This clip may be the most egregious example of ABC debate moderators' direct actions/inactions to affect viewers’ perceptions of the information presented at the debate. There are at least seven instances of this within a two-minute span. This is not “bias." It’s much worse. This is direct, planned interference in the debate outcome. When moderators take on the role of “fact checkers" the inference is that the absence of a “fact check” confers validity to the non-fact-checked information. When one side is repeatedly “fact checked,” while the other is not, that is a signal to the viewer that one side is not reliable and truthful, while the other side is. The ABC moderators had their orders, and here you see those orders executed. In this clip: 1) Trump says Pelosi is responsible for security at the Capitol. True. Muir intervenes on Kamala’s behalf by cutting him off with snarky retort, doesn’t acknowledging the validity of Trump’s statement, and immediately redirects to Kamala to set up her “answer" he knows is coming. This is direct action by Muir to affect the outcome of this exchange. 2) Kamala says she was at the Capitol on J6. She was there in the morning, but left to go to DNC HQ prior to the riot. Critical information is omitted. No fact-check. 3) Kamala says Trump incited a mob to attack the Capitol. False. Trump’s “peacefully and patriotically” comments are ignored. Trump is not charged with inciting violence. No fact check. 4) Kamala says that “some" police officers died on January 6. False. No fact check. 5) Kamala recites the Charlottesville “Fine People” hoax. This has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. No fact check. 6) Kamala recites the “stand back and stand by” hoax. This is designed to infer that Trump was ordering a “militia” to act on later orders, when he was clearly asking for a cooling of tensions. No fact check. 7) Kamala recites the “bloodbath" hoax. Trump was talking about the automobile industry, not violence. No fact check. To quote Megyn Kelly on the ABC moderators: "They did exactly what their bosses wanted."
The Great Debate
- Thread starter Big Rig
- Start date
This clip may be the most egregious example of ABC debate moderators' direct actions/inactions to affect viewers’ perceptions of the information presented at the debate. There are at least seven instances of this within a two-minute span. This is not “bias." It’s much worse. This is direct, planned interference in the debate outcome. When moderators take on the role of “fact checkers" the inference is that the absence of a “fact check” confers validity to the non-fact-checked information. When one side is repeatedly “fact checked,” while the other is not, that is a signal to the viewer that one side is not reliable and truthful, while the other side is. The ABC moderators had their orders, and here you see those orders executed. In this clip: 1) Trump says Pelosi is responsible for security at the Capitol. True. Muir intervenes on Kamala’s behalf by cutting him off with snarky retort, doesn’t acknowledging the validity of Trump’s statement, and immediately redirects to Kamala to set up her “answer" he knows is coming. This is direct action by Muir to affect the outcome of this exchange. 2) Kamala says she was at the Capitol on J6. She was there in the morning, but left to go to DNC HQ prior to the riot. Critical information is omitted. No fact-check. 3) Kamala says Trump incited a mob to attack the Capitol. False. Trump’s “peacefully and patriotically” comments are ignored. Trump is not charged with inciting violence. No fact check. 4) Kamala says that “some" police officers died on January 6. False. No fact check. 5) Kamala recites the Charlottesville “Fine People” hoax. This has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. No fact check. 6) Kamala recites the “stand back and stand by” hoax. This is designed to infer that Trump was ordering a “militia” to act on later orders, when he was clearly asking for a cooling of tensions. No fact check. 7) Kamala recites the “bloodbath" hoax. Trump was talking about the automobile industry, not violence. No fact check. To quote Megyn Kelly on the ABC moderators: "They did exactly what their bosses wanted."
I expect Putin will get removed and saner people will find a way to tuck their tail and head home a la Afghanistan. They will likely turn over security responsibilities to some self-governed area that Ukraine will re-absorb, so they can maintain the illusion that their own forces achieved their invasion goals.
WATCH: Even on MSNBC, a Hispanic undecided voter from Arizona BLASTED Kamala Harris after watching the debate for leaving the border wide open as the nation's Border Czar "My family went through a long process to get here legally — so I feel that it's unfair for hundreds of thousands to get here without problems and for the federal government to help them out."
That would be nice, but do you keep fighting this war on the supposition that Putin will fall. I started hearing that two years ago.
I don't think the Ukraine is big enough to continue a war of attrition with Russia. I've seen some polls saying that Ukrainians are tired and want a negotiated settlement.
I just don't want people to object to a settlement simply because Trump supports it.
SPRINGFIELD, OHIO UPDATE During the Presidential debate, fact-checkers at ABC News stated that Donald Trump's claims of the Haitian immigrants "eating dogs and cats" had no credible reports according to the town's city manager. Over the last 2 days, I've investigated the situation myself interviewing locals. Many claim they've seen what ABC News hasn't. Here's what they said... Watch this entire video to understand the impact of 20,000+ Haitian immigrants flooding into this tiny Ohio town of 60,000 working-class Americans. This could be YOUR town very soon.
putin will never get removed. He will die. How? That remains to be seen. History has told us Dictators never end well.
Of course, set aside that idiot. He'd give away the store to make himself look good.
But how exactly do people expect settling with a bully to work out?
