Media Bias in Favor of Kamala Harris

Media Bias in Favor of Kamala Harris

Joe Biden has decided not to run for re-election in November. Or rather, the decision was made for him by people with more political power. This leaves Kamala Harris as the presumptive candidate to represent her party in November 2024. But unfortunately, Ms. Harris is very unpopular, is not the brightest bulb in the candelabra, and carries more baggage than a Greyhound bus. I predict the press will be instructed to dredge up that baggage until the socialist Democrats hold their convention, at which time the delegates (if their opinion matters) will no longer put up with her, and somebody like Michelle Obama will be installed in her place. Nothing about this process is really democratic.

There is simply no way that an incompetent DEI hire will be elevated to President of the U.S. without massive voter fraud, the political leverage of the anonymous oligarchy, and blatant bias in the news media. The last factor is the subject of this page.

With an Honest Press, Democrats Wouldn't Have Been Shocked at the Election Results. An honest press would have reported that Kamala Harris was ducking key questions, botching interviews, and offering word salad responses. Worse, she learned nothing from one interview to the next, and she was unprepared to address fundamental issues while her handlers ignored these deficiencies. All the while, the mainstream press touted her as a skillful leader who would carve a new path forward, fight for the middle class, and unleash an "opportunity economy." If the press had cited her glaring deficiencies in running for the highest office in the land, she and her team might have been able to make course corrections and thereby exhibit a better showing. Instead, the mainstream press propped her up, along with inauthentic pollsters, strongly suggesting that it was a tight contest between Harris and Trump and that Harris was the superior candidate! Likewise, reporters failed to offer balanced reporting on her running mate, Tim Walz and generated countless features about what a great VP he would be.

Kamala Harris' campaign paid Oprah Winfrey's production company nearly $2.5 million for celeb-packed town hall — over double initial estimate. Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign shelled out nearly $2.5 million to Oprah Winfrey's production company for the celeb-packed town hall it hosted — more than double the initial estimate reported. It was originally surmised that Winfrey's company Harpo Productions had been paid around $1 million for the talk show legend's September town hall with Harris, but a new report shows that the dollar amount was greatly underestimated. Two people familiar with the matter told the New York Times that Winfrey's company had actually been paid closer to $2.5 million — still a mere fraction of Harris' estimated $1.5 billion campaign spending.

MSDNC on Hot Seat After Revelations on Harris Campaign Donations to Sharpton Organization. One big area of focus in the various post-mortems of Vice President Kamala Harris' second failed presidential campaign has been on the piles of money (one billion dollars) she spent trying to win the support of voters in key battleground states. For instance, there were the stories about the million dollars the Harris campaign spent on the "Unite for America" live-streaming event in Michigan that took place on September 19th which was hosted by TV talk show host/producer Oprah Winfrey. Though Winfrey's production company, Harpo, has denied that she was paid any personal fees whatsoever from the Harris campaign or Harpo, the questions continue to swirl. The list just goes on and on. [...] And now, hot on the heels of the Winfrey allegations comes news of what the Harris campaign gave to the racist "Reverend" Al Sharpton, a former Democrat candidate for president himself and longtime host on MSNBC. According to a new Free Beacon report, the Harris campaign donated to Sharpton's organization, the National Action Network (NAN), two times prior to her October 20th interview with him, which was broadcast on MSNBC. What did she donate? $500,000.

Kamala Harris Campaign Gave $500k to Al Sharpton's Nonprofit Weeks Before Glowing Interview With Anti-Semitic MSNBC Host. [Scroll down] On Oct. 3, Sharpton aired a video of Harris wishing him happy birthday on his MSNBC weekend show, PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton. "Happy birthday, Rev," Harris said, using Sharpton's nickname. "You have been over all of your years such an extraordinary leader. You have been a voice of truth, a voice of conscience." Sharpton, 70, conducted a glowing interview with Harris on Oct. 20 in which he touted her "extraordinary historic campaign" while referring to Trump as "hostile and erratic." His questions lined up closely with messages that Harris sought to highlight on the campaign trail. Sharpton addressed concerns among black voters — especially black men — about Harris's record as a prosecutor in California, where she was given the nickname "Kamala the Cop." [...] Sharpton did not disclose payments from the Harris campaign during either segment with the candidate. National Action Network did not respond to requests for comment. MSNBC also did not respond to comment requests.

How media fails. Of all the institutions that have failed us in past years, none has been worse than the media. [...] Fast forward to the obvious cognitive decline of President Biden. This was fairly evident even during the 2020 election but became more obvious during his term. Where was the investigation and reporting? Instead, the media basically covered up for him until it became undeniable to the entire population after the debate this past June. Had the media done its job, it is likely that Democrats would have insisted on a proper primary where multiple candidates would have been vetted. Kamala Harris would not have been the choice of Democrat primary voters. Harris would have had to better delineate her positions and her rationale for changing so many of them. Even Tim Walz didn't get properly vetted by the press. They jumped all over J.D. Vance's old comment about cat ladies but didn't pursue many of Walz's radical positions and clear falsehoods regarding his résumé.

The reason Kamala Harris lost. Whatever you think of Donald Trump, watching the mood change in the BBC's election studio has been delicious. It was like a New Orleans funeral in reverse — a carnival turning a corner and transforming into a wake. This was supposed to be a historic night. But then it wasn't just the BBC. The liberal media have been at it for days. There was supposed to be a last-minute surge in support for Kamala Harris, driven by record turnout of women coming out to fight for their rights. This was pure hubris. To think that the US election was going to turn on the touchstone liberal issue of abortion (sorry, 'reproductive rights') was nothing more than wishful thinking on the part of the many commentators and academics wheeled out to make that point.

Say, What Happened To 'Closest Election In History'? For months running up to the Nov. 5 election, the "experts" told us that this would be the closest in history. Over and over again they said it. Always with great certainty.
"This could be the closest presidential election since 1876"
"Uncertainty reigns in an election closer 'than any I have ever seen'"
"Kamala Harris vs. Donald Trump is the closest presidential race of the century"
"2024 Election Is The Closest Presidential Race In At Least 60 Years: Polls"
"Coping with election-related anxiety in a razor-thin race"
"Razor-thin race between Harris and Trump should motivate Democrats ahead of Election Day"
"Dead-heat poll results are astonishing — and improbable, these experts say"
"America's dead-heat Trump-Harris election"
"Poll shows presidential race in dead heat"
Turns out, it wasn't close at all. Trump is currently ahead by 3.5 points in the popular vote. That will tighten as the millions of votes in deep-blue states such as California, Washington, and Oregon continue to be counted, but if it holds it will be the first time since 2004 that a GOP candidate won the popular vote and only the second time since 1988. But unless you failed civics class, you'd know that we don't elect presidents by national popular vote. And if Nevada, Arizona, and Michigan end up in the Trump camp — he's currently leading in all three states plus Alaska — Trump will end up with 312 electoral votes.

So NBC Broke Election Law And Will Get Away With It; UPDATE: Forced to Give Trump Equal Time. Kamala Harris made a surprise appearance on Saturday Night Live. It was a surprise both because it hadn't been telegraphed and also because NBC had previously said neither candidate would appear due to laws requiring equal time for all candidates running. There is nothing obscure about those laws, and NBC specifically referenced them earlier this year to explain why they wouldn't host either candidate. [Advertisement] [Tweet] But there are two close races NBC wanted to influence: the presidential race, and also the Virginia Senate race in which Tim Caine faces a difficult reelection battle against a strong Republican Hung Cao. So NBC decided to break the law. To protect the rule of law, our democracy, and American political norms, you see. Sometimes you have to break some eggs to make an omelet, and if using the public airwaves, provided by the American taxpayers for free in the public interest, means tipping the scales for a favored candidate, they will do their duty. [Tweet] Saturday Night Live knows that they can do this because, whether Kamala wins or loses, they will face little punishment. Perhaps a fine, and I doubt that NBC Universal cares that much, and because they are catering to the transnational elite the virtue signaling benefit will, in their eyes, outweigh any minor cost to their shareholders.

The Editor says...
The FCC doesn't deter broadcasters from doing anything. The broadcasters have read the FCC rules over and over. It doesn't matter. In an election year, FCC fines are just part of the cost of doing business. TV news readers insist no one is above the law! But if the law gets in their way, they step over it, pay the fine, and go about their business.

CLAIM: NBC Broke FCC 'Equal Time' Rule with Kamala Harris Appearance on SNL. NBC violated the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) "Equal Time" rule by inviting Vice President Kamala Harris onto Saturday Night Live on the last weekend before the election, leaving no time for former President Donald Trump. Harris appeared in the show's opening scene, known as the "cold open," opposite Maya Rudolph, who impersonates her on the program. (The setup copied Trump's 2015 appearance on NBC's The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon.) [Advertisement] [Tweet] However, NBC had previously announced that it would not invite either candidate on the program.

ABC affiliate 'mistakenly' airs election results sparking conspiracy theories. An ABC affiliate has sparked wild conspiracy theories after mistakenly airing election results for Pennsylvania. The results appeared on the ticker along the bottom of the screen during a broadcast of the Formula 1 Mexico Grand Prix by ABC local affiliate WNEP-TV on Sunday. It showed Kamala Harris taking the state with 52 percent of the votes, while Donald Trump's share was 47 percent. It instantly prompted claims of election rigging on social media, with one person tweeting: 'The cheat is on.' WNEP-TV said that the numbers came up on the screen in 'error' and that they had been 'randomly generated' as part of a test ahead of election night on November 5.

The Editor says...
As I've probably mentioned a few times already, I worked in broadcasting for 48 years, and incidents like the one described above are rare, but they happen, especially in the week before an election. However, it's odd that when text is keyed (superimposed) over program video, with "randomly generated" election results, they always show the Democrat winning. That makes it hard to believe it was accidental. Here's a pro tip for the ABC affiliate: If you want to see whether your Master Control switcher can put a super over network video, start with a blank bracket, "The quick brown fox," or a single punctuation mark in the corner of the screen — not with an advertisement for the socialist Democrats. You can play with the character generator off-line as much as you want.

The Media Coverage of Kamala Harris and Her Marxist Father. We're only days from Election Day, and the question remains: How well do you really, truly know Kamala Harris? Did you know that Kamala and her father, Stanford professor Donald J. Harris, live just a mile apart in D.C., but never speak? Did you know Professor Harris is her only living parent, but didn't even appear at the Democratic National Convention to watch his own daughter accept her party's nomination for president? (The New Yorker describes them as estranged.) Did you know Professor Harris was a trailblazing economist and the first black scholar to earn tenure at the Stanford Department of Economics? Did you know that the Economist described Professor Harris's work as "more unashamedly Marxist than anything in modern American politics"? Did you know the Stanford Daily (Stanford's student newspaper) described Professor Harris as a "Marxist economist" and said he's teaching "radical political economics"? Did you know that the last time Professor Harris said anything particularly noteworthy about his daughter, it was to condemn her for perpetuating the "all-Jamaicans-are-potheads" stereotype? Furthermore, did you know that he's written economic papers criticizing the open border policy espoused by the radical left?

The Pravda Press Still Won't Ask Harris If She'll Accept The Results Of The Election If She Loses. The Pravda press has asked former President Donald Trump over and over again whether he'll accept the results of the election if his Democrat opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, wins. Trump's running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, has heard the question ad nauseam as well. CBS News political correspondent Caitlin Huey-Burns peppered the former president with the question in late August, as the Democratic National Committee was installing Harris as the party's nominee following President Joe Biden's forced exit from his reelection campaign. "Will you accept the results of this election?" the reporter asked. "Absolutely. I assume it's going to be a fair election. If it's going to be a fair and free election the answer is absolutely I will," Trump said. [...] In other words, if leftist activists and Trump-hating elections officials don't rig this election like they did the last one.

Kamala's Inane Talking Points. As Vice President Kamala Harris slips in the polls, the Democratic National Committee/Harris Campaign/mainstream media fusion talking points become even more absurd. [Advertisement] Claiming that J.D. Vance and Donald Trump were "weird" did not work — especially given the genuinely odd behavior of vice presidential candidate Tim Walz and would-be First Gentleman Doug Emhoff. [The same advertisement again] [Unrelated video clip] Nor was the next Harris meme convincing that the frenetic and non-stop Trump was somehow "exhausted," "senile," and "confused." Voters know the workdays of the younger Harris are usually far shorter — or sometimes not workdays at all. But Harris also falsely claimed the physically and mentally challenged Biden was, in her words, "absolutely authoritative" and "very bold and vibrant." [Advertisement] Now Harris asserts that Trump is a "fascist," a "dictator," and "unfit" for office. But this new talking point will also not stop the Harris campaign's hemorrhaging — and for a variety of reasons.

Facing FCC Investigation CBS Finally Responds to Accusations of News Manipulation. The FCC is investigating CBS for blatant manipulation of news. CBS really has no defense. CBS has been caught producing, via editorial manipulation, two entirely different responses to the same question. Everyone has been asking CBS to just simply release the full transcript. CBS has refused. The assumption is now about the manipulative content of the broadcast being so extreme that to release a transcript would be even worse than what is already known. The FCC complaint is simple and accurate, which is likely why CBS has never attempted to defend itself, until today.

Paging David Muir and ABC News. Moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis of ABC News delivered a frankly disgusting performance during the September presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. The network had agreed that there would be no fact checks and no interruptions, yet the partisan duo proceeded to do exactly that. In fact, Trump was fact-checked at least five times, while Harris was left to say whatever the heck she wanted (much of it lies). Perhaps the most infamous moment came when Muir, using his most arrogant, self-important tone, interrupted Trump on crime statistics. Yes, the former president fought back and tried to explain why Muir was wrong, but the mission had already been accomplished: they wanted to interrupt Trump's flow, have him go off on some sideline that wasn't germane to the argument he was making — and they succeeded. If this were Kamala Harris using these tactics, that would have been fine — she's supposed to be trying to trip him up — but to have the supposedly unbiased neutral "moderators" join forces with Kamala was quite simply unethical.

CBS named in federal complaint over its decision to make Harris look coherent. CBS has been named in a federal complaint for its decision to make Kamala Harris look coherent following its taping of a recent interview. To do that, the network recorded an answer she made early in the recording, then subbed it in for the word salad she actually delivered to a later question. Fox News said the complaint accused CBS News of "significant and intentional news distortion." The filing was from the Center for American Rights and was submitted to the Federal Communications Commission.

Harris abruptly bars press from student meeting after protesters show up. Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign on Thursday abruptly barred the press from her meeting with students at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, as pro-Palestinian protesters marched on the campus amid the news that Hamas' leader was killed by the Israeli military. Ms. Harris was said to be working on a statement about the developments in the Middle East. The Democratic nominee was scheduled to briefly take questions from the press ahead of what the campaign billed as a "meet and greet' with the UWM students.

