ABC Moderator Linsey Davis Admits: ‘Fact-checking’ Was Only Planned for Trump

[LeftofLeft]

The fact checking on Cheeto Hitler should have started the minute he came down the escalator.

Nothing wrong with fact checking. What is wrong is to not fact check the other candidate.

The media is corrupt.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Nothing wrong with fact checking.

NOT THEIR JOB.

Those two idiots show just how stupid America has gotten.

 

[lantern2814]

Sorry but lots of Republicans filled out lots of bogus affidavits in 2016 so you'll have to give us more evidence than a sworn affidavit for us to believe anything you are saying.

Extraordinary liars need extraordinary proof.

So how many people were prosecuted for filing those "bogus affidavits". Answer : NONE. Because that would mean ALL evidence would have been introduced, proving the fraud. Oops.

 

[lantern2814]

Harris sounded pretty darned presidential to me last Tuesday... when she mopped the floor with Trump so bad he had to fake another assassination attempt.

^^ This is the pure idiocy of Harris supporters. No grasp of reality. Even Oprah couldn't believe or understand the garbage Harris was spewing.

 

[JoeB131]

You admit you overlooked her already debunked lies?

Nope. She tells the Truth about Cheeto Hitler.

Should have happened 9 years ago.

 

[JoeB131]

Nothing wrong with fact checking. What is wrong is to not fact check the other candidate.

The media is corrupt.

Except Trump was the one who did all the lying.

That was the problem.

Kameltoe lied when she claimed no troops were in combat zones

That was a blatant and disrespectful lie

In tampon Tim’s own state he signed into law, alllowing no care for babies who survive an abortion

ABC lied

Which combat zones are they in right now. Certainly not Iraq at this point.

 

[struth]

Except Trump was the one who did all the lying.

That was the problem.



Which combat zones are they in right now. Certainly not Iraq at this point.

Haha we are certainly in Iraq

Harris lied

 

[LeftofLeft]

Except Trump was the one who did all the lying.

That was the problem.

The bigger problem is you can’t prove it

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Except Trump was the one who did all the lying.

That was the problem.



Which combat zones are they in right now. Certainly not Iraq at this point.

You should be better informed

 

[JoeB131]

The bigger problem is you can’t prove it

Sure we can and they did.

When Trump lied about babies being murdered, it was pointed out that infanticide is illegal in every state.

When he lied about eating pets, he was told that the city managers have debunked those lies.

 

[Clipper]

^^ This is the pure idiocy of Harris supporters. No grasp of reality. Even Oprah couldn't believe or understand the garbage Harris was spewing.

Trump was fact checked because he's a deprayed compulsive liar, silly boy.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Sure we can and they did.

When Trump lied about babies being murdered, it was pointed out that infanticide is illegal in every state.

When he lied about eating pets, he was told that the city managers have debunked those lies.

People are being murdered.
Retort; “Murder is illegal in every state”

Does Saying that murder and infanticide are illegal in every state prove that neither happen??

 

[Dagosa]

ABC News’ Linsey Davis, one of two moderators for last week’s presidential debate, admitted to the Los Angeles Times that the plan was only to fact-check former President Donald Trump, and not Vice President Kamala Harris.

Davis told the Times that ABC had deliberately targeted Trump — and only Trump — because of perceptions that he had been allowed to get away with false statements in the CNN debate against President Joe Biden in late June.

ABC Moderator Linsey Davis Admits: 'Fact-checking' Was Only Planned for Trump

ABC News' Linsey Davis admitted that the plan was only to fact-check Trump, and not Harris, because of perceptions CNN was too nice to him.

www.breitbart.com

But.... there's no bias in the media.
Why did the debate look like 3 against 1? Because it was, and they admit it.

Tell us, in factual, rational, non-partisan terms how it makes sense to only target Trump for fact checking because of the supposedly poor moderation of the prior debate.
Be sure to include the various changes of position Harris exhibited since her elevation to Dem nominee.

That all makes sense. Trump, has a history of being the biggest liar of any elected official…..why not ? Trump is a habitual liar…..

 

[Chillicothe]

A full week of memorizing questions and answers is not preparing, it's CHEATING,
........................She was GIVEN QUESTIONS BEFORE THE DEBATE

Prove it.
Simple.
If you know it to be a fact, show us your credible sourcing.
Do it.
Don't look bad on this venue.

--------------------------------------------------

Sometimes you crush it, like he did against Biden,

Like poster Hiker Guy earlier in this thread.....I disagree.
Trump 'won' only because poor Joe Biden self-destructed.
His age and cognitive abilities contributed to that.
Sad to see at the time. Sad to see a distinguished career get such shade.
-------------------------------------------------------

"GFY"

Good ol' MAGA's ability to be articulate, civil, and adult-like.......familiarly demonstrated once again, by MAGA Sea7.
Making America great again......with the f-bomb.

