Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

This clip may be the most egregious example of ABC debate moderators' direct actions/inactions to affect viewers’ perceptions of the information presented at the debate. There are at least seven instances of this within a two-minute span. This is not “bias." It’s much worse. This is direct, planned interference...

41,371,188 views • 2 years ago •via X (Twitter)

10 Comments

Western Lensman's profile picture
Western Lensman2 years ago

CNN “fact checks.” How is this even real?

Zaki Solja's profile picture
Zaki Solja2 years ago

They literally shut Trump off and gave Kamala the opportunity to lie.

Western Lensman's profile picture
Western Lensman2 years ago

💯

Eric Pistey's profile picture
Eric Pistey2 years ago

Kamala repeatedly told blatant lies that are were so refutable but ABC moderators refused to do so.

Western Lensman's profile picture
Western Lensman2 years ago

By not “fact checking” them, that false information was conferred validity by the moderators.

Brick Suit's profile picture
Brick Suit2 years ago

The one about police officers dying on J6 is especially egregious.

Western Lensman's profile picture
Western Lensman2 years ago

And it’s repeated ad nauseam.

AppPatriotgirl 🇺🇸's profile picture
AppPatriotgirl 🇺🇸2 years ago

ABC should lose their FCC license and be charged with election interference.

RedWave Press's profile picture
RedWave Press2 years ago

Great analysis! ABC News was out to get Trump the moment the debate started. A study showed ABC News is 100% positive in their coverage of Kamala and 93% negative in their coverage of Trump.

Western Lensman's profile picture
Western Lensman2 years ago

Yep.

Related Videos

Top 5 lies that the ABC News moderators refused to fact-check or falsely fact-checked during the debate: 1. Mandatory Firearm Buybacks: Kamala Harris told Trump to "stop lying" about her wanting to confiscate firearms. Harris has previously stated multiple times that she wants to launch a mandatory buyback program. The ABC moderators said nothing. 2. "Fine People" Hoax: Kamala Harris claimed Trump called neo-N*zi's "very fine people." This hoax was debunked by Snopes but the ABC moderators let it slide. The ABC moderators said nothing. 3. Post-Birth Abortion: Trump claimed babies were 'k*lled' outside the womb in failed abortions. Under Tim Walz, babies born alive in botched abortions are allowed to be left to d*e. Eight babies who survived abortions in Minnesota were abandoned and sadly perished under Walz. The ABC moderators simply said Trump was lying and moved on without adding context. 4. Defund the Police: Kamala Harris laughed when Trump said she wanted to defund the police. During a previous interview, Harris said having more cops on the street is "wrong." She also supported taking police officers out of schools. The ABC moderators said nothing. 5. Bl**dbath Hoax: Kamala Harris claimed Trump said there would be a bl**dbath if he is not elected, insinuating that his supporters would start k*lling people. This is completely false. The comment was made during a rally where Trump said there would be a "bl**dbath" for the American auto industry if he is not elected. The ABC moderators said nothing.

Collin Rugg

6,902,525 views • 2 years ago

Full Debate Analysis: Trump won convincingly, had a strong performance, despite going into a 3-1 debate against the moderators. However, Kamala did not bomb, and did enough to keep her campaign alive. The story of the debate is ABC showing their blatant bias in favor of Kamala, and weaponized their “fact-checks” solely at Trump. They let Kamala lie unchecked about everything from the Project 2025 hoax, to the Charlottesville hoax, and everything in between. The ABC moderators showed a clear and obvious hostility towards Trump, that they did not show towards Kamala, and in many cases, teed Kamala up to bash Trump with prepared talking points. It is now abundantly clear why Kamala refused to accept the debate on Fox News, because her campaign knew she would receive preferential treatment on ABC. Kamala also was well-rehearsed, which is unlike her, almost as if she had the questions given to her ahead of time. If ABC were willing to be adversarial towards Trump, why would they stop there? Why wouldn’t they give Kamala the questions? ABC (Disney) just confirmed on national TV, that they are in bed with the DNC, and given their war-like posture towards Trump, I think it’s safe to assume Kamala’s campaign were made aware of the questions before hand. With all that being said, Trump got the viral moments of the night, stuck to his gameplan, and brushed off the endless lies and repeated attacks, from both Kamala and the moderators. Kamala’s optics were terrible, with her constant smirking, making faces, emotional responses, and monotone phony tone. And Trump refused to let her get her viral moment. Kamala’s gameplan was to appear more moderate, and blame Trump for all the problems she and Biden created over the last 4 years, but anyone who has been paying attention saw this for what it was. Given Kamala held her own and did not implode, we can expect the compromised MSM to claim Kamala won, and the headlines will be about Trump talking about Haitians eating pets. However, the viral internet clips will belong to Trump. Overall, Kamala did not gain any ground, Trump put on a solid performance, and the public got to see the MSM are clearly engaged in election interference in favor of the Dems. Net positive for Trump.

Clandestine

534,462 views • 2 years ago

🔥 Fox’s Trace Gallagher CALLS OUT MS Now for cutting away from Trump’s UN speech to fact-check him — before having to fact-check themselves! “The Fox News Common Sense department was not one bit surprised to see MS Now cut away from the president’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly. But Common Sense was surprised that the reason MS Now cut away was to fact-check the president’s speech at the UN General Assembly.” “And let’s face it, allowing MS to fact-check the president is like allowing the United Nations to fact-check Israel. In other words, when hatred runs deep, facts run awry.” “For example, MS Now disputed the president’s claim that he was responsible for ending eight wars. Problem is, other fact-checkers have said the president makes a compelling argument that he ended eight wars.” “And the truth is, the MS fact-check had little to do with facts and everything to do with opinion. And wouldn’t you know, MS Now and the president of the United States have a difference of opinion.” “But the amazing thing about the MS fact-check is the fact that MS had to fact-check itself. The same network who said the president’s speech was, quote, “riddled with false claims,” had to come back on the air and correct a false claim. Oops.” “Common Sense thinks if you’re gonna interrupt the president’s speech just to criticize the president’s speech, why not just take a page out of CNN’s playbook and ignore the president’s speech altogether?”

TV News Now

19,402 views • 4 days ago

David Sacks criticizes the presidential debate fact-checking, noting Kamala Harris pushed debunked hoaxes like "Very Fine People," "Suckers and Losers," and "Bloodbath," while Springfield, Ohio's city manager acknowledged complaints in March about pets being eaten. "You basically had a three-on-one situation. It turns out that Linsey Davis is Kamala's sorority sister. David Muir was fact-checking him constantly, and some of those fact-checks weren't even correct. For example, we now know that the Springfield city manager has acknowledged complaints about pets being eaten. As far back as March, there are videos of him talking about the complaints." "You can say you don't believe those stories or whatever, but those reports were real. But David Muir fact-checked in real-time, saying that Trump was wrong, and there was an effort to gaslight and make him sound crazy during the debate when there were, in fact, sources for what he was saying." "And they only fact-check one candidate. For example, when Kamala Harris repeated numerous hoaxes like the Very Fine People hoax, the Bloodbath hoax, and the Suckers and Losers hoax. I mean, these are things that were already addressed in the last debate. And, you know, even left-wing sites like Snopes have said the Very Fine People thing is totally made up. The Bloodbath one was really egregious, too, because he was talking about the auto industry. She was able to say these things and never got fact-checked once." Follow -> David Sacks

KanekoaTheGreat

16,893,950 views • 2 years ago