4 Years After The Biden Laptop Coverup, Media Election Interference Is Worse Than Ever. Just last week, CBS News used deceptive video splicing to replace one of Democrat presidential candidate Kamala Harris' answers on "60 Minutes" with one that sounded less awful. A preview clip of the interview showed Harris responding to a question with nonsensical babble, but when the full interview aired, that answer was nowhere to be seen, having been replaced by a completely different response. The original answer was also missing from the transcript released by the network, and CBS continues to refuse to release an undoctored transcript. The most outrageous election interference from the press this cycle might be the pile-up on Trump by ABC News "moderators" when Trump met Harris for a singular presidential debate in September. They lobbed "fact checks" at Trump left and right while refusing to question Harris' many falsehoods. Throughout the debate, the format resembled ABC's David Muir and Linsey Davis asking Trump to explain how he could possibly be so horrible and then giving Harris a chance to opine on whether she thought Trump was horrible and why.

The impenetrable arrogance of the left media. As the 2024 presidential campaign edges to a close, the arrogance of the left, especially those in the media, is escalating to a fever pitch. The best example of their tone-deaf hysteria is Martha Raddatz's attempt to humiliate J.D.Vance over what she called lies about FEMA and Tren de Aragua. People like Raddatz never learn from their egregious, foolish mistakes. She tried to assert that the reports of FEMA failures were false when everyone with a pulse has heard the hundreds of horror stories from the victims on the ground. She tried to stop Vance from speaking, so determined was she to push the government-promulgated lie that FEMA has been on the job. She really stepped in it when she brought up the overtaking of "several apartment complexes" by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua in Aurora, Colorado, cities in Texas, and Wisconsin. Raddatz suggested that commandeering these "few apartment complexes" was just a minor annoyance. She tried to stop Vance from speaking again by saying "I know exactly what happened." But she hasn't a clue and she clearly has not given the issue any thought. She has no empathy for the hundreds of people who live in those apartments suffering under these thugs from Venezuelan prisons. They are not a problem in her neighborhood so it's not a problem. Therefore, Vance and Trump must be lying.

Calls for CBS to Release the Kamala Interview Transcript Grow Deafening As Their Reputation Burns. We've seen so much malpractice from the corrupt media, especially since Donald Trump descended that golden escalator in 2015, that it's hard to be surprised anymore. We've seen them bury the Hunter Biden laptop story right before an election, we saw them prattle on for years about a fake Russia Collusion narrative, and witnessed them lie endlessly about Joe Biden's obvious mental decline. Still, CBS' deceptive editing of Kamala Harris' "60 Minutes" interview marks yet another low. As we reported, they issued two separate clips showing Kamala answering a question from interviewer Bill Whitaker — but her answer is different in each one. Clearly, then, one of those edits is a lie. The network, which Dan Rather already humiliated back in 2004 when he accused then-President Bush of illicitly conspiring to avoid the Vietnam War but could only back up his claim with documents that appeared to be obvious forgeries, is taking immense heat from all sides for their duplicitous edits. One common refrain: come clean and release the transcripts.

Kamala Harris: The Manufactured Candidate? Why CBS's "60 Minutes" Edit Betrays The Larger Problem. In the landscape of American political journalism, a troubling trend has emerged this election season: the selective editing of the news. The latest case study comes courtesy of "60 Minutes" of CBS News, whose apparent need to repackage Vice President Kamala Harris' words into a neatly clipped soundbite is raising skepticism about the intent behind it. What makes the whole thing even more troubling is that they've withheld the full, unedited transcript of Kamala's interview. They should have released it not because the Trump campaign labeled it "deceptively edited," but because journalistic ethics demanded nothing less. Former CBS reporter Catherine Herridge points out that there's precedent for the network releasing a full, unedited transcript: they did so for her interview with then-President Donald Trump in 2020. This raises the question — why not now?

'60 Minutes' Editing Kamala Harris Is the Ultimate Deep Fake. Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president, sat down for a taped interview with CBS' Bill Whitaker for 60 Minutes which aired Monday night. The network then released what is called "teaser" clips consisting of elements from the interview before it aired that evening, one of which aired on CBS' "Face the Nation." In that clip, when Whitaker asked her why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "isn't listening" to the administration, Harris delivered one of her typical word salads, a nervous mashup of words that led to no real meaning or clarity saying, "Well Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of, many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region." But apparently, the folks at CBS aren't into word salad, so they changed it. When the program aired on Monday night, Whitaker asked the question, but this time Kamala's answer was different: "We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end." More concise, more understandable, and maybe even presidential. But that's not the answer she gave in the earlier clip. Many have noted that CBS replaced her gibberish with a comment given earlier in the interview. Like an old-fashioned cut-and-paste job, but without the glue stick. Multiple outlets have reached out to CBS asking for an explanation for the creative editing which changes the response of a presidential candidate to a national security question.

Were the CBS Moderators Instructed to Affirm Climate Alarmist Talking Points? [Scroll down] The moderators, or CBS, immediately showed their bias. After an opening question about Israel and Iran, a perfectly logical lead-in topic as missiles were literally raining down on Israel as the debate got underway, climate change was the second question offered, before the economy and illegal immigration, despite it ranking dead last or near the bottom in polls of voters as an issue of concern. Climate change ranks far below inflation, health care, education, crime, and illegal immigration in every poll taken. But because it is a liberal cause célèbre, it matters more to the left-leaning media than issues more important to voters. Thus, its prominence in CBS' moderators questioning and their behavior after. In the wake of Hurricane Helene, O'Donnell framed a question about climate change by asserting that climate change makes hurricanes "larger, stronger, and more deadly because of the historic rainfall." The data demonstrate that this is false, of course, but her handlers felt the need to make sure she used the tragedy to apply pressure on the Republican vice presidential candidate and emotionally charge the question.

The 'Basement Campaign' Isn't Going to Cut It. Kamala Harris was a local prosecutor for twelve years, San Francisco district attorney for eight years, California attorney general for six years, and a U.S. senator for four years, and she's closing in on four years as the U.S. vice president. (Her last private-sector job might well have been that gig at McDonald's.*) That's a lot of time in the public eye; over the years, and during her campaigns, she must have done hundreds of interviews, perhaps thousands. [Video clip] [Advertisement] And yet, since becoming the Democratic nominee, Harris has appeared terrified of doing them. [Advertisement] When Harris has agreed to take questions, her campaign has chosen interviewers who either are friendly and prone to softballs or who have already formally endorsed her — Stephanie Ruhle on MSNBC and Oprah to start. We're told that Harris is doing a so-called media blitz this week: The View, The Howard Stern Show, and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. Ana Navarro, a co-host of The View, was one of the hosts at the Democratic convention in Chicago. Four years ago, Howard Stern endorsed Biden and encouraged Trump supporters to drink bleach and "drop dead."

Media Maintains 'Wall of Silence' on First Gentleman #MeToo Scandal. Doug Emhoff, Kamala's powerful lawyer hubby, admitted to impregnating his nanny during his first marriage. The status of the child is unknown, but there are allegations that she suffered a miscarriage. A recent report described Emhoff hitting an ex-girlfriend in public. The media refused to report on the allegation and only reported on Emhoff's denial of the allegation. [...] It's striking that "half of the political world" is focused on an allegation the media won't report on.

One Simple Way to Tell That the Dems Are Full of It Regarding FEMA Money. We have spent a lot of time over the years discussing the never ending awfulness of the people in the mainstream media who call themselves journalists. Bias for the Democrats has been a problem since I have been politically aware, which has been quite some time. Of course, they've all gotten worse since Donald Trump rose to power in the Republican Party. Now they are running interference for the worst people to ever be in charge of the Executive Branch of the United States government. It's really ugly out there, especially in this most contentious of election years.

CNN's Brian Stelter Claims Kamala Harris Will Face 'Sharp Questions' on 'The View'. CNN's resident potato Brian Stelter is defending Kamala Harris's media schedule this week, claiming with a straight face that Harris will face sharp questions when she appears on 'The View' this week. That would be like saying that Donald Trump will face tough questions during his next appearance on the Sean Hannity show. Harris is trying to do more media after facing criticism for hiding from the press, but her choices for which outlets to appear on are very telling. She is only going into very friendly territory.

The Propaganda Press at Work: Shielding Doug Emhoff and FEMA's Failures. If you have been awake these last several days, you will know all about how the aspiring First Gentleman, Doug Emhoff, publicly slapped a former girlfriend so hard she spun around. I believe, but am not sure of the chronology, that that was after Emhoff inseminated the nanny he and his former wife had engaged to, well, possibly to help him in his task of "redefining masculinity." [Advertisement] Let us draw a veil. It is impossible to distribute air-sickness bags through the internet, and I do not want my readers left with so nauseating a spectacle as Kamala Harris's repulsive husband. [Advertisement] [Unrelated video clip] I realize, though, that, should you be so unfortunate as to acquire your news from the Propaganda Press — from The New York Times or The Washington Post, say, or from CNN, MSNBC, or the other legacy media outlets, it is doubtful that you will have run across the true story about Emhoff. The reason is that telling that story would violate The Narrative that the Propaganda Press exists to support — whatever that Narrative happens to be today. [Advertisement]

Heroes and Zeroes. I didn't watch the debate and like the great Iowahawk (David Burge) I consider this one of the worst lies told concerning them, "here is our panel of undecided voters." If you are undecided at this stage, you are a moron and shouldn't vote, or a liar. The second lie about them is that the moderators are informed and neutral and will keep their promise not to "fact check" the Republican or stack the questions to promote the Democrats' agenda rather than exploring the issues voters in survey after survey indicate are their priorities. Paul Sperry, to take one example, reveals that CBS moderator Margaret Brennan, who was rude to J.D. Vance, had been a strategic advisor to the anti-Trump Lincoln Project. Her husband, Yado Yakub, donated to the project, and was a foreign policy adviser to Biden in 2000 and 2001.

Complaints Ask FEC, FCC To Investigate ABC For Breaking Broadcast And Donation Rules In Debate. Remember that brazenly biased presidential debate on Sept. 10, hosted by ABC television? The one where ABC moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis "fact-checked" former President Donald Trump five times and Vice President Kamala Harris, not at all? The one advertised as a legitimate debate that felt more like a 90-minute campaign commercial for Harris? The Center for American Rights has filed complaints with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Elections Commission (FEC), asking these agencies to hold ABC and its local affiliate accountable on two matters: an alleged campaign donation violation, and a concern about its television broadcast license. Unlike print media, broadcast airwaves belong to the public. While anyone can find some paper, start their own newsletter, and say whatever they want, there is a finite number of airwaves across the broadcast spectrum, so they belong to everyone. That is why the FCC licenses segments of the airwaves to broadcasters with the condition that they must use a certain amount of their broadcast time to serve the public.

The Editor says...
Ahem. Yes, there is a finite bandwidth available for broadcast TV, but the FCC apparently doesn't see any shortage, because the UHF-TV band used to extend to Channel 83, and has been gradually pared down as the FCC sold some of the bandwidth (that's right, the frequencies that "belong to everyone") to the highest bidder. (When did we vote on that?) Now the UHF-TV band stops at Channel 36, although some stations may have a "virtual channel" number higher than that. What happened to all the money that the FCC raked in when the upper UHF-TV channels were sold to cell phone companies? I suspect it either evaporated or went into several money pits, like NASA, Amtrak, football stadiums, Ukraine, ethanol subsidies, windmill subsidies, solar panel subsidies, and hotel rooms for illegal aliens.

Kamala Harris Is Playing 'Pretend President' Already And She's Horrible At It. Since the Democratic Party establishment shoved Grandpa Joe Biden down the proverbial flight of stairs, Kamala Harris has played the President in public more frequently. With that came footage of her walking up and down the stairs for Air Force Two. Something struck me as odd the other day while watching her pretending to be on a phone call as she ran away from the press: She's saluting and being saluted by the military members at the bottom of the stairs. She's not President. Whoever the President is at any given moment is the Commander-in-Chief of the US military, but a vice president has no military rank whatsoever; they're not in the chain of command. I don't know if former VPs were routinely saluted or not, as there isn't a trove of footage of them leaving planes, but I couldn't help but wonder if the military has been ordered to salute Harris as part of the campaign to make her come off as presidential?

Hilarious job numbers from the Bureau of Labor. As the media campaign so vigorously for Democrats and cheer how great the Biden-Harris policies have been, suddenly, the Department of Labor comes out with an unemployment report that blows away expectations. Biden and Harris were out bragging as a significant number of people still can't pay their bills without running up new debt or going delinquent on the debt they already had. Supposedly, 254,000 jobs were created in September. Isn't that amazing, that this report came out one month before the election? Of course, the media gave the headline number and never got into the details. Here is one important detail: government jobs showed a gain of 785,000 because of the second biggest seasonal adjustment on record. (It is easy to manipulate numbers when you have "seasonal adjustments.") This would mean that private-sector employment declined 531,000 with seasonal adjustments. I would say that is not too much to brag about. Somehow, the voters don't get to see that number, but they know that the economy has sucked the past four years because they can't pay their bills.

#MeToo Is Dead, and Doug Emhoff Killed It. Once upon a time, Democrats pretended to care what happened to women. In 2017, following the revelation that film producer Harvey Weinstein was a serial sexual predator, Hollywood and all their fellow liberals did a thorough housecleaning. They named and shamed men who had been abusing women for years. It was #TimesUp for toxic masculinity. Or so we were told. And told. And told. Again and again and again. Fast-forward seven years. The president of the United States is a dementia-addled basket case, and his even more inept VP is the Democratic candidate. Most of the "news" industry is frantically trying to convince you she'll make a good president, because they don't care about anything but keeping Donald Trump out of office. So, what do the journos do in 2024 when a woman comes forward with a story of abuse by a powerful man? The first thing they do is check whether there's an (R) after the guy's name. If not, he's off-limits. They'll ignore the story as long as they can. And when they're finally forced to say something about it, they'll minimize it as much as possible. They'll even transform the powerful Democrat into the victim.

MSNBC Producer Admits Network is 'Doing All They Can' to Help Elect Kamala Harris. O'Keefe Media Group (OMG) on Thursday released undercover video of Basel Hamdan, a producer for MSNBC, admitting the network is doing all they can to elect Kamala Harris. Hamdan also told the OMG undercover journalist that MSNBC has made their viewers "dumber over the years." [...] Hamdan said MSNBC is tied to the Democrat party. "They just are way too cozy with the Democratic politicians," Hamdan said. "If you watch an interview with a Democratic politician they just finish each other's sentences. The anchor and the politician are in total agreement about everything."

Media Bury Woman-Battering Allegation with Doug Emhoff Puff Pieces. To no one's surprise, the corporate media are engaged in a full-on propaganda campaign to bury the credible bombshell news that Kamala Harris's husband, Doug Emhoff, allegedly battered a former girlfriend. On Wednesday, the Daily Mail released a story that included statements from three friends of the alleged victim, along with travel documents and photos to back up the claim. The claim is this: in 2012, while attending the Cannes Film Festival, Emhoff slapped a then-girlfriend so hard she spun completely around. Two of the alleged victims' friends say they were told of the abuse at the time. The third learned of it in 2018.

'Fact check' has become just another word for censorship. At the vice presidential debate this week, the CBS moderators once again tried to show that they were the fair and impartial people in the room[.] Except that — as with the Trump-Harris debate — they only seemed interested in fact-checking in one direction. Against the Republican. On Tuesday night the subject of Springfield, Ohio, once again came up. And once again Springfield revealed one of the big problems of this media era. CBS's Margaret Brennan decided to fact check something that JD Vance said and immediately relayed a piece of false information herself. Following Vance's point about the number of illegal migrants Brennan announced authoritatively that Springfield does in fact have "a large number of Haitian migrants" but that they have "legal status [and] Temporary Protected Status." It was then down to Vance to fact-check the fact-checker by pointing out — correctly — that what Brennan had just described was actually a "pathway" opened up by Kamala Harris explicitly to fudge the true levels of illegal immigration.