---------------------------------------------------

The problem is that the Media look at Trump as "entertainment"

I quite agree Joe.
The media has irresponsibly protected Trump by letting him get away with his nutsocrazo lies, deceptions, accusations, and fantagasms. EVERY time Trump makes a false statement he should promptly be called on it. THAT is what journalism does.

Their responsibility is to hold to account the powerful, and provide to the public true accounts of developments, statements, assertions. America's media has nurtured and protected Trump simply and merely because he makes headlines that sell newspapers, capture eyeballs.....and makes them money.
------------------------------------------------------------------

If people want to know the facts, they can look them up on their own.
................Absolutely, by the people and the news…but not the debate moderators.

Mentioned earlier.
And adequately addressed.
The journalist at the debate were journalists......not LSAT auditors.
--------------------------------------------------------------

ABC had to cheat to help harris look somewhat good, and she still couldn’t help from lying the entire time

Prove it.
Don't make this forum and yourself look bad.
Be better.
Prove she cheated.

Kameltoe

"Kameltoe"?
When MAGAs ain't wallowing in their inarticulate f-bombs....well, they still have their ingrained and defining misogyny.

alllowing no care for babies who survive an abortion

Prove it.
An tell us about "babies who survive abortion".
Where, when, how many, name hospitals, doctors, give us details and metrics.
It's nonsense.
And cheap inflammatory language.
It's a MAGA trope. I am mildly convinced you should know that.

NOT THEIR JOB.

Indeed, it WAS their job.
They are long vetted career journalists with professional bona fides and the awards to prove it.
They are not hall monitors, or LSAT auditors.
If Trump didn't want.....if Harris didn't want.....real journalists then they should have negotiated for some CPA exam auditors to sit in.

Instead, they agreed to stand before real journalists and subject themselves to what journalists do.
Expect to be asked to explain.
Expect to be fact checked.
Expect to be caught on flagrant falsehoods and deal with it when the inevitable query comes.
Don't be naive'.

ps.....to Don Trump's credit he didn't whine or snowflake about it too much. In fact, in contradistinction, he was happy with ABC and how the debate went. He said he won overwhelmingly. He even said it was his best debate ever.

So why in the world would any of his supporters be unhappy with how it all came down.
He's happy.
Why second guess Don Trump?

 

[struth]

Prove it.
Simple.
If you know it to be a fact, show us your credible sourcing.
Do it.
Don't look bad on this venue.

--------------------------------------------------

Like poster Hiker Guy earlier in this thread.....I disagree.
Trump 'won' only because poor Joe Biden self-destructed.
His age and cognitive abilities contributed to that.
Sad to see at the time. Sad to see a distinguished career get such shade.
-------------------------------------------------------


Good ol' MAGA's ability to be articulate, civil, and adult-like.......familiarly demonstrated once again, by MAGA Sea7.
Making America great again......with the f-bomb.

---------------------------------------------------


I quite agree Joe.
The media has irresponsibly protected Trump by letting him get away with his nutsocrazo lies, deceptions, accusations, and fantagasms. EVERY time Trump makes a false statement he should promptly be called on it. THAT is what journalism does.

Their responsibility is to hold to account the powerful, and provide to the public true accounts of developments, statements, assertions. America's media has nurtured and protected Trump simply and merely because he makes headlines that sell newspapers, capture eyeballs.....and makes them money.
------------------------------------------------------------------


Mentioned earlier.
And adequately addressed.
The journalist at the debate were journalists......not LSAT auditors.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Prove it.
Don't make this forum and yourself look bad.
Be better.
Prove she cheated.



"Kameltoe"?
When MAGAs ain't wallowing in their inarticulate f-bombs....well, they still have their ingrained and defining misogyny.



Prove it.
An tell us about "babies who survive abortion".
Where, when, how many, name hospitals, doctors, give us details and metrics.
It's nonsense.
And cheap inflammatory language.
It's a MAGA trope. I am mildly convinced you should know that.


Indeed, it WAS their job.
They are long vetted career journalists with professional bona fides and the awards to prove it.
They are not hall monitors, or LSAT auditors.
If Trump didn't want.....if Harris didn't want.....real journalists then they should have negotiated for some CPA exam auditors to sit in.

Instead, they agreed to stand before real journalists and subject themselves to what journalists do.
Expect to be asked to explain.
Expect to be fact checked.
Expect to be caught on flagrant falsehoods and deal with it when the inevitable query comes.
Don't be naive'.

ps.....to Don Trump's credit he didn't whine or snowflake about it too much. In fact, in contradistinction, he was happy with ABC and how the debate went. He said he won overwhelmingly. He even said it was his best debate ever.

