The media, focused solely on Trump, haven’t seemed interested in fact checking Kamala Harris. And not for lack of opportunity.
So I decided to. Below are some false and misleading statements from last week’s debate.
I could only fit so many. But give it a read. ⤵️
For starters, I think this image typifies how the media treat the two candidates.
Dale’s sentiment here applied broadly to the rest of the media, who had eyes only for Trump.
So let’s look at Harris, shall we?
1. She claimed that she was the only one on the debate stage with a plan for the middle class.
That’s the type of claim the media usually says “needs context,” as the Biden-Harris admin has failed the middle class, as even CNN acknowledged.
2. Harris claimed that Trump intends to implement Project 2025, the latest monster-under-the-bed for Democrats.
Beyond overhyping the details of the project itself, what Harris glossed over is that Trump has denounced the project, repeatedly saying he’s got no interest.
Surely, fact checkers must’ve been climbing over one another to point out that this connection was bogus, right? That whatever else, Trump had clearly said he isn’t supportive of it?
Well, no. The media mostly ignored the claim, or counterclaimed that really he does support it.
If you’re wondering why, I have an idea.
Okay, back to the facts.
3. Harris claimed Trump would ban abortion nationwide.
Again, Trump has repeatedly said he won’t do this. He’s even taken heat for being too liberal on the issue from pro-life folks. But Harris keeps repeating it. And the media keeps ignoring it.
4. Harris also said that nowhere in the country are there full-term abortions.
This simply isn’t true. As @MaryMargOlohan explains in a recent piece and thread:
Okay, not a fact check, but Harris bragged about the endorsement of Dick Cheney.
Does anyone else think it’s really weird that the Dems are hyped that the guy who lied us into the Iraq war, whom Dems wanted tried for war crimes, supports their candidate?
6. Harris said that Trump would “weaponize” the legal powers of the federal government against his opponents.
Again, this “needs context.” The Biden-Harris admin are doing precisely this to Trump. Isn’t it a touch rich for Harris to try to call it out?
7. Harris claimed (repeatedly) that she had been “very clear” about her position on fracking.
Look at these screenshots, one from 2019, one from 2024, and tell me this is “clear.”
I mean, the press have even celebrated how she’s pivoted on this topic!
8. Harris bragged about her and Biden’s investment in clean energy. But is that investment going anywhere?
As I fact checked for Biden’s DNC speech, all that money has led to a grand total of 7 new charging stations, a key climate focus.
Not 7,000. Not 700. Just 7. Nationwide.
9. Harris said “and some died” when describing law enforcement casualties at the Capitol on Jan 6.
Whatever else you think about what happened, law enforcement personal weren’t killed as a result. To imply otherwise is dishonest.
10. Harris repeated the “very fine people on both sides” lie about Charlottesville.
Even Snopes, no right wing rag, has explained that this isn’t real.
11. In a similar vein, Harris accused Trump of saying there’d be a “bloodbath” if he lost the election.
The phrase is pulled, without context, from Trump’s remarks about the auto industry.
To apply it instead to the country is bogus, and maliciously so.
12. Harris claimed that “there is not one member of the…military who is in active duty in a combat zone.”
Even NYT disputed this one. Since they let most of her claims go, I’ll give them the floor:
13. Harris claimed she has a “plan” (again) for bringing down the cost of living.
If so, why hasn’t she implemented it in three years as VP, while her admin has spiked the cost of living with inflation and other failed economic policies?
Lovely time for “context.”
Bonus: I can’t not include the most ridiculous aspect of the debate “fact checking”: claims that Trump was wrong to accuse Harris of supporting trans surgeries for detained illegal immigrants.
Problem was, she did.
H/t @guypbenson for this terribly awkward NYT reflection.
And @time produced one of the most cringe-inducing corrections on record (h/t @TimMurtaugh).
Apparently @sbg1 didn’t get the memo from NYT.
And I can’t not include this “needs context” claim from NYT initially, the ‘context’ being that Trump was right, apparently.
Look, I get the protest that Trump isn’t a beacon of truth. But the American people deserve to know whether what his opponent has to say is actually accurate.
In many cases, it isn’t.
And it’s impossible to ignore how all of this intersects with the media, who regularly repeat these bogus Harris claims as gospel truth.
That they can’t do their “fact checking” with any integrity says a lot about the mission such work actually serves: furthering Dem interests.