Walz 'Misspeaks': How the Media Are Framing the Governor's Lies. On Tuesday, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) and Sen. JD Vance (R-OH) faced off for the vice presidential debate on CBS News. Walz was reportedly feeling nervous ahead of time, and it certainly showed. Arguably his worst moment was when he was confronted by co-moderator Margaret Brennan for lying about being in Hong Kong for the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. It's just one of many examples from the pathological liar, and Walz had to know it was coming. He still seriously flubbed his response, and yet the media keep covering for him.

J.D. Vance Will Never Be Allowed On Live TV Again After He Dominated That Debate. It's safe to assume we're never going to see J.D. Vance on live television again, at least not until after the election is over. The dude so thoroughly dominated the vice-presidential debate on Tuesday night that there's no way cable news producers are going to book him again. He'd put them out of business. If you didn't watch the event on CBS, the affair was a set-up from the beginning. One of Trump's greatest electoral weaknesses is among suburban women. Naturally, CBS cast two women note-card readers to "moderate" the debate for the explicit purpose of daring Vance into a conflict with either of them. Vance never took the bait. He parried every onslaught. He even conceded agreements to Kamala Harris's running-mate, Tim Walz, when it was warranted. In short, the three Democrats ganging up on Vance didn't get him. He got them. He beat them.

The Girl Squad Moderators for the Vance-Walz VP Debate Fixated on Childcare, Totally Skipped Over Crime. Tuesday night's Vice Presidential Debate between Republican Ohio Senator JD Vance and Democrat Minnesota Governor Tim Walz was amazingly civil and substantive. Vance not only set the tone, but he put the Girl Squad moderator team of Margaret Brennan and Norah O'Donnell on their four-inch heels by checking them on their attempts to fact-check and run interference, even though they claimed at the beginning that this would not be done.

Kamala Harris Doesn't Care About White People. Natural disasters like Hurricane Helene, a category 4 storm, are of course going to cause massive damage and devastation no matter what. But it didn't have to be as bad as it has become in the absence of timely federal aid from the Biden-Harris administration. [...] It hasn't escaped anyone's notice that the victims of the flooding are predominantly poor white people in Appalachia. Given that fact, and the appalling lack of concern from Harris and Biden, there's a lot more reason right now to claim that Harris doesn't care about white people than there ever was to claim Bush didn't care about black people. Unlike in 2005, you won't hear that from the media. You're far more likely, in fact, to hear corporate outlets attack Trump for "making it political" by traveling to Georgia on Monday to help distribute supplies and assist in relief efforts.

Ridiculous 'fact check' of a true statement during CBS debate. Sen. JD Vance was accurately describing the migrant crisis fueled by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden when CBS moderator Margaret Brennan decided to insert herself with a "fact check." "Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status," she said smugly. Vance was rightly annoyed by the interruption and said, "The rules were that you guys weren't going to fact-check, and since you're fact-checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on." He then proceeded to truthfully, forcefully explain what "legal status" means: [...]

New York Times Endorsement of Harris Continues to Be Like Their News: Superficial and Cartoonish. Perhaps to no one's surprise, the New York Times continued an unbroken string of endorsing Democrats for president that it began in 1960. In a hard pivot, the New York Times joined the rest of the media in turning from extolling the "joy" of Kamala's campaign to harping on her character. The article declares that Donald Trump is unfit to hold office. [Excerpt omitted for brevity.] According to the editorial, "regardless of any political disagreements voters might have with her, Kamala Harris is the only patriotic choice for president." This is as deeply dishonest as the Times's Pulitzer Prize-winning coverage of the fake "Russia collusion" story. While the endorsement claims that Kamala's policies will aid first-time homebuyers and entrepreneurs, it is really designed to be eyewash for doing nothing. A tax credit for homebuyers does exactly one thing: It raises the cost of homes by the amount of the tax credit. [...] We don't know what the rest of her policies are.

Our Liberal Friends Can Tell That Something is Wrong. All the right people are responding to the "vibe" of the Harris campaign. But I tend to look for a different "vibe": what is the subliminal message from our liberal friends? For instance, Oliver Wiseman at the Free Press wonders why Trump isn't running away with the election. Maybe because the regime media is pushing Kamala Harris as Wonder Girl on us? And because the Democrats have spent the last eight years dirtying up Trump with everything from Russia to lawfare?

Seriously, no one trusts the media. Do you find yourself despising the nation's socialist media even more than usual? [...] The benefit of hindsight helps us understand that the last-minute un-democratic coup and the sudden changing of Komrade Kamala for Biden were the obvious plan. Thus, the shortened campaign sprint is a feature, not a bug in that it helps the nation's socialist media hide her from the people. The outlines of the plan are clear enough when you look back over the events of the past few months, with the media playing a key role in the fraud. [...] This could explain why this race still seems to be "close." Oliver Wiseman of the Free Press wrote that "Trump Should Be Beating Harris by a Mile," and he chalks up part of the reason for the opposite to the Trump campaign making mistakes. It's a fair point, but the fact is that the media are massively distorting the press environment. Studies have shown that whereas coverage of Donald Trump has been almost entirely negative, Komrade Kamala has been enjoying [positive coverage].

That Wasn't An Interview. It Was A Campaign Rally. [Scroll down] [Harris] trotted out the usual canards about the "border security bill" (that ensured the polar opposite). The "worst economy since the Great Depression" Donald Trump supposedly left behind (a fiction recently dispatched on these pages). Women dying because of post-Roe restrictions (as opposed to complications from medically-induced abortions). And that the airhead who once claimed that smaller tax refunds reflected a middle-class tax hike called Donald Trump "not very serious" about economic issues. The real issue with the "interview" — the individual styled as "NBC News Senior Business Analyst" seemed curiously uninterested in analysis. Talk about "not very serious." Instead of questions, Ruhle offered up the Democratic candidate's own campaign stump soundbites — and then re-affirmed and reinforced her responses.

Did Kamala Just Implode Her Campaign With Another Disastrous Interview? After reading the tea leaves, the Harris-Walz campaign discovered that it was a problem that Kamala wasn't doing interviews, and so they basically decided to put her out there and hope for the best. Well, it's not going well, and I can't help but wonder if this is why Trump's been seeing momentum in recent polling. Frankly, I expect more movement in Trump's direction after her latest interview on Wednesday with Stephanie Ruhle of MSNBC. Seriously, this interview showed us (again) why Kamala was not the candidate that Democrats genuinely wanted to run after Joe Biden dropped out. Ruhle pointed out that "prices are still high," to which Kamala responded, "Yeah, I agree with you." When Ruhle pressed her on how she planned to combat price gouging without resorting to price controls, which could raise concerns about her principles, Kamala sidestepped the question entirely. Instead of providing a clear answer, she declared, "I am never gonna apologize for going after companies and corporations that take advantage of the desperation of the American people."

MSNBC's 'Interview' of Harris Shows How Left-Wing Media Are Treating Election as Coronation. Vice President Kamala Harris completed her second whole interview of her mostly cloistered presidential campaign Wednesday night. Frankly, it was an embarrassment for American corporate media and gives the lie to the idea that the Harris campaign is all about defending "democracy." The interview was exactly what one would expect if you'd followed the Harris campaign at all. It was a series of mostly softball questions, delivered in the friendliest of confines on left-wing MSNBC, conducted by an admiring and sycophantic host, Stephanie Ruhle. That setup was practically telegraphed ahead of time. Five days before the interview, Ruhle went on HBO's "Real Time With Bill Maher" and claimed that Harris didn't have to answer any substantive questions from the media. "Kamala Harris isn't running for perfect," Ruhle heatedly told the New York Times' Bret Stephens, another guest on the program.

Stephanie Ruhle Plays Tee-Ball, Kamala Harris Still Swings and Misses. Every day Kamala Harris attempts to do media, it stuns me that Julia Louis-Dreyfus isn't suing the Vice President for intellectual property theft. At the very least, the Veep star should be legally allowed to claim royalties from the actual Veep. Harris' Hump Day frolic through Pittsburgh consisted of a speech to the Economic Club, followed by a 24-minute and change sit-down with MSNBC's Stephanie Ruhle. How did Ruhle score such an exclusive? By interceding on Bill Maher's Real Time on HBO last Friday night when New York Times columnist Bret Stephens dared to note that there is no there, there with Kamala Harris on policy.

Kamala Does Trainwreck Interview With Stephanie Ruhle, Who Admits Harris Didn't Answer Questions. Stephanie Ruhle appeared on Friday on Bill Maher's "Real Time" show and, incredibly, argued that people shouldn't demand or expect answers from Kamala Harris on the issues since she was running against former President Donald Trump. It was a ridiculous position for someone who claimed to be a journalist arguing against the questioning of a presidential candidate because she supported her. So perhaps it's not surprising that Harris who has given very few interviews then gave Ruhle an interview. Harris no doubt thought she could walk through a softball interview with Ruhle after what Ruhle said. She knew she could count on not being pressed, given what Ruhle said. But even with a softball interviewer who supports her, Harris was still completely vacuous. She had no understanding what she was saying about tariffs or anything else.

Kamala Harris is stumped by question about crucial part of her economic policy during MSNBC interview. Vice President Kamala Harris gave a long pause during her interview on MSNBC when she faced a question over how she would pay for her economic plans. The moment came early in the interview where Harris batted away slow-pitch questions such as 'can we trust you?' Interviewer Stephanie Ruhle asked Harris, who was giving her first network TV interview since securing her party's nomination, how she would pay for her economic plans. 'If you can't raise corporate taxes or if GOP takes control of the Senate, where do you get the money to do that,' her interviewer asked, after Harris outlined some of her plans like a $6,000 credit for young couples or subsidies for new small business ventures. Republicans stand a decent chance of taking the chamber from the narrow Democratic majority, with a Montana Democratic-held seat growing increasingly vulnerable. 'But we're going to have to raise corporate taxes,' Harris told her after a pause.

Uncovering the Coverage. [Scroll down] I became less interested in accuracy and more interested in what the writer was trying to get me to believe. Who were the people behind the reporters? What was their agenda? Who was getting paid? And for what? Why now? How is it they are all saying the same thing at once? Why does the message change so often? Am I supposed to just forget what they told me five minutes ago? Yesterday, Kamala Harris was against fracking, against ICE, against the police, against private health insurance. Today she is in favor of all these wonderful things. Remember the Green New Deal? Well, you shouldn't. Do you like Trump's policies? No problem. They are now the policies of his opponents. Yesterday the Democrats slammed Trump as a threat to democracy. But after a thoroughly undemocratic backroom deal to anoint Harris, they are now all about "brat" and "joy" and "moving forward." At least for the moment. The Democrats are not running on policy. They are running on memes that roll across your eyes momentarily like a Tik-Tok video, but never sink into your consciousness, images that change faster than the voters can comprehend.

Why Does the Media Pretend Kamala Can Do a Single Thing She Promises? The United States has a big housing crunch, and one of the biggest reasons (there are many) is that Biden and Harris have let in 10 million+ illegal migrants and "refugees" over the past three years. In other words, Harris, the Border Czar, caused the crisis to a great extent. Now, she is promising to build three million homes during her term — a rather big boast. So it's fair to ask: what is her record when it comes to initiatives she was put in charge of? You know, ones like connecting rural homes to high-speed internet and getting the border under control? How about building out half a million EV chargers? [Tweet] You know the answer: none of these things happened. In fact, despite over $40 billion allocated for the rural internet initiative nearly three years ago, not a single home has been connected. Not one. [...] String fiber or cable to tens of thousands of remote locations is frankly insane, which is one of the reasons not a bit of it has been done.

An obvious lie:
Doug Emhoff: Not Fair To Criticize Kamala Harris For The Admin's Failures. Vice President Kamala Harris' husband, Doug Emhoff, claimed during an interview this week that it was unfair for people to criticize his wife's performance over the last three and a half years because she was not the president. Emhoff made the remarks during a softball ABC News interview Friday morning on "Good Morning America," which came just days after the network's debate between Harris and former President Donald Trump that was extremely biased against the Republican nominee. Co-anchor Michael Strahan asked Emhoff if he thought it was fair that his wife was being criticized for the numerous failings of the administration, even though she was named the border czar, bragged about being the last person in the room on Afghanistan, and was the tie-breaking vote on passing the American Rescue Plan — the legislation that triggered the inflation crisis.

Whoops: Did You Notice This Small Problem With Kamala's Oprah Zoom Audience? There appear to be duplicates in the Zoom audience, despite the fact that Oprah was talking about this great "grassroots" effort. Here's a shot from the ABC News video at 2:00 minutes in. Check the second and third rows from the top. You see in the second row from the top, starting from the left, there are seven people. Those same seven people are then repeated in the third row, starting from the middle. [Tweet]

The Vacuity of Kamala Harris. The Democrats switched her for the failing president late in the game and hope with the aid of a partisan press and her dodging any real interviews to hide from the public her extreme leftist views. The debate with ABC struck most of us as a softball one-sided one — more like an interview than a debate — with both "interviewers" (one of whom was her sorority sister) "fact checking" Trump "lies" while allowing her to gibber on with pre-packaged blather. A whistleblower has provided a credible sworn affidavit (which he wrote a day before the interview) in which he says she was given sample questions similar to those which were actually asked, was promised certain questions would be out of bounds by the interviewers and further, that Trump — but not her — would be "fact checked" by them. ABC provided a tardy response, which is hardly sufficient. [...] Yes, this reminds us that ABC contributor Donna Brazile fed Clinton the questions "in anticipation of a supposedly unscripted townhall meeting" and ABC helped deflect questions about Biden's failing mental state.

Is Obama cash underwriting Iran's election interference? Now it is clear and substantiated by our intelligence agencies that Iran has been funneling intelligence regarding the Trump campaign to Kamala Harris. Like so much right now, the American people are expected to swallow this outrage and 'move on,' while the Left shrieks louder that it isn't so. Of course it is true and has been very arguably so since Obama got into office. The absolutely tiresome ya-da-da about Russian interference again (concurrent with Hillary's return to the MSM main ticket), is what the media, in the last three election cycles, is dragging out of its moldy box of tricks. But not Iran — the MSM will stay away from Iran, as they have thus far. They must have got the memo.

ABC Is a Collapsing House of Cards. The latest information about ABC News is that moderator Linsey Davis admits the fact checking was aimed at Donald Trump. This is totally nuts. It's not acceptable for news agencies protected by the Constitution to do anything like this. The whistleblower is a hero and we should stand by him. As reported earlier, moderator Linsey Davis admits fact-checking was only for Trump: [...] ABC News has to get back to reporting the news and abandon activism or they have to stop pretending they are a news service.

