch of lies.
Again, a moderator sides with VP Harris, and again, the moderator is incorrect. Kamala Harris’s own VP choice, Governor Tim Walz, signed a bill removing all restrictions on abortion in Minnesota, including abortions in the last trimester.
After winning reelection for governor in 2022, Walz and the newly-elected Democratic legislature in January 2023 rushed through the Protect Reproductive Options Act, which codified the “fundamental right to reproductive freedom” and essentially prohibited any restrictions on abortion, including gestational age limits.
Minnesota’s “Born Alive Protection” act, passed in 2015, was repealed with the passage of the 2022 law signed by Governor Walz. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/2015/cite/145.423.
This is basic Democrat orthodoxy and Harris sticks to it: there shall be absolutely no restrictions on abortions; therefore, babies born alive after a failed abortion attempt are left to die. This is the same policy advocated by former Virginia Governor Ralph Northam during a radio interview (something else President Trump alluded to twice during the debate) a-child-is-not-a-choice.
So, who is actually lying here?
In the third trimester, a baby is viable and a mother’s health is more at risk during an abortion. Only six countries even allow abortions in the third trimester (countries we should not want to be associated with). President Trump raised this concern and received no response from VP Harris.
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: And the other thing, they — you should ask, will she allow abortion in the eighth month, ninth month, seventh month?
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Come on.
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Would you do that? Why don’t you ask her that question —
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: You could do abortions in the seventh month, the eighth month, the ninth month –
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: That’s not true.
However, it is true. Harris supports the “Women’s Health Protection Act,” which would allow abortions through all nine months of pregnancy. Harris, not Trump, has the extreme position on this issue. Otherwise, why doesn’t she defend her position with more vigor? Why must she lie to show she does not have an extreme position.?
“My body, my choice” is the ultimate lie. During pregnancy, there are two bodies not one, unless one person has twenty fingers, twenty toes, four arms, four legs, and two heads. It is not your body and it is not your (legitimate) choice.
Today, some women shout their abortions. Some even publicly wish they had been pregnant so they too could have had an abortion and supported the cause. (never-again). We have devolved from the “safe, legal, and rare” paradigm to a society literally advocating for child sacrifice.
Fine People on Both Sides
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Let’s remember Charlottesville, where there was a mob of people carrying tiki torches, spewing anti-Semitic hate, and what did the president then at the time say? There were fine people on each side.
This phony smear has been repeated ad nauseum for seven years. This egregious lie just won’t die. The press conference transcript makes clear Trump did not advocate violence or praise groups spewing hatred.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/full-transcript-of-trumps-both-sides-charlottesville-presser
Q: Mr. President, are you putting what you’re calling the alt-left and white supremacists on the same moral plane?
THE PRESIDENT: I’m not putting anybody on a moral plane. What I’m saying is this: You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other, and they came at each other with clubs — and it was vicious and it was horrible. And it was a horrible thing to watch.
But there is another side. There was a group on this side. You can call them the left — you just called them the left — that came violently attacking the other group. So you can say what you want, but that’s the way it is.
Q: (Inaudible) both sides, sir. You said there was hatred, there was violence on both sides. Are the —
The president says there is blame on both sides.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I think there’s blame on both sides. If you look at both sides — I think there’s blame on both sides. And I have no doubt about it, and you don’t have any doubt about it either.
And if you reported it accurately, you would say.
Trump clearly stated the Neo-Nazis and white nationalists should be condemned totally.
So you know what, it’s fine. You’re changing history. You’re changing culture. And you had people — and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists — because they should be condemned totally.
He then defends another group of people, people who are not Neo-Nazis and not white nationalists, not spewing hatred, who he says were treated unfairly.
But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.
Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people. But you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets, and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group.
There are zero Trump comments about fine people spewing anti-Semitic hate. Harris’s deception is easily exposed, but the temptation to paint Donald Trump as a Nazi ally is just too great for her to avoid. The strategy is unfortunately effective when appealing to people who will believe anything negative about President Trump–whether true or not.
Harris also echoed a more recent and another extensively demagogued comment in which Trump used the term “bloodbath”.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS Donald Trump the candidate has said in this election there will be a bloodbath, if this — and the outcome of this election is not to his liking.
