ABC News Moderators Blasted For Extreme Bias, Fact Checking Trump But Not Harris

[wing2000]

When you do it to one candidate but not the other yes

Harris wasn't spinning stories of immigrants eating your pets. At some point, a line needs to be drawn.

 

[Pommer]

Or (and this might sound a bit radical) the "journalists" could just ask the questions, allow the candidates to answer, and then allow the viewers to do their own research to find out for themselves if what they said is true, and which candidate supports what the individual voter wants in a president. They don't need to inject themselves into the arguments and take sides which then makes the viewers question the validity of the debate process, and ultimately the election process.

My guess is that if Mister Trump hadn’t allowed himself to have been lured out to immigrants-eating-the-pets-land, he would have fared okay and we won’t be discussing what a raw deal he got from these biased moderators.

 

[Hammster]

Harris wasn't spinning stories of immigrants eating your pets. At some point, a line needs to be drawn.

She did lie about Charlottesville.

 

[BPPLEE]

Logically they first have to be saying something that is inaccurate.

She did

 

[BPPLEE]

Harris wasn't spinning stories of immigrants eating your pets. At some point, a line needs to be drawn.

She was spinning other stories

 

[BPPLEE]

What if one had had a long history of telling whoppers?
I would think it amiss of the journalists didn’t come prepared more for that one and scrutinize them more severely.

This is “normal”; /thread

That is biased

 

[wing2000]

She was spinning other stories

Was she? Which far left social media stories was she spinning?

 

[childeye 2]

She did

Okay, so what is it that she said that bothered you.

 

[rjs330]

Or that she didn’t support gender reassignment for illegals. Or didn’t raise money to post bail for criminals in Minneapolis.

Or that she was never for taking people's gun?

 

[rjs330]

So the obvious bias of the moderators doesn’t concern you?

Of course it doesn't concern anyone on the left. It's obvious they are not for fairness or equality. This is one more piece of evidence that they are okay with anything as long as it means they might win the election.

 

[BPPLEE]

Okay, so what is it that she said that bothered you.

I've already posted in this thread things she said that weren't true.
She didn't say anything that bothered me because I know it's all rhetoric

 

[childeye 2]

I've already posted in this thread things she said that weren't true.
She didn't say anything that bothered me because I know it's all rhetoric

Like what did you post? I hope it's not the federalist list of Harris lies. That would not qualify as rhetoric from Harris.

 

[childeye 2]

Or that she was never for taking people's gun?

When I checked the provided evidence for one of these particular claims, they showed that Harris at one time supported a buy back guns program.

 

[rjs330]

Even the moderators lied when fact checking Trump. For example on the abortion issue when they fact checked Teump they lied about what some states allow.

 

[7thKeeper]

Even the moderators lied when fact checking Trump. For example on the abortion issue when they fact checked Teump they lied about what some states allow.

So what state(s) allow(s) the killing of a baby after birth?

 

[childeye 2]

Even the moderators lied when fact checking Trump. For example on the abortion issue when they fact checked Teump they lied about what some states allow.

Blank assertions are not exactly productive discourse. And both sides should dial back the hyperbole. If we sow the wind, we will reap the whirlwind. A charge of lying should be accompanied with evidence showing that the person being charged knows the actual truth but intends to deceive. Otherwise, the one making the charge could just as well be labelled a liar and the entire discourse becomes bad fruits.

 

[childeye 2]

My guess is that if Mister Trump hadn’t allowed himself to have been lured out to immigrants-eating-the-pets-land, he would have fared okay and we won’t be discussing what a raw deal he got from these biased moderators.

Personally, it was informative to see what Trump believes as true, and where he gets the information upon which he formulates his reasonings and subsequent decision making.

 

[rjs330]

This was so telling as to who the press is in this country. They have lost all objectivity. The press was supposed to be the watch dog over the government and be unbiased. This was pure evidence that they have lost all objectivity and are the propaganda branch for the democratic party.

 

[childeye 2]

This was so telling as to who the press is in this country. They have lost all objectivity. The press was supposed to be the watch dog over the government and be unbiased. This was pure evidence that they have lost all objectivity and are the propaganda branch for the democratic party.

Things have changed with the rise of the internet, and we can't just blame the press. How is it that there's way more money to be made by spreading disinformation and sensationalism? It's like no one wants to hear the boring truth.

 

[BPPLEE]

Like what did you post? I hope it's not the federalist list of Harris lies. That would not qualify as rhetoric from Harris.

Here’s the fact check that ABC didn’t give Kamala Harris

So since ABC didn’t do its job, here are some of the fact checks they should have made:

nypost.com