Will the Republicans Really Lose — Again? Remember just a few short weeks ago: Donald Trump's heroic defiance of an assassination attempt was grudgingly admired even by opponents, while the Democrats were in disarray over what to do about their demented president running for re-election — and, to compound their dilemma, his highly implausible replacement. Trump looked like a shoe-in as the next president. All the best commentators were saying so. Yet now the Democrat left establishment — with the most cringeworthy candidate ever proposed by a major party — are back in the race. Even allowing for the bias of the opinion polls, the very notion that this ludicrous woman should be taken seriously by anyone is [an] indictment of America's politics and where it is taking the world. That intensive coaching prevented her from making a fool of herself in the recent debate is heralded as a remarkable achievement, which in a sense it was.

Polls Show Kamala's Campaign Is Headed For Disaster, And The Media Knows It. While most major polling still shows Vice President Kamala Harris up over former President Donald Trump nationally, she is floundering in critical spots; not only does she know it's terrible, but so do her lapdogs in corporate media. [Paywall]

ABC responds to viral 'whistleblower affidavit' claiming Kamala Harris received debate help. ABC News insists it did not break debate rules after a document claiming to be from an anonymous 'whistleblower' said there was close collaboration between the network and Kamala Harris's team before the presidential showdown. But the network still has not confirmed whether the document was written by an ABC staffer, or where it was filed before it emerged on X. The unverified document, said to be a sworn affidavit signed by a notary public on September 9, has sparked controversy. The document alleges ABC News gave Harris questions ahead of the debate, along with agreeing to preconditions to give her a leg up on former President Donald Trump.

ABC News hits panic button after sworn statement alleging rigged debate, David Muir does damage control. ABC News is apparently pressing the panic button in the wake of fierce criticism of its Sept. 10 presidential debate between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. A sworn statement by an ABC News whistleblower exposing network bias favoring Harris continues to be in focus regarding "assurances" to the Democrat's campaign days before the event. Now David Muir, anchor of ABC's "World News Tonight" and co-moderator of the debate, is defending his performance during the matchup, as ratings for his evening news broadcast have plunged some 12% in the aftermath.

Did the Mainstream Media K.O. Kamala? Shortly after the debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, leftist pundits began crowing on social media about how conservatives' complaints about the bias shown by two ABC moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis, are just proof that Trump had lost the debate. [...] [{I}ndependent voters] were sold a high-stakes prize fight between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, and what they witnessed was the referees methodically landing haymakers against Donald Trump on behalf of Kamala Harris in between punches. That's very different than a referee innocently making a bad call or two in a football game. What the average spectator witnessed in the debate was very obviously nothing less than outright cheating. And if there's one thing most Americans hate, it's a cheater[;] and any honest observer would surmise that ABC conspired with the DNC to cheat in that debate.

ABC debate moderator Linsey Davis makes stunning admission about all those live Trump fact checks. ABC News debate moderator Linsey Davis made a stunning admission about their attempts to 'fact check' Donald Trump during his debate with Kamala Harris. Republicans were furious at ABC News moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis for refusing to fact check Harris on her lies about Trump's views on IVF. In a new interview, Davis says that it was a conscious decision to do the fact checks after seeing how Trump and Joe Biden performed in the CNN debate in June.

Cahoots:
ABC Whistleblower Says Harris Camp Allegedly 'Restricted the Scope' of Trump Debate Questions. Late last week, there was word that an ABC News whistleblower was set to expose both the network and the Kamala Harris presidential campaign for allegedly rigging the network's Sept. 10th debate in the Democrat nominee's favor and against former President Donald Trump. The information that they said would be revealed was that Harris was given advance notice on what questions would be asked, and that Trump would be fact-checked live. Now, the whistleblower has released a sworn, notarized statement, which is dated Sept. 9, 2024 — the day before the debate. They say the Kamala Harris campaign allegedly "restricted the scope" of the ABC News debate questions, that the campaign allegedly demanded that only Donald Trump would be fact-checked during the debate: [Tweet]

ABC Moderator Linsey Davis Admits: 'Fact-checking' Was Only Planned for Trump. 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. As Breitbart News noted, Davis and co-moderator David Muir fact-checked Trump seven times — often incorrectly — while never fact-checking Harris once, even when she used hoaxes, such as the Charlottesville "very fine people" hoax. 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.

An ABC employee's sworn affidavit claims ABC cheated to help Kamala win. The Black Insurrectionist did the legwork and obtained what appears to be a duly signed affidavit from an ABC employee attesting under oath to the network's staggering corruption to ensure that Kamala Harris won her single debate against Donald Trump. Secret negotiations, bias, squashed issues, sample questions...it's all there. Of course, we have only this unknown employee's sworn assertion that these things happened but, if they did... oh my! Here's the tweet with the somewhat redacted affidavit: [Tweet] The introductory material in the affidavit says that the employee is a technical and administrative worker who is not endorsing Trump. He (or she) simply wants what all Americans want — a fair debate allowing Americans to hear what the candidates have to say on the issues that matter most. The key substantive allegations (which currently have no verification other than this sworn testimony) are as follows: [...]

With fact-checks like these, how does truth stand a chance? ABC News has been widely criticized for the bias of the two moderators Linsey Davis and David Muir. Even liberal outlets acknowledged that the two journalists seemed inclined to "fact check" only Trump. In the meantime, they allowed clearly false statements from Harris go unchallenged. Three of the unchecked claims are being widely disseminated by supporters, including some in the media. Here are three legal "facts" that are being repeated despite being clearly untrue. [#1] "Crime is down under the Biden-Harris administration." One of the most notable slap downs by ABC followed Trump commenting that crime rates have drastically risen during the Biden-Harris administration. Muir immediately balked and declared: "As you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is coming down in this country." Harris and her allies have been repeating the claim by ABC. But the actual statistics show that Trump was right. The Justice Department's released survey found that, under the Biden administration, there has been a significant increase in crime. Violent crime was up 37 percent from 2020 to 2023, rape is up 42 percent, robbery is up 63 percent and stranger violence is up 61 percent.

Media Bury Kamala Harris's Disastrous First Solo Interview. The mainstream media have buried Vice President Kamala Harris's first solo interview in the eight weeks since she joined the presidential race, either failing to report it or claiming, falsely, that it was a great success. Harris spoke to Philadelphia's WPVI-TV, known as 6 ABC, and struggled to express a coherent thought as she rambled through five straightforward questions from reporter Brian Taff. [Tweet with video clip] The Harris campaign trusted a local ABC affiliate after ABC News' moderators sided with her during last week's debate. Taff asked specific questions, but — perhaps given time constraints — did not follow up on Harris's answers. Asked for specific policies that would bring down costs and make life more affordable for Americans, for example, Harris talked about her supposedly middle-class upbringing, and how her neighbors cared about their lawns.

When does Linsey go work for Kamala? Less than a week into the debate about ABC's selective fact-finding at the debate, we hear this from Linsey Davis herself. [...] First, thanks to Linsey Davis for admitting that the fact-checking was selective indeed. No more suspense or questions about that. Second, who made the decision at ABC that the fact-checking would be selective? Did Davis and Muir make that call? Or did the word come from up in the newsroom, the organization, or who knows where? Mark Penn is right that we need an investigation. Better than that, maybe someone at ABC can accept responsibility and tell us how something like this could happen.

Not being there. Kamala Harris sat down for a brief chat with the friendly Brian Taff of 6abc Action News Philadelphia this past Friday. Taff traveled to Johnstown to conduct the first solo interview Harris has given. [...] This clip catches the opening of the interview. Taff asks her, "When you talk about bringing down prices and making life more affordable for people, what are one or two specific things you have in mind?" Harris achieves complete vacuity. "I grew up in a neighborhood of folks who were very proud of their lawn. Ya know?" [Tweet with video clip] As in her debate with Trump, Harris is tightly scripted. She has been coached to say nothing, yet the nothing sounds familiar. Indeed, at the opening of the interview, she provides the same memorized non-response to Taff that she did in her opening nonresponse in the ABC debate with Trump. I found the transparent falsity and evasion at the top of the interview almost shocking.

Kamala Harris Completely Bombs Her First Solo Interview. After nearly two months of procrastination, Kamala Harris finally did her first solo interview since shoving Joe Biden out of the presidential race. On Friday, the vice president sat down with a local ABC News affiliate in Philadelphia to answer questions for a whole 10 minutes. [Advertisement] Funny enough, the reporter who conducted the interview has a history of being called in when Democrat presidential nominees need a boost. [Tweet] Sure enough, the questioning wasn't exactly tough, and Harris was instead asked a variety of softballs. The problem? She couldn't answer them: [Tweet with video clip] [Transcript] [Advertisement] A presidential nominee is not going to get an easier question than that. It's basically the equivalent of asking, "Tell me how amazing you are."

Kamala Harris Gives Her First Solo Interview And They Tried To Hide It. Kamala Harris gave the first solo interview of her 2024 Presidential campaign to Brian Taff of ABC 6 local news in Philadelphia. This interview was short, with the full video (including a brief intro and outro) clocking in at under 12 minutes. Unlike the disaster of the CNN "joint" interview with her VP pick, Tim Walz, there was no fanfare or marketing to promote the interview. All signs point toward this totally solo interview being hidden, despite it being crucial as Kamala does not usually speak to the press or do any interviews. As far as the ABC discussion's content, nothing new was revealed. Most of the answers (and questions) mirror what she was already prepared for before the debate with Trump.

Kamala Harris Gives Bizarre "word salad" Interview Highlighting Why Campaign Director Brian Fallon Tries to Keep Her Hidden. Kamala Harris gave her first post-debate interview to ABC News6, Philadelphia. The media outlet understood the potential risk of the interview following public ridicule of the national ABC News debate. As a result, ABC News6 has posted the full unedited interview, and the responses by Kamala Harris highlight exactly why Brian Fallon has tried to keep her away from speaking without a teleprompter. Not only does Kamala Harris fail to answer the questions, the responses she gives are ridiculous word-salad replies about ancillary issues that are not even connected to the primary topic being quieried. [Video clip]

Kamala Harris disaster solo interview with ABC Philadelphia was pre-taped, not live. As bad as the softball interview went for Kamala Harris with ABC in Philadelphia yesterday, there is another important fact to consider. This interview wasn't even live. ABC probably spliced and edited the video to make Kamala sound as coherent as she could. And it was still an epic disaster. [Four tweets with video clips.]

ABC News Caught Grossly Deceptively Editing Kamala Harris' Disastrous Solo Interview. As RedState reported, Kamala Harris' first solo interview since wresting the nomination away from Joe Biden did not go well. The vice president seemed ill-prepared, rambling on about things unrelated to the questions being presented by ABC News reporter Brian Taff[.] One particularly egregious example occurred when she was asked to give just two specific things she'd do to bring down costs for Americans. What followed was a mind-numbing word salad in which she spent nearly a quarter of the interview (which was only 10 minutes long) rambling about being "middle class." [Tweet with video clip] [Transcript] The above exchange can be seen online by going directly to ABC 6's website. Guess who didn't see it? That would be the network's television audience.

And now it's Mark Penn. The ABC ambush of Trump, originally called the Trump-Harris debate, keeps on keeping on. [...] My main issue for me is: was it a premeditated ambush. Who wrote the questions? No questions about China or hostages but lots of questions about 2020. Who decided to have all of those "fact checks" on cue? Were the moderators contacted during the debate with information about challenging Trump on this or that? At some point, as they do with lawfare, good people have to look at the TV and ask if this weaponization of the media is good for the country. I have no problem with anti-Trump websites or news programs, such as the nightly programming at MSNBC. However, this was presented to the public as a debate, not another "get Trump" hour. ABC has a quite a bit to explain on this story.

*IF* This Is True, ABC News Is About to Become Engulfed in a Major Scandal. I asked yesterday morning whether Kamala Harris' camp got the ABC News debate questions in advance. The vice president was visibly nervous for the first portion of the debate but got into a groove, especially when she figured out that Donald Trump would take the bait she was chumming. [...] [Tweet] Harris seemed ready for the questions, which explained her word salad responses, but she never answered any of the questions from moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis. They did fact-check Trump live, though these interruptions were peppered with fake news — no shock there. Harris was never pressed for her mountain of lies, and we know why: an ABC whistleblower is alleging that not only did the Harris camp get questions in advance, but that she was given assurances that she wouldn't be fact-checked by the moderators either. I'm not saying this is fact, but if this is true, it's a major scandal: [Multiple tweets] There are bits and pieces of evidence that suggest a rigged game everywhere. In 2016, Democrats did just that with Hillary Clinton. Donna Brazile, a CNN contributor at the time, sent the Clinton camp advanced copies of the debate questions.

Linsey Davis Reveals How She, David Muir and ABC News Schemed to Protect Kamala Harris. ABC News anchor Linsey Davis revealed in a post-debate Los Angeles Times puff-piece profile how she, ABC World News Tonight anchor David Muir and ABC producers schemed to ambush President Trump with 'fact checks' at Tuesday night's presidential debate in Philadelphia with Kamala Harris after watching Trump crush and knock Joe Biden out of the race in their June debate. The fact checking at the debate was one-sided, with Trump being interrupted by Muir and Davis several times with 'fact checks' while Harris was not 'fact checked' once. Going into the debate, there was concern about Harris' friendship with a Disney executive who oversees the ABC News division (NY Post excerpt): ["]Dana Walden, a senior Disney executive whose portfolio includes ABC News, is one of Vice President Kamala Harris' "extraordinary friends," according to a report in the New York Times. Walden and Harris have known each other since 1994, while their husbands, Matt Walden and Doug Emhoff, have known each other since the 1980s. [...] ["] After the debate it was revealed that ABC did not disclose that Davis is an Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority sister of Harris.

If True, the ABC News Presidential Debate Could Be Rocked by Explosive Scandal. Anyone who watched the presidential debate hosted by ABC News on Tuesday knows that the moderators were biased and repeatedly fact-checked Trump while letting Kamala Harris's lies go unchallenged. We kind of expected that to happen, as the bias and conflicts of interests of the moderators and the network as a whole were well established. However, there are reports now that an ABC News whistleblower is about to come forward with evidence that Kamala was given sample questions before the debate. [Two tweets] The reports appear to originate from this post from an X/Twitter user who says he or she will release "an affidavit from an ABC whistleblower regarding the debate." [Tweet] "I have just signed a non-disclosure agreement with the attorney of the whistleblower," the post claims. "The affidavit states how the Harris campaign was given sample question which were essentially the same questions that were given during the debate and separate assurances of fact checking Donald Trump and that she would NOT be fact checked. Accordingly, the affidavit states several other factors that were built into the debate to give Kamala a significant advantage."

A forgettable Warped Debate. The September 10th presidential debate went down as expected. [...] The ABC moderators proved they were predictably and shamelessly biased. [...] Harris's instructions were not to explain her agenda. She never defended disowning policies that she had embraced as a lifelong, self-confessed, "woke" "radical." Instead, Harris's threefold strategy was simple enough — and it mostly worked. One, goad Trump as a coward and racist. Then smile and call for unity, kindness, and an end to such name-calling. [...] Two, Harris predictably once more reinvented herself. She erased entirely her upper-middle class, privileged upbringing, as a child of two PhDs. There was no mention that her radical political career was opportunistically gifted by her insider and paramour fixer, the married Bay-Area left-wing politico Wille Brown, over 30 years her senior. Instead, Harris became a middle-class child of a struggling small businesswoman. [...] Three, everything else in the debate was outsourced to the ABC "moderators," David Muir and Linsey Davis. Both apparently calculated that if it was a question between blatantly helping Harris or appearing intellectually and professionally honest, then it was a no-brainer, partisan choice.