So why in the world would any of his supporters be unhappy with how it all came down.
He's happy.
Why second guess Don Trump?

ABC whistleblower already came forward and admitted it

 

[Chillicothe]

ABC whistleblower already came forward and admitted it

That's a fail, poster Struth.
I think you now that by now.

Still, riddle the forum this: ,

• A vetted 'whistleblower'?
• And sourced by who?
• And who is it?
• And what evidence has been offered?

Reported: (Politifact)
"The anonymous account’s initial post included no evidence to support its claim. The affidavit the account later shared, on Sept. 15, was impossible to authenticate and made unsubstantiated claims that it provided no evidence to support. The affidavit’s author claims to have secret recordings of conversations that would prove the allegations, but those have not been released.

-------------------------------

In my humble opinion, that 'whistleblower' tale got introduced on right-wing media because of a burning desire for it to be true as an excuse for Harris' competition beating debate performance. And once hoisted up on right-wing media the candidate Vance and others in the Sycophancy Competition amplified it across several platforms.

But, to date, there has proven to be no there there.
If there was.....it would be here.
It would be everywhere.
But, alas, it ain't.

So poster Struth, and with no desire to overdrive the nail ------ "That's a fail".

But good luck with your next conspiracy-du-jour

 

[struth]

That's a fail, poster Struth.
I think you now that by now.

Still, riddle the forum this: ,

• A vetted 'whistleblower'?
• And sourced by who?
• And who is it?
• And what evidence has been offered?

Reported: (Politifact)
"The anonymous account’s initial post included no evidence to support its claim. The affidavit the account later shared, on Sept. 15, was impossible to authenticate and made unsubstantiated claims that it provided no evidence to support. The affidavit’s author claims to have secret recordings of conversations that would prove the allegations, but those have not been released.

-------------------------------

In my humble opinion, that 'whistleblower' tale got introduced on right-wing media because of a burning desire for it to be true as an excuse for Harris' competition beating debate performance. And once hoisted up on right-wing media the candidate Vance and others in the Sycophancy Competition amplified it across several platforms.

But, to date, there has proven to be no there there.
If there was.....it would be here.
It would be everywhere.
But, alas, it ain't.

So poster Struth, and with no desire to overdrive the nail ------ "That's a fail".

But good luck with your next conspiracy-du-jour

Your opinion isn’t relevant.


Ignoring sworn affadivts, evidence, well that’s unsurprising for dembots

 

[Chillicothe]

"Your opinion isn’t relevant........Ignoring sworn affadivts (sic), evidence,"

------------------------------------------------
OK, mein freund, batter up.

Who swore this affidavit?
Who witnessed it?
Do you have a copy with both signatories?
Where is and what is this "evidence" you claim is ignored?

Look, partner, you can make anonymous claims all day under a fake name --as you have been---but there comes a time when the rubber must meet the road, the moment of truth arrives, yada, yada, yada.

And you are a fail in that. Why?

So far, earnest poster Struth...... your flogging of this 'ABC Whistleblower' fantagasm that Trump's Duped & Snookered have fawned over makes your avatar look weak and under-informed, mis-informed.

Be a better poster than that, be a value-added contributor here.

We wish you good luck.

 

[struth]

------------------------------------------------
OK, mein freund, batter up.

Who swore this affidavit?
Who witnessed it?
Do you have a copy with both signatories?
Where is and what is this "evidence" you claim is ignored?

Look, partner, you can make anonymous claims all day under a fake name --as you have been---but there comes a time when the rubber must meet the road, the moment of truth arrives, yada, yada, yada.

And you are a fail in that. Why?

So far, earnest poster Struth...... your flogging of this 'ABC Whistleblower' fantagasm that Trump's Duped & Snookered have fawned over makes your avatar look weak and under-informed, mis-informed.

Be a better poster than that, be a value-added contributor here.

We wish you good luck.

you can deny all the evidence, nobody can make you accept the truth. it's weird though

 

[sealybobo]

Kameltoe lied when she claimed no troops were in combat zones

That was a blatant and disrespectful lie

In tampon Tim’s own state he signed into law, alllowing no care for babies who survive an abortion

ABC lied

No she didn't lie.

A Defense Department spokesperson told PolitiFact that the U.S. is neither engaged in a war, nor has service members fighting in active war zones anywhere in the world.

The Defense Department confirmed the U.S. military is not engaged in a war. But Harris’ statement ignores critical facts.

There are thousands of U.S. military service members stationed in areas that are considered combat zones. These members face hostilities from foreign adversaries and some have been killed or injured during military operations.

We rate Harris’ statement Mostly False.