Republicans Outraged as Debate Moderators Fact-Check JD Vance
CBS initially stated that they would refrain from conducting live fact checks, but ultimately, they proceeded to do so regardless.
TroibNews 
JD Vance may have excelled in the debate, yet that did not deter Republicans from targeting the moderators.
During the debate, moderators fact-checked the Ohio senator on his claims regarding Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, and the 2020 election. Almost immediately, Republicans took to social media to criticize the fact-checking, especially since CBS had announced beforehand that it would not engage in such practices during the debate.
Accusing moderators — before, during, and after debates — has become a familiar tactic for Republicans in the current political climate influenced by Donald Trump. It serves as a way to divert attention from underwhelming debate performances. However, even with Vance's compelling showing on Tuesday, Republicans still sought to score points by blaming the media.
When Vance reiterated his baseless assertion that "illegal immigration" was causing unrest in Springfield, Ohio, a claim that ties into the conspiracy theory promoted by him and other Republicans, including Trump, about Haitians eating pets, moderator Margaret Brennan interjected, stating that many Haitian migrants "have legal status."
In response, Vance asserted that "the rules were that you were not going to fact-check me," and soon after, CBS, the debate host, cut his microphone.
Trump chimed in on his Truth Social platform, criticizing CBS's other moderator, Norah O'Donnell, for having "a bad night" after she mentioned there was "no widespread fraud" in the 2020 election.
Other Republican figures joined the fray. Florida Senator Marco Rubio, a prominent Trump supporter who was once considered for Trump's vice presidential pick, pointed out “gratuitous editorial statements” in a post on social media. Additionally, Fox News’ Brit Hume likened the debate atmosphere to a “3-to-1” contest against Vance, echoing a common refrain among Republicans after Trump’s lackluster debate performance last month.
The topic of fact-checking has become a significant issue in the current presidential debate season.
In last month’s presidential debate on ABC, Trump laid the groundwork for labeling the contest as unfair. So when moderators Linsey Davis and David Muir fact-checked him in real time during his exchange with Kamala Harris, his supporters were quick to find someone to blame.
This led CBS to announce that it intended to make fact-checking an opt-in "second screen" experience, rather than challenging statements made live during the debate. Yet, the moderators deviated from this plan by confronting a falsehood about Haitian migrants that Vance had repeated for weeks.
Consequently, fact-checking finds itself in a perplexing situation. Journalists feel compelled to correct false claims, even as this action alienates the Republican base from the media. Conservatives often view fact-checking as a tool used against Trump, using it to cast the media as liberal.
This allows Trump and his allies to know precisely which playbook to follow.
Rohan Mehta for TROIB News
During the debate, moderators fact-checked the Ohio senator on his claims regarding Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, and the 2020 election. Almost immediately, Republicans took to social media to criticize the fact-checking, especially since CBS had announced beforehand that it would not engage in such practices during the debate.
Accusing moderators — before, during, and after debates — has become a familiar tactic for Republicans in the current political climate influenced by Donald Trump. It serves as a way to divert attention from underwhelming debate performances. However, even with Vance's compelling showing on Tuesday, Republicans still sought to score points by blaming the media.
When Vance reiterated his baseless assertion that "illegal immigration" was causing unrest in Springfield, Ohio, a claim that ties into the conspiracy theory promoted by him and other Republicans, including Trump, about Haitians eating pets, moderator Margaret Brennan interjected, stating that many Haitian migrants "have legal status."
In response, Vance asserted that "the rules were that you were not going to fact-check me," and soon after, CBS, the debate host, cut his microphone.
Trump chimed in on his Truth Social platform, criticizing CBS's other moderator, Norah O'Donnell, for having "a bad night" after she mentioned there was "no widespread fraud" in the 2020 election.
Other Republican figures joined the fray. Florida Senator Marco Rubio, a prominent Trump supporter who was once considered for Trump's vice presidential pick, pointed out “gratuitous editorial statements” in a post on social media. Additionally, Fox News’ Brit Hume likened the debate atmosphere to a “3-to-1” contest against Vance, echoing a common refrain among Republicans after Trump’s lackluster debate performance last month.
The topic of fact-checking has become a significant issue in the current presidential debate season.
In last month’s presidential debate on ABC, Trump laid the groundwork for labeling the contest as unfair. So when moderators Linsey Davis and David Muir fact-checked him in real time during his exchange with Kamala Harris, his supporters were quick to find someone to blame.
This led CBS to announce that it intended to make fact-checking an opt-in "second screen" experience, rather than challenging statements made live during the debate. Yet, the moderators deviated from this plan by confronting a falsehood about Haitian migrants that Vance had repeated for weeks.
Consequently, fact-checking finds itself in a perplexing situation. Journalists feel compelled to correct false claims, even as this action alienates the Republican base from the media. Conservatives often view fact-checking as a tool used against Trump, using it to cast the media as liberal.
This allows Trump and his allies to know precisely which playbook to follow.
Rohan Mehta for TROIB News