The Editor says...
Harris was installed in the office of Vice President as the result of a stolen election in 2020. Anyone who would accept that position, knowing she doesn't deserve it, would probably not hesitate to accept illicit assistance from the people producing a debate on TV.

ABC Failed to Disclose Debate Conflict of Kamala Harris and Linsey Davis Being AKA Sorority Sisters. ABC News failed to disclose that Kamala Harris and ABC News anchor Linsey Davis, who co-moderated Tuesday night's debate between Harris and President Trump, are sorority sisters in the influential Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. AKA formed a PAC in August after Harris became the Democrats' presidential nominee. The sorority connection is one more possible clue as to why the debate moderated by Davis and ABC World News Tonight anchor David Muir was so one-sided in favor of Harris. Muir and Davis interrupted Trump numerous times to fact check and argue with him while they did not fact check Harris even one time. While the sorority connection was not mentioned at the debate, Davis did speak about it during ABC's coverage of the Biden-Harris inaugural in January 2021: [Tweet]

The Debate at the Kitchen Table. ABC staged a debate this week. A presidential debate. Ostensibly between former president Donald J. Trump and former senator Kamala Harris, but in actuality between Trump and the partnership of Harris and ABC. There is always media bias. To some extent, unconscious media bias is unavoidable. But we don't expect it to be blatant; the viewer doesn't expect antics like we saw this week, when the ABC moderators repeatedly declared Mr. Trump's statements lies, and never called out Ms. Harris's blatant lies. We call it "fact-checking" today, a term coined in social media for when our high-tech overlords punish a writer for stating something with which the gurus disagree. But it's not really fact-checking, is it? It's an invasion of a conversation, a denial of free speech, a thumb on the scale. In the case of a presidential debate, it's electioneering. And it virtually invalidates the value of our constitutionally protected free press in this process. ABC's refusal even to try to act as an impartial host rendered this debate useless.

The worst debate in the history of presidential debates. Not one question Tuesday night about the execution of Hersh Goldberg-Polin and five other hostages two weeks ago, or about any of the Americans murdered by Hamas terrorists on October 7? Not one question on Iran, which is within weeks of acquiring a nuclear weapon and which is paying and perhaps precisely directing repeated attacks by its proxies on American forces in the Gulf or Arabia, the Red Sea, Iraq or Jordan? Not one question about the capacity of President Joe Biden to continue as president? And not one, single fleeting question about the People's Republic of China, and its genocide against the Uyghurs, its oppression of Hong Kong, its threat against Taiwan or the Philippines, or its military buildup, the largest, most expensive peacetime military buildup in history? Perhaps ABC's parent Disney put the kibosh on questions that would upset the People's Republic of China and endanger the company's theme parks in the country or the release of its movies in China? Who knows?

Debate Moderators Bringing Up J6 But Not Trump Assassination Attempt Tells You Everything About Media Corruption. Nobody was surprised Tuesday night when the first — and likely only — 2024 presidential debate featured Donald Trump vs. Kamala Harris, David Muir, and Linsey Davis. Yet the level of corruption never ceases to amaze, this time in the form of Kamala's ABC cronies neglecting to bring up the recent attempted murder of their political foe that occurred not two months ago. You'd never know that the former and likely future president was shot in the head 59 days ago. And that it was at the hands of a crazed gunman who was allowed to scale the roof of a building near where President Trump was speaking even after bystanders saw him. And that the building was suspiciously left out of the security perimeter even though it was identified as a potential threat. And that snipers were supposedly told not to secure the roof of the building because the nearly flat roof was kind of "sloped." And that Democrats' "Trump is Hitler" language might have had something to do with it. No, Muir and Davis instead asked questions about a three-and-a-half-year-old (mostly peaceful) demonstration because that's what Kamala Harris would rather talk about. Why would moderators generate discussion about Democrats inciting a would-be assassin when they can just keep recycling the fiction that Trump incited a violent mob in 2021?

Kamala Harris Lies About Guns, Fracking, Private Insurance, etc. and ABC Hacks Let Her Get Away with It. It was obvious after the first 15 minutes of the presidential debate tonight that it was President Trump versus Kamala and two ABC hack reporters. The ABC moderators repeatedly "fact-checked" and "fake fact-checked" President Trump during the debate. This should not surprise ANY Trump supporters or conservatives. The mainstream media becomes more slanted and dishonest as the years go on. The ABC moderators refused to fact-check Kamala Harris on a number of her lies. Kamala said she would never take your guns. A lie. [Tweets] Kamala said she supports private insurance. A lie. [Tweet] ABC said Democrats never proposed killing babies who survive abortions. This also took place in Minnesota. [Tweet]

ABC Should Be Prosecuted For Illegal Contributions To Harris In 'Debate'. Former President Donald Trump showed up for a traditional political debate Tuesday night, but he instead found himself in the middle of a 90-minute ambush to boost Kamala Harris. Working as a team, ABC hosts David Muir and Linsey Davis propped up Harris and repeatedly tried to vanquish Trump by talking over him, cutting him off, and asking bizarre questions they did not ask Harris. At one point, Davis jumped in for Harris and offered a rebuttal to one of Trump's comments on abortion, a move beyond the scope of a moderator. They allowed Harris more time to respond and followed her when she veered off topic, but gave Trump no such breaks. It was not a debate, but a campaign contribution. That's not a big surprise from either moderator, as Muir hosts the most Trump-negative network news evening broadcast and Davis has a long track record of promoting Democrat talking points including stolen election claims from Hillary Clinton.

Democracy Truly Does Die in Darkness. Those same people who gaslighted us about Biden's mental acuity are now doing so about the cackling, incompetent purveyor of word salads as they present a completely new image of Harris based on lies. The media are telling us to trust them as they completely remake Harris and Walz as moderate, sensible leaders despite extensive records that indicate they are the most extreme, progressive (socialist, if not communist-leaning) public officials to ever run for high office while they hide such records in their reporting on this critically important election. Harris makes John Kerry look like amateur hour on the flip-flop gymnastics of her extreme policy positions. Communist China-loving Walz is a serial liar seemingly far worse than Biden or Harris, if possible. The media is MIA. They also are not holding Harris accountable for her complicity in the Biden mental decline cover-up let alone all of the economic, domestic, and foreign policy disasters of her administration.

Megyn Kelly: Dana Walden, Close Friend of Kamala Harris, Runs Disney-Owned ABC News. The Moderators Did Her Bidding. The obvious bias shown by ABC News moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis during Tuesday's presidential debate has put the spotlight on their boss — Disney executive Dana Walden, who oversees ABC News and is a close personal friend of Kamala Harris. So blatant was the network's animus against former President Donald Trump during the live broadcast that even Megyn Kelly — not exactly Trump's biggest fan — has called out Walden, saying she is helping lead the effort to "steal this election. They're openly working to sink him." Megyn Kelly's post-debate roundup focused in part on Disney executive Dana Walden, who serves as co-chairman of Disney Entertainment where she runs numerous TV properties including ABC News.

ABC's David Muir Lied About Crime Falling Under Biden-Harris. The ABC moderators for the presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris couldn't have been more biased. Not once did they fact-check Harris' long list of lies. But I will leave the fact-checking of David Muir and Linsey Davis' lies to others. I will focus on only one of Muir's discussions on crime. DAVID MUIR: "President Trump, as you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is coming down in this country, ..." In fact, Trump was correct about the increase in crime under Biden. While violent crime fell by 17 percent under Trump, Biden has seen it rise by 43 percent. Muir doesn't understand what the FBI is measuring. The FBI counts the number of crimes reported to police. Trump was right that less than half of police departments are now giving that data to the FBI, but, more importantly, Trump was discussing what was happening to total crime, not just the number of crimes reported to police.

Debunking Kamala's Biggest Lies That the ABC News Moderators Let Slide. January 6: "And on that day, the president of the United States incited a violent mob to attack our nation's Capitol, to desecrate our nation's Capitol. On that day, 140 law enforcement officers were injured. And some died." FACT-CHECK: False. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died in the hospital the next day and not by a fire extinguisher to the head, as falsely claimed by multiple mainstream media outlets. His official cause of death was two strokes, occurring many hours after the Capitol riot. According to the DC medical examiner's office's report, Sicknick suffered no injuries, internal or external. He also didn't have a reaction to bear spray, which national news outlets had fallen back on, claiming that the mace used by the rioters caused the officer's pair of strokes. Specifically, Sicknick succumbed to "acute brainstem and cerebellar infarcts due to acute basilar artery thrombosis," the coroner said.

Fact Check: ABC Moderators Silent As Kamala Harris Repeats Hoaxes About Trump and Race. CLAIM: Kamala Harris claimed that Donald Trump "refused to rent property to black families" and called for the "execution" of the Central Park Five. VERDICT: FALSE. These are both inaccurate claims, which the ABC News moderators allowed to stand uncorrected. ABC News' Linsey Davis and David Muir frequently tried to fact-check former President Trump and never once did the same to Vice President Harris — and it wasn't because she was telling the truth. In a responding to a question about race, Harris claimed that Trump had "refused to rent property to black families."

ABC Moderators Called Out as Double Standard Becomes Evident: 'A Disgraceful Failure'. Tuesday night's debate was by no means a fair fight. The debate marked the first time that former President Donald Trump clashed with Vice President Kamala Harris. Many supporters of both candidates — as well as moderates still making up their minds on who to vote for — were looking forward to seeing the two candidates go head-to-head[.] Unfortunately, Tuesday night's debate didn't provide us with a one-on-one debate. Instead, it was three-on-one. ABC's two moderators, news anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis, constantly attacked, fact-checked and pressed Trump to answer questions. When it came to Harris, the kid gloves were on; they barely pressed her at all, even when she refused to answer questions.

3 on 1: Trump Clashes With Harris — and the Debate 'Moderators'. ABC's debate moderators' performance in Tuesday night's presidential debate made CNN's performance in June look like a master class in fairness, objectivity, and balance. It was exactly the kind of debate moderation left-wing commentators on X have been demanding for months — years, really. They don't want anything approaching objectivity. They wanted moderators to "fact-check" former President Donald Trump every step of the way while allowing his opponent to pontificate on questions they think will be beneficial to Democratic Party fortunes. And that's essentially what happened. ABC News anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis continually "fact-checked" Trump in real time, arguing with him after nearly every answer. That makes for a horrible debate format.

ABC News 'Moderators' Made a Joke of the Presidential Debate. If moderators do their job correctly, nobody talks about them afterward. Unless one becomes a legendary moderator like Jim Lehrer, debate watchers don't remember who the moderator was. [...] Not a single sentient being expected ABC News moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis to be impartial in any way given their history of reporting on the candidates, but the partisanship and unequal treatment of the candidates went far beyond any expectations and set a new standard for how not to moderate a debate. Muir and Davis repeatedly fact-checked Trump (with questionable or outright false "facts"); jumped in to help Harris when she was floundering by switching topics or interjecting "gotcha" questions at Trump; bird-dogged Trump to pin him down on a yes-or-no answer while not doing the same to Harris; ignored blatant lies by Harris, and inserted their own opinions and thoughts about Trump's answers.

Are Harris supporters ignorant or do they just hate Trump more than they love this country? Given everything we know about Kamala Harris by now, it is astonishing that a single American would consider voting for her. She is clearly way out of her depth, and until she suddenly became the designated candidate of the Democrat party, most people on both sides of the aisle considered her to be unqualified. [...] Now we have heard the one and only debate during which the two ABC moderators clearly sought to cover for Harris's many, many lies. To those of us who follow the campaign closely, just about every word out of her mouth was a lie. So, one has to assume that those people who support Kamala Harris are wholly ignorant of her plans to complete Obama's transformation of America into a Marxist nation without any constitutional protections. If they continue to support her after the debate, then they are so deeply indoctrinated they are unable to think critically. David Muir and Lindsey Davis both ran interference for Harris. They did not challenge even one of her many prevarications.

What ABC moderators didn't ask. After watching the debate between President Trump and Kamala Harris, what was essentially a dynamic of three-against-one as the two moderators obviously teamed up with Harris, we're reminded that the media is one of the biggest enemies of the American people. ABC didn't ask Kamala if she felt responsible for the Haitians overwhelming the town or any deaths and other crimes they have committed. ABC didn't ask why Kamala spread the false story that our border guards were whipping Haitians. Why were she and Biden, along with so many journalists willing to destroy the guards' lives without evidence? Why didn't she ever publicly apologize for her lies? ABC didn't ask Kamala about her responsibility in any deaths or rapes at the hands of illegals. Why don't we know the names of all the victims? ABC didn't ask why Joe Biden, to whom Kamala currently acts as a right-hand man, signed so many executive orders to open the border as soon as he took office. If they cared so much about securing the border and enforcing existing laws, why did they do that?

Media bias machine working at full capacity for Kamala and the Democrats. It is astonishing what the media reports on, and what they don't, as they campaign for Kamala and other Democrats. Kamala and other Democrats are outraged about guns in certain crimes, but when we see videos of Venezuelan gang members, who were admitted by Kamala and Joe, wielding guns in an Aurora, Colorado apartment building, we don't hear a word; the media does very little reporting, and the Democrat governor of Colorado says what we are seeing is not true, merely a figment of our "imagination." That is similar to the FBI, 51 former intelligence officials, and other Democrats intentionally lying to the public before the 2020 election that the Hunter Biden laptop, which showed massive corruption by Joe Biden and his family, was Russian disinformation. The Biden family crimes were all in our heads! The media and other Democrats claim they are very concerned about the public getting misinformation before the election, but they are the ones who spread the misinformation and intentionally hide the truth... if it damages their chosen candidate.

Is There Election Fraud or Not? One of the most revealing memes on the internet asks: "If the Biden-Harris administration has done such a great job, why does Kamala Harris promise that if elected, she will fix everything on Day 1?" If everything's swell, why does everything need fixing? Kamala isn't alone in wanting it both ways. The esteemed Wall Street Journal has been among establishmentarians who ridiculed Donald Trump for claiming that his re-election was foiled by a conspiracy that stole the election. Just about every mainstream media outlet has bellowed that there was no proof of a rigged election. But if elections are on the up-and-up, then why does virtually every Republican candidate now demand that steps be taken to "ensure election integrity"?

Mainstream Media Sure Isn't Demanding Answers from Kamala, Huh? [Scroll down] She's not just "limit[ing] improvisational moments" — she's not even going on the record with the press pool that accompanies her on the campaign trail. Politico reported a month ago that Harris only speaks to them off the record, and those reporters have so far cooperated in that strategy rather than demand real interaction and answers. I called it The Silence of the Kams four weeks ago, and it continues to this day. Axios doesn't have much to say about the how in their headline "How Harris Dodges Scrutiny," but it's clearly because the media is complicit in the strategy. If the press pool refused to do any more off-the-record interactions and demanded on-the-record responses, that strategy would either collapse or Harris would shortly lose the press pool she requires for messaging. And yet the mainstream media keeps playing along. The Protection Racket Media has been in the bag all along, just as they were with the cover-up of Joe Biden's cognitive decline over the last three years.

