Kamala's softball ABC sit-down shows network's bias - and how...

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

54% : Most troubling, Davis revealed that specific questions were asked of Trump because she and Muir studied hours of his speeches and anticipated his answers.
44% : "Davis explained her expectation of what Trump would say by adding, "Politicians tend to say the same things again and again.
36% : Asked about his view of limits to abortion access, Trump defended the concept by citing a former governor of Virginia backing the killing of certain infants up to and even after birth.
34% : Among her false statements was that Trump was praising neo-Nazis when he said there were "fine people on both sides" during a 2016 confrontation in Virginia.
33% : She told the Los Angeles Times the idea of live fact-checking emerged from the June debate between Trump and Joe Biden on CNN.
33% : "As soon as Trump finished, Davis delivered her planned "fact-check," declaring, "There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it's born.
28% : It can't be because the ABC moderators so blatantly tipped the scales in Harris' favor with a rigged "fact-checking" scheme they employed only against Trump.
24% : In another sequence, Muir said Trump was wrong to say crime was rising, citing FBI statistics.
24% : Instead, ABC kept Trump on defense and created an unfair impression that much of what he said was false and everything Harris said was true, which is certainly not the case.
22% : Or were they completely corrupted by their desire to damage Trump?
21% : As new evidence emerges, the debate looks as if it was a trap designed to ensnare Trump and humiliate him in front of 67 million viewers.
20% : In effect, they selected questions designed to catch Trump making statements they could declare false.
20% : "Trump walked into the trap -- and Davis pounced.
11% : I am among those who believed Harris outperformed Trump during the 90-minute debate, but knowledge of ABC's biased scheme gives me pause.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.