Election 2020 / Instagram / Opinion / Politics

Kamala Harris’s Dishonesty on Abe Lincoln

Kamala It was impossible to miss how Kamala Harris, like Joe Biden, refused to answer questions about their plans to expand the Supreme Court. But she also misrepresented history.

Harris claimed at the VP debate that Abraham Lincoln refused to nominate a candidate for Chief Justice in October 1864 because “Honest Abe said, it’s not the right thing to do” and wanted the people to vote first.

Lincoln, of course, said no such thing. He sent no nominee to the Senate in October 1864 because the Senate was out of session until December. He sent a nominee the day after the session began, and Salmon P. Chase was confirmed the same day. And Lincoln wanted to dangle the nomination before Chase and several other potential candidates because he wanted them to campaign for him. Lincoln’s priority was winning the election, which was necessary to win the war — and he filled the vacancy at the first possible instant.

Kamala Harris is simply inventing history.

Reprinted with Permission from - National Review by - Dan McLaughlin

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by Outside Contributor
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sue McNulla
3 months ago

Dangerous liars Harris and Biden! They use scare tactics! Pray for Trump or you will have a reason to be scared!

Diana Erbio
3 months ago

Interesting that Kamala would lie about honest Abe…? I started a Statue Page a Blog Series in an effort to spread more of our American history. Hope some of you will visit the Page “Statues:The People They Salute” ???

PaulE
3 months ago

And of course the Democrat moderator, Susan Page, did NOTHING to correct the lie of Harris. Neither did the majority of the so-called MSM, who know about as much history as what they had last night for dinner. Thus those uninformed folks out there watching the debate were left with the impression that Harris’ statement was true. This is how the debate game has been played for the last 50 years. The Democrat candidate can make-up anything they wish and the moderator, always a Democrat supporter, will say nothing to correct the Democrat lies to ensure the public is getting accurate information.

Of course without lies and other means of deception, how would most Democrats ever manage to get themselves elected over and over again. It takes a certain degree of ignorance on the public’s part to facilitate the average Democrat in their rise to power. A well-informed electorate would be able to spot the lies and quickly conclude the Democrat candidate was being dishonest. Which is why our public school system hasn’t taught either American or world history properly for over half a century. The more ignorant the public becomes, the easier it is for the Democrats to get away with their lies.

Kim
3 months ago
Reply to  PaulE

Dishonesty in media is one reason why I canceled cable TV, including Fox News. Although I think they were better than the other media, some of Fox’s “personalities” were permitted to say things that were absolutely untrue. And they were never challenged or asked to verify their claim.

Marie Harf, Donna Brazile, Juan Williams, and others often said things that made me respond to them. Big help that was. Very likely, the newer generation of Fox News officials have instructed the on-air hosts to let it go. So much for journalism, and for opinion. At times, I think I noticed Dana Perino having to stifle herself.

I noticed that happening more often over the years. Democrats have mastered this tactic, the subtle inclusion of mistruths in their conversation that the Republicans simply didn’t pick up on or explore. Lost opportunities. Susan Page and other liberal moderators are steering the vote. There should be no debates without an equal number of questions from R’s and D’s. And they need to allow longer responses, so both sides can slice into the meat.

PaulE
3 months ago
Reply to  Kim

Yes, since Murdock’s sons took over FOX in 2016, it has been downhill ever since. I don’t bother watching it anymore myself, as the network isn’t even subtle in their bias towards being pro Democrat or even other leftist groups and against anything even remotely constitutionally conservative in nature. Both of Murdock’s sons are very progressive and have made no secret that they were ashamed of what FOX News used to be. So they have systematically been adding more progressive voices, like those you mentioned, to the entertainment division (that’s the time slot occupied Carlson, Hannity and Ingram during primetime and onto the daily talk shows as well), while allowing the news division to be purely progressive at this point. Supposedly the sons want FOX News to resemble CNN. From my perspective, they are well on their way to achieving that goal.

These days I watch a combination of Newsmax and several overseas news outlets via the Internet that report on important American news events far better than just about any so-called news outfit here in the United States. I have zero use for the “spin” or commentary that makes up so much of our domestic news coverage here these days. Just report the facts surrounding the story and I can analyze the data myself to draw a correct conclusion.

PaulE
3 months ago
Reply to  Kim

Well yet another reply to you has been flagged by AMAC. Think I’m done here. Best of luck to everyone and lets hope President Trump wins big.

6
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x