Harris Campaign Spokesman Tells CNN 'We Don't Have Time' to Talk About What Happened Over the Last Few Years. The Kamala Harris campaign spokesman Ian Sams appeared on CNN this week and made excuses for why they are not talking about Kamala's record from the last few years. This gives away their whole game. Democrats and the Harris people want voters to forget the fact that Harris has been part of the Biden administration and is directly responsible for what has transpired over the last three and a half years. That's why they keep pushing the whole 'new way forward' nonsense. It's a feeble attempt to erase recent history so that Harris isn't held accountable by voters.

The Press Finally Notice Kamala Harris Is Playing Them for Fools. Some elements of the national press are finally starting to understand that Kamala Harris is playing them for fools. Of course, admitting there's a problem is different than acting on it. Seven weeks after stabbing Joe Biden in the back and entering the presidential race, the now-Democratic Party presidential nominee has given just a single interview. That was conducted by resident superfan Dana Bash of CNN asking the questions (and feeding the answers), and Harris brought along her running mate, Tim Walz. The vice president has also done zero press conferences, instead choosing to use anonymous aides to push policy position changes to the press.

Wow! Have you listened to Alexa lately? "Alexa, why should I vote for Donald Trump?" "I cannot provide content that promotes a specific political party or a specific candidate," Alexa says. "Alexa, why should I vote for Kamala Harris?" "While there are many reasons to vote for Kamala Harris, the most significant may be that she is a strong candidate with a proven track record of accomplishment. As the first female vice president, Harris has already broken down a major gender barrier, and her carrier in politics has been characterized by a commitment to progressive ideals and a focus on helping disenfranchised communities," Alexa says. It's kind of different, wouldn't you agree?

Minnesota news station conveniently "loses connection" when state senator starts ripping them for being Tim Walz puppets. No "state-run media" happening here folks. It's just Minnesota's incredibly Democrat- and Tim Walz-friendly media having "technical difficulties" the moment anyone challenges their neutrality. Check this out: [Tweet with video clip] [...] I'm not sure that North Korean media could be this blatantly corrupt. Before the cut, Senator Jensen got some great blows in. I can't imagine the panic going on in the newsroom when they ~~cut~~ lost the feed.

The Editor says...
I worked in broadcasting for 48 years, much of the time occupied in establishing "live shot" signals for remote pickup links, and I can assure you that live feeds of this sort, from a fixed point of origination, NEVER fail without some advance warning (as in this case), except when someone manually kills the feed. If a signal is about to drop, there's usually some disturbance in the video or audio before they both disappear. Not this time. You can safely surmise this was not a case of "technical difficulties" beyond the station's control. The feed was obviously cut because the Republican politician was developing momentum and had to be stopped, as if the TV station is owned and operated by socialist Democrats.

Making it too big to rig. Kamala has tried to steal Trump's ideas such as dropping the tax on tips and giving parents of newborns $5,000. If the latter passes, look for taxpayers to pay for abortions in the name of equality. Kamala has yet to sign up for MSSTA — making Social Security taxless again. The media bias of the tips exemption was delightfully obvious. Trump's no tax on tips would impoverish the government while Kamala's would help underpaid workers.

CNN puts 'live' banner on pre-recorded Harris-Walz interview. CNN displayed a live banner during the entirety of anchor Dana Bash's pre-taped exclusive Thursday interview with Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. Bash made it apparent at the start of the broadcast that the interview with Harris and Walz had been recorded earlier on Thursday and was not airing live. It was Harris' first sit-down interview since launching her 2024 presidential campaign on July 21 and aired exclusively on CNN at 9 p.m., with Bash providing live commentary on location in Georgia throughout the broadcast. [Tweet]

WaPo: Kamala is joy, Trump is misery. [Scroll down] The progressive energy and spending policies of Kamala Harris have caused high inflation everywhere — remember she was the deciding vote on the Inflation "Reduction" Act. The Democrats have given Russia and Iran the ability to finance wars and terrorism with high crude oil prices, and their open border policies have been destroying the United States since the day they took office. But, Harris is the "joyful" candidate: [...] Kamala's "optimistic" view consists of lying; she continually lies that the U.S. will not survive if Trump is elected, because she continually lies that Trump is a dictator. A nation where illegals seize control of apartment complexes? Where people can't afford groceries? Where the prospect of home ownership for ordinary Americans is rapidly evaporating? That's an "optimistic" future? Trump's "pessimistic" view is when he tells the truth about the damage that Kamala has caused with her big government policies, which would only worsen with four more years.

So what really was witheld from CNN's 41-minute interview with Kamala Harris? Is CNN a news network or a public relations agency? What else can one conclude but the latter, now that we learn that CNN did a 41-minute interview with Democrat presidential nominee Kamala Harris, but only released 18 minutes of it to the public, both in its broadcast and in its transcript. That was its big news scoop, the first major interview of Kamala Harris since Joe Biden was forced to pull out of the race last month. For a news agency to withold ... the news ... is strange stuff indeed, given that news is supposed to be what it does, and its bread and butter. [...] Now we get a purported leak as to the reason why: [Advertisement] [Tweet] So we learn that Harris's undoubtedly mangled and contradictory responses to questions about fracking were a mess, meaning, CNN was running cover for her in order to make her look better than she really was. Worse still, CNN apparently gave Harris veto power over what went into the CNN interview and what didn't. That's the biggest no-no in news. That's not news, that's serving a client.

CNN, Washington Post: A Modern Press Gang. From the absurd Dana Bash "interview" of Kamala Harris, her first since being nominated to the highest office without ever having received a single vote, to the slavish coverage in the [Washington] Post, it's clear they cannot defend the Democrats' unpopular policies. Instead, they work to hide them, and treat the entire presidential campaign as if it were the selling of new and "improved" laundry soap. [...] This week, Tim Walz's rather disgusting hotdish tater tots were featured in a very long piece with pictures of the dish and Walz's head with tater tots swirling halo-like around it. The point of giving this play is not because hotdish tater tots is so wonderful a dish. It's to show readers how down to earth and "self-effacing" the serial liar and far-left vice-presidential candidate is — at the same time allowing the sophisticates to confirm their superiority over the rubes in the Midwest.

The 'See No Candidate, Hear No Candidate' Campaign The Media Are Forcing On Voters. It's supposed to be a great honor bestowed upon CNN and even the American voters that Kamala Harris, along with her crutch Tim Walz, will finally appear Thursday for an interview — a taped interview (meaning edited), not a live one. Goodie. Outside of any debates between Kamala and Donald Trump (assuming at least one takes place), this is how the next 68 days are going to be, all at the insistence of the national media and to the great pleasure of Kamala. This is a first-of-its-kind presidential campaign where you're not supposed to see either candidate, aside from the occasional still photo and edited video, accompanied by stories relayed by the media — the vast majority of which will be deceptive, if not outright and blatantly false.

Commentary on Harris's softball interview on CNN:
The Significance of the Passage of Time. She was speaking, you understand, but the main thing you noticed was the musical quality of her voice: sonorous, resonant, like one of the more obscure woodwind instruments, an alto clarinet or a basset horn, producing a sound like unto creamy dressing over the familiar word-salad of iceberg lettuce. It would be ungentlemanly to bang on the particulars of Kamala Harris's CNN interview performance, so I'll proceed. The nocturne was 18-minutes long, all that survived from the 41-minutes CNN actually recorded, so you might wonder a little about the notes not played. The leitmotif throughout was "my values have not changed," meaning, disregard any dissonance you might detect in the velvet honk of my voice. Mind the significance of the passage of time, not the music, Altogether, as nocturnes should, it had a soporific effect.

Election Day Patriotism. Two news offerings on Wednesday caught my eye. The first was a column by Robin Abcarian of the Los Angeles Times, "Are Kamala Harris' Democrats taking back the flag-waving patriotism claimed by Republicans?" [...] No one buys that Democrats are suddenly patriotic. Robin Abcarian's job is to make her readers feel good about voting for the Hyena and the Cowardly Lion. Given her location in the heart of Narcon Liberalism, I would expect nothing less. This is a valuable service to her readers. Almost as valuable as the poop map in San Francisco so people know which street corners to avoid in the literal [excrement pit] by the bay.

CNN Delivers Kamala Harris First Interview in Three Heavily Edited Segments. In an effort to provide as much assistance as possible, CNN heavily edited the Kamala Harris interview as agreed between their producers and the campaign of Kamala Harris (Brian Fallon). The narrative engineering within the interview, which includes soft guidance by Dana Bash, is transparent and openly visible. The backlash against CNN is also very visible in all social media examples where the interview is being highlighted. To present the post-broadcast coverage, CNN has uploaded the interview in three segments. You will find them below. [Video clip]

Kamala is ripped to shreds for 'word salad' CNN softball interview. Kamala Harris was last night ripped to shreds for her 'word salad' answers in a softball liberal media interview — her first since Joe Biden dropped out 40 days ago. The Democratic nominee appeared beside her running mate Tim Walz for an hour-long broadcast — which in reality amounted to less than half an hour of actual questioning by Dana Bash. The liberal commentariat claimed that she had succeeded by following the tenet of 'do no harm' during the pre-recorded broadcast from Savannah, Georgia.

Internet Reacts to Weird Staging of Kamala's CNN Interview and Hulking Tim Walz. Well, wonders will never cease — Kamala Harris actually sat for a formal interview. Of course, it wasn't live, it was taped, and it was conducted by a friendly face in CNN's Dana Bash. Meanwhile, the VP needed the comfort blanket of her running mate and Emotional Support Governor, Minnesota's Tim Walz, just to get through it. Many subjects were discussed, and to be fair, Bash actually asked her some pointed questions on her frequent flip-flopping, but the internet had a field day with something simpler: the staging. Namely, Kamala appeared to get the child's seat, while Walz looked like he was Hagrid sitting next to her. [Tweet]

The liberal media's gushing over Kamala Harris is an embarrassment to journalism. Yes, of course liberal media outlets in the US are biased towards Kamala Harris. They're always biased towards the Democrats' candidate. Nothing new there. What makes their behaviour right now so remarkable is not that they're being partisan. It's that they're willing to be partisan even though the object of their adulation has been giving them absolutely nothing in return. They're cheerleading for someone who won't even speak to them. [...] If a Republican candidate followed such an approach, these liberal media outlets would — quite rightly — be scandalised. [...] Ms Harris's approach, however, doesn't appear to trouble them at all. They seem perfectly happy to carry on portraying her as Mandela, Gandhi and Beyoncé rolled into one.

Kennedy Endorses Trump — Media Endorses Kamala. The media continues to fawn over Kamala Harris while the latter steadfastly refuses to sit for interviews or stand for press conferences. Her handlers know how important perception, the optics, can be — aesthetically and psychologically — portraying her in a positive, pleasing light. One can readily see this in her attention to apparel — towards a more "presidential" appearance. Time magazine is a case in point. Its latest issue features a dramatic portrait of Kamala Harris on the cover bearing the engaging caption "Her Moment." The magazine offered minimal substance on Harris's performance as vice president. But it gushed a fountain of ink alluding to the virtual "carnival" atmosphere which accompanies Harris's political events. And in an almost laughable fashion an effort was attempted by the interviewer to place Harris's performance on the same level with last year's "blockbuster summer for women of Barbie, Beyoncé, and Swift." The Left's hypocrisy knows no limits.

Networks Deliver Massive Media Honeymoon to Kamala Harris. Since Joe Biden exited the 2024 presidential race four weeks ago, the liberal networks have delivered an unprecedented boost of positive publicity to his successor in the race, Vice President Kamala Harris. Not only has Harris received 66% more airtime than former President Donald Trump, but the spin of Harris's coverage has been more positive (84%) than any other major party nominee, even as Trump's coverage has been nearly entirely hostile (89% negative). As always, our calculation of spin omits so-called "horse race" assessments, but a separate count shows those statements have also favored Harris by a whopping margin (94% positive, vs. just 43% positive for Trump). At the same time, the network coverage has virtually eliminated any discussion of the strident left-wing positions Harris took as Senator or during her 2020 presidential campaign. And while Republican Vice Presidential candidate J.D. Vance and his Democratic counterpart, Tim Walz, have received nearly equal amounts of airtime, the networks have celebrated Walz (62% positive press) and punished Vance (92% negative).

Kamala's Magical Media Makeover Masks Stunning Flaws. Poof! In a cloud of gaslit smoke we have just witnessed the remarkable transformation of V.P. Kamala Harris with the lowest public approval rating among registered voters of any vice president in NBC News polling history (49% negative compared to 43% positive) a year ago to become recast as a celebrated nominee to lead the nation and free world. And this illusory spectacle was accomplished without the supposed convert — a merged reincarnate spirit of Harriet Tubman and Margaret Thatcher — having received a single delegate vote. Having been first to bomb out of presidential contention for the 2020 race, Kamala's latest revisionist version follows a familiar Democrat Biden basement bunker strategy with a Harris reversal, reinvention and retreat-from-press-inquiry agenda. This politically desperate disappearing act relies upon campaign staff to walk back previous radically unpopular statements and actions to conform with a winning majority of voter values and viewpoints.

CNN beclowns itself and says the markets yearn for Kamala. According to most of the media, the Democratic National Convention is so "electrifying," and pure "joy[.]" The journalists have clearly received their talking points from the DNC, or they wouldn't all be using the same words. The Democrats have been telling us how great Joe Biden was for three-and-a-half years, until we saw him in the debate, even calling him "sharp as a tack." They told us that Kamala was weak and unpopular, and an albatross around Joe's neck. Now, she is the greatest thing since sliced bread, despite running away from her record and Biden's policies as fast as she can, because she knows they're losers. Here is CNN telling us that Wall Street is gravitating toward her, and it's clearly our turn to cackle when we read a headline and article like this: ["]How Kamala Harris is winning over Wall Street [...] ["] There is just so much to love! Let's blame corporations for greed and gouging when they make a small profit, instead of big government spending and regulations.

Kamala Can't Win Without Extreme Election Interference And That's Exactly What's Happening. Everyone invested in a Kamala Harris victory in November isn't making even the faintest attempt at taking her seriously as a presidential candidate. She's not one because she has no reason to run for president, no vision, no interest in the job. The whole point of this herculean, gravity-defying exercise we're in the midst of isn't to make Kamala president. It's to deny Donald Trump the White House. The only way that can happen is for election interference on behalf of Kamala in ways that were once unspeakable. We're already seeing it with inexplicable poll numbers (literally, no one can explain them); a national news media that went from acknowledging Kamala as a perpetual screw-up to heralding her as a glamour queen; and an all-hands cleanup effort to remake her reputation from undeniably incapable to Barack Obama redux. We're entering a new phase where Democrats and the media will not only pretend Kamala's last three embarrassing years in office never happened, but they will lie about anything and everything from here forward and to a degree in no way tethered to reality.

Media Hide Biden-Harris' Huge Migrant Flood in Campaign Season. More than 170,000 migrants crossed President Joe Biden's borders in July, but the TV networks and establishment media pretend the inflow was just 56,048 migrants during the run-up to the 2024 election. The July 2024 inflow of more than 170,000 migrants is triple the number touted by Biden's pro-migration border chief and his media allies. It is also four times the 40,000 illegal migrants who appeared at President Donald Trump's southern border in July 2020.

