Back to episode — Episode 2594 CWSA 09/11/24
Context —
that’s what I used to think. And when I say used to think I mean yesterday. I have modified my belief on this topic because the moment or even before the debate was over I saw the first person on the right say, “Hey that was really three against one.” And I thought, oh yeah that’s a clever way to frame it because you’re saying that the moderators were for one side three to one. And I saw somebody…
← Previous segment →t have been because I’ve seen him work. I mean you can tell he’s biased but he’s not an idiot, right? So he was presenting himself as really just an idiot and there’s no way that’s real or organic because he isn’t. He’s clearly unethical and corrupt. That seems obvious. But he’s not dumb. Anyway so that wasn’t a joke.
Bill Mitchell had a list of the things Harris said wrong. I had maybe a quibble with a few of them so I removed them but I’ll tell you the ones that are obvious. So Harris used the fine people hoax and was not fact-checked by the hosts. Keep in mind that the hosts fact-checked Trump in real time. I saw two different numbers. One said four times and one said seven. Four for sure. But none for Harris. Harris was never fact-checked in real time. And we’ll talk about what they fact-checked on Trump.
But she put down the fine people hoax, didn’t get caught. She said Project 2025 was Trump’s. That’s not. She said he wanted to be a dictator. That’s fake. Wanted to terminate the Constitution. Nope, nothing like that. She said that Trump told Putin that he could quote “do whatever the hell he wants” and go into Ukraine. Nothing like that ever happened. She blamed the Afghanistan withdrawal on Trump. That’s ridiculous. She used the bloodbath hoax. That was Trump talking about economics and they made it sound like it was going to be a violent insurrection.
She said that Trump would have an abortion monitor. That doesn’t make sense and he’s never suggested anything like that. She said that back in the 70s that Trump refused to rent to Black families. My understanding of that is that the Trump company pled guilty to discriminating in renting but that was never tied to Trump. So there was an acknowledgement by the staff that they did but there was no smoking gun that said Trump told them to do it. Use your own judgment on that one.
Central Park Five. Harris said that Trump called for executing the Central Park Five. That was not true. He called for execution in general and did not mention the Central Park Five. And also when Trump defended himself he said that that was when they had been found guilty. Later I think that changed but oh no the police I think it was based on the police saying they were guilty. So that was Trump’s defense.
There was the suckers and losers hoax. Trump never called military veterans suckers and losers. There was a—then Harris had a new one. She referred to Trump’s tariffs as a national sales tax and never explained that what she meant was in effect that a tariff would look like a sales tax to Americans. So that was just a lie because she didn’t explain what the context was. She distorted unemployment figures. She—what else did she do? It’s quite a long list here. She said that there are no troops in combat zones under the Biden administration. She said that five police officers died on January 6th. So she alleged the way she said it was like they died during the event. That was not the case.
And let’s see there was another—I think there was one point where she had three hoaxes in one answer. One answer she used the fine people hoax, the stand back and standby thing as if it was malicious. She was talking about he was talking about but he wasn’t. And then the bloodbath one.
So here’s the thing. It seems clear to me two things. Number one, Kamala Harris knew in advance that she would not be fact-checked. Don’t you think that’s true? Do you think she would have brought out the fine people hoax if she thought ABC was going to fact-check her? I don’t think so. Somehow she knew she wouldn’t be fact-checked and he would.
Now I saw Mike Cernovich and some other people suggest that she had gotten the questions in advance because when the initial question came out she had great answers but when there was any kind of follow-up she struggled a little bit. Now I’m not sure you could tell from that alone you know because confirmation bias would slip in there a little bit and you’d imagine you’re seeing it even if it’s not there. But here’s why I think she saw the questions. And many of you knew this. The head of the network, the CEO who owns Disney that owns ABC, is her best friend for 30 years. Do you think that her good friend of 30 years wouldn’t tell her the questions? See in the world I live in it’s just guaranteed. If your best friend has access to the questions—and she would because she could just say hey before you ask the questions you need to run them by management and then she just sees them and then she goes to Kamala Harris and she goes, “Hey here’s what the questions are.”
Now if you’re telling me that her friend didn’t do that for her knowing that there was a zero chance of getting caught because all she had to do is say look you know I wrote this on a piece of paper take this to Kamala make sure nobody else sees it. It would be the easiest thing in the world not to get caught. So if it has a high benefit and you have easy access to it you’re literally the boss, high benefit, no chance of getting caught, easy access—under those conditions cheating happens almost every time. So you don’t have to—I don’t think you have to dissect the difference between the prepared answers and the less prepared answers. There’s something to that. There was one example I think where she somehow knew that there were 9,000 or however many—she knew the number of Polish people living in Pennsylvania for some reason which sounds like something you wouldn’t even know. There was no reason to know it unless you had prepared for the question. So there were some signals that she prepared for the question but I’m telling you that the setup largely guarantees she saw the questions. Largely guarantees. I mean in the world I live in if your friend has a big benefit for you, easy access to it and almost no way to get caught and even if you got caught it would be blown off—I mean people would say ah well yeah it happens—every time in that condition.
All right. Let’s see. So here’s some of the fact checks. Well we’ll talk about that separately.
Let me give you the overall. Harris won the handshake. How many of you noticed that? So Trump does this thing where he establishes dominance with his handshake. Like he’ll grab your hand and pull you in and control you with two hands and it’s a strategy. It kind of establishes your alpha dominance because you controlled the handshake. It wasn’t an equal thing. And if you noticed when they both walked on stage that Harris closed the distance and shook hands with him behind his own podium. So Trump, instead of meeting her halfway, she walked to him and then she introduced herself. “Hi I’m Kamala Harris.” Now that was funny because I think he probably knew who she was without the introduction but they had never met. So if you’ve ne
Context —
ver met it’s sort of normal to say your name. It’s kind of weird when famous people say their name. I’ve had the same experience. You know I’ll be in an event where people went there to see me and I’ll still introduce myself. You know like we came here to see you we kind of know your name but it’s just an automatic habit anyway. So I think that she immediately and strategically—I don’t think any…
Next segment → →