Trump used the term “bloodbath” when speaking of the economy. For two-and-a-half paragraphs Trump spoke of economics before saying it will be a “bloodbath” under Harris’s policies. He didn’t prompt anyone to violence if he was not elected. He warned there would be bad consequences (i.e. an economic bloodbath) if Harris’s policies are implemented. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-bloodbath-for-country/
China now is building a couple of massive plants where they’re going to build the cars in Mexico and think, they think, that they’re going to sell those cars into the United States with no tax at the border.
Let me tell you something, to China, if you’re listening, President Xi — and you and I are friends, but he understands the way I deal — those big, monster car-manufacturing plants that you’re building in Mexico right now, and you think you’re going to get that, you’re going to not hire Americans, and you’re going to sell the cars to us?
No, we’re going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you’re not going to be able to sell those cars if I get elected. Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s going to be the least of it, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the country, that’ll be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars, they’re building massive factories.
It is yet another ugly distortion.
Harris repeated other false narratives regarding Trump’s words. She wants to paint him as extreme and out-of-control; if he is extreme and out-of-control, why must she twist his words and lie about his intent? Furthermore, if you are lying about him in these instances, how many other instances are you lying about him?
Quick Takes
Let me squeeze in a few more Harris lies. There is always room for a few more:
https://thefederalist.com/2024/09/11/25-lies-kamala-harris-told-in-her-debate-against-trump/
Harris said the Trump Tax cuts (in 2017) benefitted only for billionaires and big corporations. Not true. In 2017 many large corporations passed on tax cuts to their workers. Tax brackets were lowered for all individuals, including the middle class.
- Harris said Trump would be immune from prosecution per a recent Supreme Court decision. I wrote an entire post on why this is not true: presumption-of-presidential-immunity-makes-sense Everyone, not just the president, charged in the US is afforded a presumption of innocence in a courtroom. Despite this protection, not everyone is acquitted. The presumption of innocence can be (and frequently is) overcome. Similarly, a president’s presumption of immunity can be overcome with strong evidence against him. This presumption does not give the president carte blanche.
- In 2019, Kamala Harris said: “There is no question I am in favor of banning fracking” The tape says otherwise: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=harris+says+she+is+for+a+fracking+ban&atb=v314-1&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DVNPKSr-ozU4. She changed her fracking position when joining the Biden ticket (not her choice, in other words), but now she says she was NEVER for a fracking ban. Politicians are allowed to change their minds, but they need to explain the switch. Denying something true never happened is not the way it should be done.
- During the summer of 2020, she joined a chorus of Democrats supporting “defund the police”. Again, the tape shows otherwise: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/26/politics/kfile-kamala-harris-praised-defund-the-police-movement-in-june-2020/index.html. When confronted with this during the debate, she said “That’s not true”. But it is 100% true.
Telling the truth matters. Politicians shouldn’t just be honest only when it is convenient. Furthermore, lying politicians should not be defended by biased news media. This is bad for our public discourse. The American public knows relatively little about VP Harris. The debate was a chance to get to know her better, but her deceptions may have thrown many off the scent. Furthermore, the campaign strategy is to keep her hidden, to pretend she is a change from the current administration. People should take the time to dig a little deeper to see the real Kamala Harris.
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: So, she just started by saying she’s going to do this, she’s going to do that, she’s going to do all these wonderful things. Why hasn’t she done it? She’s been there for 3 1/2 years. They’ve had 3 1/2 years to fix the border. They’ve had 3 1/2 years to create jobs and all the things we talked about. Why hasn’t she done it?
Was the Debate Rigged?
Unfortunately, politicians are known for lying, but cheating is a far greater problem. The cheating for this election may have already begun. It seems obvious that Harris was provided an unfair advantage during the debate. How involved was her campaign in seeking this advantage? Hopefully, we will hear more definitive news regarding this story before the election is over.
Seek the Truth 
I like how a lot of voters are now termed as “low information voters”. That’s the target audience for politicians aiming to get voted into office on popularity over ability or actual policies. It’s worked so well in so many western countries in the last couple of decades. That’s why they go balls out with their narratives and deflections as it is designed to wipe out any competition. IMO
LikeLike