I reject their normal. Tim Murphy of Mother Jones greeted the Democrat nomination for vice president the way teen girls greeted the Beatles 60 years ago on the Ed Sullivan Show. Murphy wrote, "Tim Walz, Normal Guy, Is Harris' Pick for Vice President." [Excerpt omitted for brevity.] He was vetted? So everyone in the Democrat Party knew that when he said he went to Iraq, he was lying. So everyone in the Democrat Party knew that when he said he was a command sergeant major, he was lying. So everyone in the Democrat Party knew that when he said he didn't suddenly retire to avoid combat, he was lying. That's their normal. Lie, lie, lie. He worked in Red China for a year — beginning right after Tiananmen Square — and has made 30 visits back, including his honeymoon. [...] It's not just Murphy who is trying to sell Walz as a normal guy. All the media is.

MSNBC: Harris [is] 'The End of White Patriarchal Society'.. The Regime sycophants at MSNBC, consumed by their collective desire to imprint the Harris candidacy into the American psyche, have now proclaimed Harris to be "the future". With Joe Biden vanishing in the rear-view mirror, the "Hope and Change" nostalgia has been ramped up to 20 as the reality challenged MSNBC's 9PM host, Alex Wagner, proclaims Obama and Harris to represent "the future". It is unclear to me how a president who termed out 8 years ago is "the future", but MSNBC is running that in the hopes of projecting Harris as the next avatar of Obamism. This stuff is the coverage equivalent of the creepy Shepard Fairey poster. Everything is a contrived callback to "Hope and Change". This includes the incessant evocation of the "coalition of the ascendant" that would permanently transform American politics upon elevating Obama to power.

The Press Won't Discuss Real Campaign Issues, Because They Don't Want Trump To Win. We're now three weeks from the press hounding Biden out of the race because they looked like fools for defending years of video clips showing him stumbling around on the international stage non compos mentis. And with no remorse or self-awareness, the media are already back to doing everything they can to serve Democrats' narrative. What this means in practice is that, unlike a traditional presidential campaign, there's been virtually no discussion of actual issues such as the economy, immigration, education, taxes, health care, foreign policy, and so on. The last four years have been pretty disastrous. As a result, if this campaign becomes about issues and what's happened under the Biden-Harris presidency, Trump is going to benefit greatly from that discussion. So the press won't let it happen. Kamala Harris could not survive the scrutiny of a real presidential campaign, and the media know this.

Kamala Eliminating Taxes on Tips is Good, Trump Eliminating Them is Bad, According to CBS. In the wake of Kamala Harris copying Donald Trump's plan to eliminate taxes on tips for service and hospitality workers, mainstream media outlet CBS demonstrated obvious bias in its coverage of the two candidates. For Harris, CBS' X description was: "Vice President Kamala Harris is rolling out a new policy position, saying she'll fight to end taxes on tips for service and hospitality workers." For Trump, CBS' X description was: "Former President Donald Trump's vow to stop taxing tips would cost the federal government up to $250 billion over ten years, according to nonpartisan watchdog group." Author Tim Murtaugh shared the side-by-side on X, joking that "Only sharp-eyed readers will be able to spot the difference in the coverage of the two proposals."

Washington Post Reporters Asks The Biden Regime If There Is Anything They Can Do To Censor The Musk/Trump Interview. Did this Washington Post "reporter" just ask the first lesbian, black press secretary if the Biden regime could INTERVENE and stop Trump's interview with Elon Musk on X?! "I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue... it's an America issue... What role does the White House or the President have? Any sort of stopping that, or stopping the spread of that or intervening?" [Video clip]

Basement Strategy Episode II. This year, it is a metaphorical basement since Walz and Harris are barnstorming the country, but the principle is the same. Avoid scrutiny at any cost, lie all the time, mindlessly repeat those lies, and count on the mainstream media to create a fictional movie that reflects reality in no way at all. As things stand neither Harris nor Walz has taken a single spontaneous question from a serious reporter. Walz is far more fluent than Harris because he is a pathological liar without a conscience, while Harris is quite stupid and incapable of stringing words together on her own. She is a speechwriter's dream because she is quite good at reading others' words and is terrified of speaking her own. The key to this strategy is simple: let the Hollywood/mainstream media/big tech and intelligence community campaign for them.

Theater of the Absurd, Harris-Walz Edition. Last week in this space, I pointed out the irony of the Sudden Harris Ascendancy Syndrome. Here she was, one of the least popular figures on the American scene — someone, moreover, whom everyone, no matter their political coloration, regarded primarily as political life insurance for Joe Biden — and yet, Wham!, the very moment Biden resigns, her media reconstruction begins in earnest. I almost wrote "media rehabilitation," but that would not have been quite right. We say that someone is rehabilitated when he has fallen from a previous state of health, competence, or popularity. Kamala Harris has never been competent or popular. So what the media has done to or with her these last couple of weeks is more of an outright fabrication project. In part, as I wrote last week, it is a product of "magical thinking," the belief, or at least the hope or pretense, that by saying something is so, you magically make it so.

Harris Lurches Even Further to the Left. Over the last few months, we Americans have been gobsmacked by the speed at which Team Big Left — Democrat politicians, celebrities, hi-tech moguls with their social media platforms such as Google and Facebook, and the MSM — can create a brand-new election zeitgeist at the drop of a hat. [...] In addition to the pace, we are also amazed at the size of these tasks. These guys started out the year by pushing the corpse-like Biden as "sharp and wise" and one of the most consequential U.S. Presidents ever. Par for the course for Big Left, but then, after the Great Debate, the degree of difficulty went through the roof when they had to take Harris, the worst candidate on their bench, and turn her into a heroine for the ages.

Kamala Harris Can't Articulate The Case For Voting For Her. What exactly is Harris' appeal? She is the same unlikable, inauthentic candidate who was forced to drop out of the 2020 Democrat presidential primary before a single vote was cast. [...] What would account for Harris' meteoric rise from political pariah to Democrat star in two weeks? "Kamalamania" is not based on reality; it is purely a media-driven construct. The legacy media have joined with Democrats in a full-court press to catapult Harris over the finish line — by whatever means necessary. Americans are witnessing a real-world demonstration of the power of propaganda and are amazed by the ease — and speed — with which it was accomplished. The media's swooning coverage has taken a candidate once considered so weak as to be a "drag on the ticket" and elevated her to rockstar status.

Regime-Approved 'Fact-Checkers' Rush To Downplay Tim Walz's Stolen Valor Controversy. It's another day that ends in "-y," which means legacy media hucksters are running dishonest interference for the Democrat Party. The latest example comes in the form of a Friday "fact-check" by The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler. Known for his willingness to lie on behalf of Democrats, the Post's "democracy dies in darkness" guru decided to offer his "assessment" of the controversy engulfing Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. While lauded by regime-approved media for his National Guard service, Walz's rollout as Kamala Harris' 2024 running mate has been marred by reports and resurfaced clips indicating he committed "stolen valor." As Matt Beebe has detailed at length in these pages, Walz abandoned his unit before it deployed to Iraq to run for Congress and has inflated his military rank throughout his political career.

Tim Walz is a Radical Leftist Who Imposed Abortions Up to Birth on Minnesota. The last couple of days we've documented the legacy media's infatuation with Walz's Midwest cool. They like him — okay, they adore him — because they have persuaded themselves that the public is so dense they will take their cues not from his abysmal record but from social media posts. We think otherwise. Here are just a few of the many steps Walz has taken to make Minnesota, in effect, an abortion sanctuary state. [...]

Biden 2.0 — [The news] Media [are] Now Covering Up Kamala's Incompetence. The media are scared to ask Kamala Harris questions. If you think about it, what we have here is nothing less than another version of the years-long media cover-up of Joe Biden's lack of competency. [Advertisement] When it came to Biden, the media were desperate to hide his obvious, glaring, and dangerous mental deterioration due to his advanced age. [Advertisement] With Kamala, the media are desperate to hide her obvious, glaring, and dangerous stupidity. The media know CacklyMcNeverBorderCzar is the word salad queen. The media know CacklyMcNeverBorderCzar loses her poise as soon as she's challenged. Most of all, the media know CacklyMcNeverBorderCzar will never be able to explain her failure as Biden's Not-A-Border-Czar, her promotion of a bail fund to release looters and rioters, her stated desire to ban fracking, and her wish to offer illegal aliens free healthcare.

Is Harris Campaign Relying On Smoke and Mirrors? The Harris campaign is showing lots of videos of rallies and gatherings with cheering people, but is it all real or are they leveraging CGI and the more modern AI and other tools to enhance the messaging and thereby influence you perceptions and opinions? This image as an example, when run through a tool to measure the possibility of AI use the poster says the tool indicates a 92% possibility of AI use. [Tweets] Add to this the fact that they don't appear to want real questions and people are getting a quick sense of a "smoke and mirrors" strategy being used by the campaign.

Liberal Gaslighting Goes Global. The problem with many liberals is they can't live in their own truth. They abandon ship as soon as it becomes inconvenient to maintain their current persona. The most obvious and telling recent examples come from the Democrat Presidential candidate-by-fiat, Kamala Harris. For the last three and a half years, she was 'The Border Czar.' Everyone knew it. Biden announced it with much ballyhoo, and she was referred to as 'The Border Czar' by the television, print, and electronic media repeatedly. As the Vice President, she ran interference for Joe Biden. (He didn't create the huge border fiasco; she did.) [...] Any stain of failure, especially one tied to the massive disaster of the southern United States border, was a huge threat to her Presidential aspirations. So, the Democrat political machine, together with their legacy media propaganda juggernaut, went full George Orwell on John Q. Public. CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the New Yorker, Axios, and a score of other legacy media began trumpeting: 'Kamala Harris was never the Border Czar!' Unfortunately for the gaslighters, and thanks to the internet, there are an abundance of records of them dubbing her with that title.

The Press Rush to Put Lipstick on the Pig, but the Tim Walz Pick Is a Disaster for Democrats. Who is Walz? He's a Bernie Sanders clone whose record is so left-wing that Trump could run a new ad every single day from now until the election. That didn't stop the press from quickly trying to put lipstick on the pig, though. In the aftermath of the news, CBS News described him as a "centrist" who likes to cook casseroles. [Tweet with video clip] [...] That above framing is insane and objectively false. Walz is as far-left as you can get, to the point where he competes with Gavin Newsom as the most radical governor in the country. He let his state burn during the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots, choosing to coddle criminals instead of taking action. He signed a bill putting tampons into boys' bathrooms. He believes biological males should compete against females in sports. He took the side of teachers' unions over students during COVID. He has praised socialism as just being "neighborly." He has defended sanctuary cities. He even changed Minnesota's flag to look like the Somali flag to appease the Islamists in his state.

The Atlantic rebrands Kamala's weird persona as 'fun'. Kamala's history is no longer a mystery. Willie Brown got her started on her political path when she dated this much older man while he was still married to (but apparently separated from) his wife. Following the political appointments he made for her, he helped her successfully run for San Francisco DA and then for California Attorney General. Both as a local DA and as a state AG, Kamala pursued a highly politicized, unprincipled path. In San Francisco, to look like a law-and-order DA, her office obtained more than 1,900 marijuana convictions for low-level offenders. What hid behind those statistics, though, was the fact that almost none of those convicted were actually punished. It was Potemkin justice. Kamala's principles were also foul. The best example is Kamala Harris's decision not to seek the death penalty for Edwin Ramos, who murdered Tony Bologna, 48, and his two sons, Michael, 20, and Matthew, 16 — all totally innocent men — as part of a gangland hit gone wrong. It was an unspeakably evil act but Kamala didn't think the full force of the law applied. Incidentally, I know of no significant cases that Kamala personally tried and won during her tenure.

Evidence of Big Tech & MSM Rigging Public Opinion for Kamala Harris. We now have more evidence that Google is rigging the election. While they say that they have nothing to hide, their search results paint a different picture. A Google search for "Trump polling lead over Harris" falsely suggests that Harris is ahead. Even a simple search for "Trump news" surfaces overwhelmingly negative stories from left-leaning outlets. Meanwhile, searching for "Kamala Harris news" highlights glowing profiles and positive coverage. Disturbingly, negative stories about Harris, like Doug Emhoff's affair, are buried deep in search results. Search for "Kamala Harris scandal," and you'll find a sanitized list of results, omitting key controversies. In contrast, a search for "Trump controversy" brings up a litany of negative headlines and damaging stories.

Lap dogs for Democrats: Media barely shrug over Doug Emhoff's affair. Doug Emhoff's ugly secret matters — not least as yet another example of rank media hypocrisy. On Saturday, the second gentleman Emhoff admitted to cheating on his first wife, Kerstin Emhoff, leading up to their divorce in 2009. Worse, it seems his mistress was his children's nanny, a teacher at their school, who also ended up pregnant from the affair, though no one's saying what came next — and Emhoff and his wife's campaign desperately want the scandal to end with no more questions asked. And major media are eager to help: The New York Times made sure to emphasize in a headline that this was a "long-ago affair"; The Washington Post helpfully pointed out that "the affair ended years before he began dating Vice President Harris." The double standard is glaring: The press spent years breathlessly covering the tale of Donald Trump's alleged 2006 dalliance with Stormy Daniels; no news is too old if it embarrasses Republicans.

Now Kamala is being allowed by the press to run from the basement just like Biden did in 2020. Kamala Harris hasn't done any press conferences or sit-down interviews. She says she will debate Trump any time, yet when he offers a debate with the nearly same rules, on September 4, she runs and hides[.] [...] Sadly, most of the media and many voters don't care how extreme, destructive and radical that Kamala and other Democrats are. They seem willing to have the United States commit suicide from within.

Don't be surprised if Kamala shoots ahead in the polls. [Scroll down] Vice President Harris will also get a big bump from the Democratic National Convention. Most all the major Hollywood stars will be there. I wouldn't be surprised if Taylor Swift showed up, wrote a song, and sang it before the whole country. Harris will also get a bump when she chooses a vice president. The press is already going gaga trying to figure out whom she will pick. [...] Another advantage Harris has is that her position as vice president might allow her to mitigate any responsibility for what happened during the Biden/Harris administration. Trump will not let her get away with this, but the elites and the media will. They will claim she has a completely spotless record since she didn't do it. Biden did. The eight million illegal aliens who came into this country by land, air, and sea are not because of anything Vice President Harris did, the press will claim.

Trump Campaign: CBS Poll Skewed to Help Harris. The Trump campaign on Sunday blasted a CBS News/YouGov poll, saying it manipulated its latest poll to inflate results that help Vice President Kamala Harris. Poll results announced earlier Sunday showed former President Donald Trump and Harris, who are expected to oppose each other in the November election, are tied in key battleground states. However, the CBS News/YouGov results showed Harris with a 1-point edge (50% to 49%) in a head-to-head matchup. The Trump campaign said the poll's methodology and breakdown of respondents were changed from those used for a July 18 survey to benefit Harris. For example, the share of participating liberal voters increased from 28.5% of the respondents on the July 18 poll to 30.2% in the Aug. 4 poll. A lower share of moderates (31.8% on July 18 to 30.3% on Aug. 4) participated. Also, self-identified conservatives comprised 36.7% of the 2,247 respondents for July 18 and just 35.5% of the 3,102 respondents for Aug. 4.