As ever, there’s too much here to fit into a thread. Read the full write up at my newsletter, @Holden_Court, linked here: open.substack.com/pub/drewholden…
@Holden_Court And if you’d like to kick me a few bucks to support the beer fund that supports my sanity by going through all of this, I won’t stop you from doing so. paypal.com/donate/?busine…
@Holden_Court If you needed more evidence that Harris’s claim #12, about the safety of our troops, was a lie: @RepJimBanks has it.
With the news that Trump freed the hostages and brokered an Israel/Hamas ceasefire, I thought it would be a good time to check in on the folks who compared the president to Hitler over the last few years, for reasons that I hope are obvious to you.
Remember? ⤵️
You may think the “Trump is literally Hitler” phrase is just a silly joke.
But for years, media outlets and left-wing voices on the internet have insisted that, no, really, Trump is just like Hitler.
Few have done so with as much gusto as @CNN.
Back in 2016, @CNN alleged that Trump rallies were just like Hitler rallies because…Trump had attendees raise their right hands.
A newly declassified CIA report on Joe Biden & Ukraine blows the doors off claims from the legacy press, in the lead up to the 2020 election and beyond, that Trump was pushing a “conspiracy theory” about Biden’s corruption.
Remember how the press buried Burisma? ⤵️
First, the facts. The report unearths how Biden blocked the release of intel from Ukrainian sources validating allegations of bribery tied to Biden’s diplomatic push to oust a prosecutor there in 2015, tied to his son Hunter’s work with the gas company Burisma.
You may remember this story because Biden’s having helped oust a prosecutor in a foreign country to allegedly protect his family’s corruption came up in the 2020 election.
To hear @ABC tell it, that was a “debunked Ukraine conspiracy theory.”
The media are melting down about former FBI director Jim Comey’s indictment, calling it Trump’s “retribution.”
But if prosecuting a political rival is such an outrage, why’d they cheer along when Biden went after Trump, Bannon & Navarro?
Some side-by-sides ⤵️
I want you to help me spot the difference in tone.
With Comey, @CNN put five — five! — reporters on the byline to declare the indictment was an “escalation” in “Trump’s effort to prosecute his political enemies.”
Where was that when Biden’s DOJ indicted Bannon? “A victory”
And @CNN wasn’t any better on Peter Navarro, another Trump aide indicted under Biden.
Rather than an “effort to prosecute…political enemies,” CNN quoted the prosecutor to tell the story.
Why is the claim of the government the framing of the piece under Biden? I have a guess.
The outrage over Kimmel’s canning is incredibly stupid, but it’s also enormously rich coming from the same media outlets who have cheered the government actually censoring people, particularly during COVID.
Let me know if you can spot the difference in tone? ⤵️
This @CNN headline made me think this story needed a thread.
Kimmel’s suspension is “straight from a European strongman’s playbook,” per @CNN’s @brianstelter.
When Biden cracked down on free speech during Covid, CNN hyped up the effort.
Few promoted the government’s actual attack on free speech more aggressively than the same @brianstelter now calling a comedian’s shelving evidence of autocracy, or something.
I know there’s a lot going on but we just had a media conspiracy implode that I think captures something important about the corporate press.
Did you hear about how Trump was allegedly going after John Bolton as retribution for his criticism?
Well…follow along ⤵️
We saw a week straight of media suggestions that Trump was abusing the powers of the state to deal out “retribution” to John Bolton following the news that the FBI (“Trump’s DOJ!” headlines rang out) raided his house.
We were in “unsettling” times, to hear @nytimes tell it.
The *Editorial Board* at @nytimes put out an even more dramatic statement, asking who Trump’s next payback victim after Bolton would be.
A single poll has bootstrapped a media narrative that DC residents are outraged by Trump’s takeover.
I poked around the cross tabs of the poll — of 600 or so of DC’s more comfortable residents — and I think it’s pretty suspect.
How come? Follow along: ⤵️
Let’s start with the poll. The @washingtonpost talked to 604 people, of whom 90% — 90%! — self-described as living in “very good” or “good” neighborhoods.
So, fine. 80% of people who like where they live in DC are upset.
But even beyond that, it’s worth asking whether this poll really captures DC’s opinion.
In the poll, only 31% describe crime as a “serious” or “very serious” problem in DC.
When @washingtonpost asked this same question in May, *50%* said it was a serious problem.