The fact-checks flew in one way on Tuesday night during the national debate between former president Trump and vice chairman Kamala Harris. As expected, Linsey Davis and David Muir of ABC News were blatantly biased, making the discussion essentially a three-on-one fight between Trump and almost an in-kind contribution to the Harris strategy.
The lying and gaslighting were so brazen from Harris, and the “fact-checking” from Muir and Davis so lop-sided ( they failed even once to push back or correct any of Harris ‘ obvious falsehoods ), that the entire spectacle eventually took on an air of unreality. It was odd to witness it happening live on television. By the end, my major conclusion was that the purpose of these debates was to deceive and intimidate Americans by defusing truth and flooding the internet with lies, making it impossible to determine what is and is not accurate. This is in addition to the media’s clear goal of boosting Harris and hurting Trump.
At one point, Harris recited a myriad of the most obvious, completely debunked lies about Trump, from the “fine people on both sides” remark on Charlottesville, to the “bloodbath” remark about the car industry, to claiming he “incited” the U. S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6. Everyone can check for themselves online and verify that nothing in these cases was actually fake. But the editors said little.
They repeatedly said nothing when Harris lied about her sights on drilling, gun control, and defunding the police. Nor did they say something when she falsely claimed there are no American troops in conflict zones ( three U. S. men were killed , in a drone strike in Jordan earlier this year, and , seven were injured , in a assault against ISIS in Iraq last month ), that police officers died on Jan. 6, that third-trimester abortions never happen, or that the Trump revenue cuts overwhelmingly benefited the rich. On and on, lie after lie.
With Trump, it was of course much different. Muir and Davis routinely inserted themselves into the debate under the guise of “fact-checking” the former president, even on trivial matters, to the point that at times it devolved into a side debate between Trump and the moderators.
But again, media bias is baked in, and was n’t a surprise. As , Megyn Kelly noted,” The person who runs ABC News”, Dana Walden, “is a close personal friend of Kamala Harris”, and the moderators “did exactly what their bosses wanted them to do”. We’ve known all along that Trump is n’t just running against Harris and the DNC, he’s running against a machine that includes the entire corporate press, the administrative state, the intelligence agencies, Big Tech, and even Taylor Swift.
However, what stood out about this debate was how vehemently biased it was and how unconcerned ABC appeared to be even when presenting the impression of journalistic honesty or fairness. It was startling to witness it. And the result of it is n’t always to affect the outcome in any way. Whatever his opinions may be, it’s unlikely that anyone will be persuaded by anything said or done during this absurd debate.
No, the real purpose is to erode our capacity to have a coherent society, to support a democratic system of government, or anything else that comes close to self-government. You ca n’t do it like this, especially not in our digital era. The distortions, lies, and undisguised bias are immediately fed into social media, which quickly turns into a feeding frenzy of claim and counterclaim, full of commentary that only serves to distort the debate itself.  ,
That’s what happened Tuesday night. Corporate media commentators like Chris Hayes of MSNBC , declared , Harris was” cleaning his clock”. California Gov. Gavin Newsom later , used the exact same phrase. In the meantime, right-wing commentators furiously posted evidence disproving her lies and omissions. They were apoplectic about the biases of ABC and Harris.
This type of discussion is not productive. For that, you need the absolute minimum of shared reality. We would be better off without these presidential debates because of ABC’s and the rest of the corporate press’s actions.
If they’re going to be this way, they’re just going to distort reality and make political discourse impossible, which will only lead to the disintegration of our polity. They are poison in the bloodstream of our national life, not a requirement and a salutary part of our national elections. Trump, at least, should refuse to take part in them going forward, and the rest of us should refuse to watch if he does.