Kamala's claim of border success is a sociopathic lie — but media abets it. [Scroll down] A politician less certain that the media would swallow any set of absurdities deemed in her interest might hesitate before making such facially preposterous claims. The idea that Harris has been a tough-minded success on the border while Donald Trump was a failure is sociopathic in its dishonesty. It's tiresome and apparently beside the point to recite the basic facts, but after experiencing what was a migrant crisis by the old standard that now seems quaint, the Trump administration implemented a series of measures that all but brought illegal crossings to a halt. Then, the Biden administration reversed them all, and illegal immigration quickly accelerated to record levels. This is a matter of record that isn't in dispute. Millions of illegal immigrants have entered the country and strained the resources of big cities across America.

CNN Stunned as a Group of Black Men at Harrisburg Barbershop in Pennsylvania [State] 'Kamala Ain't Black'. A group of Black men at a barbershop in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, voiced their skepticism on Kamala's racial identity. [...] As the leftist media continues to promote her as a Black American figure, a recent visit to a barbershop in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, revealed that many local Black men are not convinced. When asked about their views on Harris, the overwhelming response was clear: 'Kamala ain't black.' In a segment aired on CNN, a CNN reporter noted that callers on an XM radio program quickly dismissed the opinions of the barbershop patrons. "When I played that audio on XM radio program on Thursday, many callers who self-identified as African-American were quick to tell me that those men were the exception, not the rule. Some described them as low information voters, no different than you'd find among Whites." [Tweet with video clip]

The Editor says...
The people who are quick to call a radio station (and get through the screener) to promote a Democrat are probably political activists. The people "randomly" encountered in an all-black barber shop were probably expected to support the Democrat, which is why they were interviewed in the first place. Blacks who care about race and politics don't appreciate a mostly-Indian opportunist calling herself black and putting on a phony black dialect when it suits her needs. If you disagree with the Democrats, they'll call you stupid: "Low-information voters."

Media Completely Ignores 'Blacks Against Harris' Zoom Call Event. This week, a large Zoom event called 'Blacks Against Harris' took place and was attended by thousands of people, but the media ignored it. Apparently, 'White Dudes for Harris' and 'White Women for Harris' are fine, but 'Blacks Against Harris' is unacceptable. Why do you suppose that is? If Democrats and their media allies want to live in this divisive world of identity politics, they should not be allowed to pick and choose which groups deserve attention and praise. [Tweet with video clip] There has been a lot of talk in this election cycle about the increasing amount of support for Trump among black voters, particularly black men. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC), one of Biden's biggest boosters, is dismissing this as a non-starter.

Kamala Harris has been identified as Indian, Black and Asian American by newspapers. Newspapers across the country have historically made issue of the race of Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris since her first days in public office. Newspaper stories now more than 20 years old have referenced Harris as an Indian-American and as a Black woman. More recently, they have described the vice president also as "Asian American." Race has become an issue because former President Donald Trump said he didn't know Harris was Black "until a number of years ago."

Kamala Harris Continues to Avoid the Media, They Continue to Be Okay With It. As RedState reported Wednesday, despite the fact that it has been eleven days since Vice President Kamala Harris effectively became the presumptive 2024 Democratic presidential nominee, she hasn't given one press conference or had any media interactions where she's actually taken any questions from reporters. She has done other things, though, things that I think most people would describe as "weird." Interestingly, that is what many on her side have taken to calling Sen. JD Vance (R-OH), Donald Trump's vice presidential running mate, even though — last I checked — it wasn't JD Vance who pretended to have a southern accent and who campaigned and laughed at a funeral while claiming a title he did not yet hold.

Media Gaslighting About Kamala Harris Nears Totalitarian Levels. Ever since Kamala Harris became the Democratic Party's presumed presidential nominee, the news media have worked to correct what it calls "misinformation" about her. Harris was not a "DEI hire," they say, meaning Biden did not choose her for his Vice President because she's a black woman. Harris was never border czar and wasn't responsible for the quintupling of migrants crossing the border. And, no, say the media, Harris does not support a ban on fracking. But in the media's so-called fact-checking, they have spread misinformation. Biden explicitly said he would choose a black woman as Vice President after black Democratic activists and the media urged him to; as such, Harris was indeed a "DEI hire." The media in 2021 widely referred to Harris as "border czar," and her responsibilities were to deal with the so-called "root causes of migration." And Harris had supported a ban on fracking when she ran in the Democratic primary in 2019 and only changed it a few days ago in response to Trump's attacks.

Mockingbird media:
The short, strange life of 'weird'. For a brief moment, every Democratic talker in the United States was calling former President Donald Trump and running mate Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) "weird." They're still doing it now, but in the last 24 hours or so, the vogue of "weird" appears to be dwindling. And that leaves the question: What was that about?

The Joy of Conspiracies As They Go Mainstream. Kamala went from dingbat to superwoman in about 24 hours. If she ever looked like this, it was decades ago. She's nearly 60! [Tweet] Her history is erased. Of course, she wasn't the border czar and doesn't want to end fracking, oil, gas, and coal, and you can keep your little gas guzzlers, too. The only problem is we see the truth, and we can't unsee it. We all see it, and we know what they are. The media just out and out lies now. They used to be subtle and simply lie by omission or make little nasty or biased comments here and there.

Something Shady Is Going on Surrounding Kamala Harris. A new audit reveals a disturbing bias in Google and YouTube search results. When users search for negative news about Kamala Harris, they're met with overwhelmingly positive or neutral content. For example, on Google, searching for "Kamala Harris negative news July 2024" predominantly returns positive articles. Similarly, on YouTube, searches for "Kamala Harris negative videos July 2024" show supportive content. If the fix is not in at the ballot booth, it certainly seems to be online.

After Years Of Regaling VP As Border Czar, Media Claim Harris Was Never In Charge Of The Invasion. Years after acknowledging and even praising President Joe Biden for naming Vice President Kamala Harris "border czar," corporate media claimed the presumptive 2024 Democrat nominee was never charged with overseeing the logistics of the record-breaking invasion. Biden first charged Harris with leading "our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle and the countries that help — are going to need help in stemming the movement of so many folks, stemming the migration to our southern border" in March 2021. At the time, he claimed the former California attorney general and senator was "the most qualified person to do it." Harris didn't do much with the title and task. Yet, even her delayed first and only (and heavily staged) visit to the border received celebration from her allies in the press. This kid-glove treatment intensified recently when corporate media accused those critical of Harris' failure to do anything but exacerbate the Biden administration-incentivized invasion of making the VP a "convenient scapegoat."

Narrative Killer: NY Times Reports Show Kamala Harris Had Bigger Role Than 'Border Czar'. This week, as they were eager to elevate Kamala Harris into the political stratosphere, we saw yet another attempt by the news outlets to set their already smoldering reputations on fire anew. The latest has the press attempting to claim that Kamala Harris was never Joseph Biden's Border Czar, and this is due entirely to the recognition that the immigration crisis is an anchor on her campaign. With this reality comes an attempt at rewriting not just the past but their publication history. There are dual efforts with this latest lie: Kamala was never given the job of Border Czar, and the claim that she was is a fiction created by Republicans. To dispel the second point first, here is a handy montage, courtesy of Newsbusters, showing the various press outlets that dubbed Harris as the Border Czar: [Tweet]

Fact-Checkers Slap 'False' Labels On Claims Harris Was 'Border Czar'. The nitpickers, who style themselves as fact-checkers at PolitiFact and USA Today, have rushed to Vice President Kamala Harris's defense by slapping "false" labels on those who seek to label her as the Biden Administration's "border czar" in order to claim that her failure to stem illegal immigration proves she is unqualified to be president. On Wednesday [7/24/2024], PolitiFact's Maria Ramirez Uribe gave the Republican National Committee a "mostly-false" rating. For Uribe, calling Harris the border czar is wrong because "Biden didn't put Harris in charge of overseeing border security." Rather, he "said Harris would lead U.S. diplomatic efforts and work with officials in Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras to stem migration to the U.S." Uribe also objected to the "czar" title because "Managing the border 'has always been' the Homeland Security secretary's role, [Migration Policy Institute communications director Michelle] Mittelstadt said."

Kamala Harris Was Biden's "Border Czar" — But Axios and DC Media Want to Rewrite History to Benefit Democrats. After President Joe Biden announced that he would be dropping out of the presidential race, Vice President Kamala Harris has emerged as the new presumptive 2024 Democratic presidential nominee — and her ascension has brought about a remarkable — Orwellian, even — shift in coverage from mainstream corporate media outlets. In 2021, President Biden very publicly tapped Vice President Harris to take charge of the growing criminal and humanitarian crisis at the southern border — a move that garnered significant media attention at the time.

Yes, Kamala Harris Was the Border Czar. Now that Vice President Kamala Harris is the leading contender for the Democrat party's presidential nomination, the corporate media are gaslighting the public to a degree many of us never thought possible. The latest Orwellian history rewrite is whether Harris was President Biden's "border czar." One example is left-wing Axios, called out via real fact-checking and X community notes, now denying that Harris was Biden's border czar. As Fox News reported, in the spring of 2021, Axios said, "The number of unaccompanied minors crossing the border has reached crisis levels. Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar, said she would be looking at the 'root causes' that drive migration." Now this week, Axios did a 180, rewriting history with this revision: "The Trump campaign and Republicans have tagged Harris repeatedly with the 'border czar' title — which she never actually had."

Kamala's Ministry of Truth. Did I just fall out of a coconut tree? How else to explain the dizziness so many of us are feeling at the speed of Kamala Harris's coronation — and at the contortions now being performed to present her as the saviour of the beleaguered Democrats, if not of American democracy itself. Within 48 hours of Joe Biden's withdrawal from the US presidential race on Sunday, Vice-President Harris had clinched enough delegates, donors and Democratic power-brokers to ensure her an unchallenged, uncontested path to becoming the Democratic nominee to face Donald Trump this autumn. [...] As Jenny Holland wrote on spiked earlier this week, the media are eager to present Harris as 'Martin Luther King, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Taylor Swift and Beyoncé, all rolled into one'. We need to remember who we're talking about here. The newly anointed Democratic nominee was someone few believed could win the presidency, only a few weeks ago. Indeed, this is widely understood to be behind the Obamas' hesitancy to back her — and Biden's own reluctance to hand over the baton to his veep.

Media's Version of Harris is Unburdened by History. Once again, the Democrats are offering up a woman candidate for president. And once again, it is an unlikeable candidate who owes her career to a far more skillful male politician. In Hillary's case, it is her husband, Bill, a charismatic personality adept at the game. In Harris's case, it was her lover Willie Brown who boosted her up the ladder and showered her with expensive gifts. ["]To say that Kamala Harris had an affair with a man more than twice her age, leveraged his fundraising prowess and connections to launch her political career, and once in office did his corrupt bidding isn't sexist. It's well-grounded in fact.["] When in 2019 Harris ran for president, she was highly promoted by the media but drew little support and dropped out quickly. The Los Angeles Times said she never should have even entered the race.

CNN and rest of MSM conspire to promote Kamala Harris. Watching CNN and reading much of the rest of the mainstream media in print and online since last Sunday, when Joe Biden announced that he's not running for reelection, is like a nightmare vision of a dystopian future. True to the Marxist playbook, it's nonstop historical revisionism, coupled with the retooling of Kamala Harris as a messianic Obama-type figure. [...] As painful as it is, watching CNN (and MSNBC, which arguably is even worse) provides essential insights into the fast-growing propaganda campaign that the political establishment and the MSM will be employing to get Harris elected.

The Mainstream Media Is Deleting Previous Reporting About Kamala Harris. Barring yet another shocking moment in a rollercoaster campaign, Vice President Kamala Harris will be the Democratic Party's nominee for the 2024 presidential election. Although Harris has been in the limelight as Vice President, the media attention towards her has increased substantially given that there's a possibility she could become the 47th President of the United States. Of course, when something is published on the internet, it can remain online indefinitely. As deleting stories is generally frowned upon, editors may choose to amend a story years after initial publication if they no longer agree with the original copy — but in the case of Harris, many are trying to simply pretend their past repotting on Harris never existed in the first place.

Legalized Press-titution: Media Coverage of Kamala Has Reached Shameless Fangirl Levels Already. This article is not made from the standpoint of surprise, but more of a sense of awe at the audacity of it all. [...] Her ascendancy since meant that not only would she be treated with kind hands, but the media have been overflowing with gushing praise for the woman to an unseemly level. The first indicator you might see of how hands-off the press will be with her record is the claim that Kamala has "already been vetted." This is sheer garbage. During her attempt at the presidential run in 2020, Harris managed to gain no traction, earning zero delegates and polling in fourth place in her home state of California, thus dropping out ahead of that promised embarrassing result. She was properly vetted in the debates by Tulsi Gabbard, who kneecapped Harris in an effective fashion. But how about Harris' record during her term as VP? As I recently covered, there is nothing but a resume of failures on her CV.

The Beatification of Kamala Begins. The manufactured enthusiasm for Kamala Harris has begun, and the first 48 hours of the marketing blitz are exactly as we should expect. The next few months are going to be ridiculous at a level beyond The Lightbringer. Fortunately, a person who was perhaps not paying attention in '07/'08 will now get to witness something they missed before, and the ears might not be as deaf as they were 16-years ago. We also have the ego of Teh One which might come into play if he feels slighted witnessing a higher level of adulation than he received.

By The Way, Kamala Harris Is A Dangerous Authoritarian. With some hard work, pluck, the right boyfriend, and a bit of genetic luck, Kamala Harris has found her way onto the presidential ballot without having to secure a single primary vote. Don't tell me the American Dream is dead. Sure, Harris is a demagogue who speaks in cringy, swirling, impenetrable platitudes. And sure, according to Joe Biden, Kamala was an identity hire. But "Morning Joe" says we're not supposed to talk about any of that. So, let's discuss her record and stated positions. It seems like a lifetime ago that Biden named Harris his running mate. What you may not recall is that the media tried to gaslight us into believing the California senator was another apolitical dealmaker. Former Clinton fixer George Stephanopoulos said Harris was "the middle-of-the-road, moderate wing of the Democratic Party." The New York Times called her a "pragmatic moderate," while the Associated Press focused on her "centrist record." And so on. A "small c conservative," one Washington Post columnist wrote. The only problem was, according to GovTrack, Harris' record in the Senate was to the left of red-diaper baby Bernie Sanders. She was least likely of any senator to join in any bipartisan bills.

CBS Implies Kamala Harris Should Be Exempt From Criticism. The bitter Sunday afternoon announcement that President Joe Biden would end his reelection bid spurred hours of live network television coverage. [...] The news wasn't two hours old before Robert Costa warned the Republican attacks were going to be "rough and tumble like we've never seen it." He received a text from Donald Trump Jr. "already attacking Vice President Harris, saying she owns the entire policy of President Biden, even more liberal, and he's saying she's not competent!" Stop. What in that statement is rougher than we've ever seen? The Democrats and their staunch media allies compare Donald Trump to Hitler and other mass-murdering dictators. They explicitly call him an "existential threat" to democracy. How is it then "rough" to say Harris is ultraliberal and incompetent?

Jump to Liberals - Intro Page
Back to the Home page