Trump Is Flat-Out Lying About the 60 Minutes Interview With Harris
The full transcript shows the president's complaints about the editing of the interview are not just wildly hyperbolic and legally groundless. They are demonstrably false.

CBS has finally released the full transcript of the interview with Kamala Harris that 60 Minutes aired on October 7, which provoked a lawsuit that Donald Trump filed against the network a few weeks later. The same interview is also the focus of an investigation by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which has the power to nix a pending merger between Paramount, the network's owner, and Skydance Media by declining to approve the transfer of broadcast licenses.
After the interview aired, Trump, then the Republican presidential nominee facing off against Harris in the 2024 election, described it as "Election Interference," an "UNPRECEDENTED SCANDAL," and "a giant Fake News Scam" that was "totally illegal." By editing the interview to make Harris "look better," he said, CBS had committed an offense so egregious that the FCC should "TAKE AWAY THE CBS LICENSE" (by which he presumably meant the broadcast licenses held by CBS-owned stations). The transcript confirms what you may have suspected: Trump's characterization of the interview is completely bonkers. It is Trump, not CBS, who is perpetrating "a giant Fake News Scam."
It was already clear that the editing of the interview did not constitute consumer fraud, as Trump alleges in his lawsuit, or "broadcast news distortion"—the claim that the FCC is considering. But the transcript also makes it clear, beyond any serious dispute, that CBS did not commit any journalistic sins when it presented an edited version of Harris' response to a question about Israel.
The transcript validates the network's argument that it was engaging in standard journalistic practice by using a more "succinct" segment of Harris' response to the Israel question than the one that was featured in a preview on Face the Nation the day before. And it shows that Trump has not only absurdly exaggerated what happened (as is his wont); he has flagrantly misrepresented the nature of the editing and continues to do so.
"CBS and 60 Minutes defrauded the public by doing something which has never, to this extent, been seen before," Trump averred on X today. "They 100% removed Kamala's horrible election changing answers to questions, and replaced them with completely different, and far better, answers, taken from another part of the interview. This was Election changing 'stuff,' Election Interference and, quite simply, Election Fraud at a level never seen before. CBS should lose its license, and the cheaters at 60 Minutes should all be thrown out, and this disreputable 'NEWS' show should be immediately terminated….This will go down as the biggest Broadcasting SCANDAL in History!!!"
The idea that making Harris seem a bit more cogent (or less "CRAZY" and "DUMB," as Trump put it in October) could have been "election changing" was always silly, all the more so in light of Trump's victory, which was by no means close in the Electoral College. But Trump is simply lying when he says 60 Minutes "replaced" Harris' answer with a "completely different" answer "taken from another part of the interview."
When correspondent Bill Whitaker suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was "not listening" to the Biden administration's concerns about the war in Gaza and had "rebuffed just about all of your administration's entreaties," here is how Harris responded:
Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region. And we're not going to stop doing that. We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.
The Face the Nation promo used the first sentence, while the interview as aired on 60 Minutes used the last sentence. In other words, the latter show's producers were telling the truth when they said they had used the "same question" and the "same answer" but "a different portion of the response."
Harris did not come across as especially forthright, articulate, or intelligent in either version, although the one that 60 Minutes showed was a little more concise. This is what Trump thinks (or claims to think) amounted to "a giant Fake News Scam" and "the biggest Broadcasting SCANDAL in History."
After Trump sued CBS, the network insisted that "the interview was not doctored" and noted that 60 Minutes "did not hide any part of Vice President Kamala Harris's answer to the question at issue." After all, Trump was aware of this supposed "SCANDAL" only because CBS aired both parts of her response. The full transcript removes any doubt about who is telling the truth in this case and who is just making shit up.
Trump's lawsuit claims that CBS "cross[ed] the line from the exercise of judgment in reporting to deceitful, deceptive manipulation of news." Even if that were true, it would not qualify as consumer fraud under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, as the lawsuit asserts, for reasons I explained in detail last week. Trump did not suffer any cognizable damages under that statute, let alone damages amounting to "at least" $10 billion, as he risibly claims.
In fact, however, CBS did not engage in "deceitful, deceptive manipulation of news," which means it cannot possibly be guilty of broadcast news distortion, which requires "evidence showing that the broadcast news report was deliberately intended to mislead viewers or listeners." When the FCC rejected that claim last month, Jessica Rosenworcel, its Biden-appointed chairwoman, rightly said "the FCC should not be the President's speech police" or "journalism's censor-in-chief." But her Trump-appointed replacement, Brendan Carr, whose avowed dedication to freedom of speech and freedom of the press is curiously selective, revived the complaint and has indicated that it will figure in the FCC's review of the deal between Paramount and Skydance.
Carr's interest in reconsidering the frivolous complaint against CBS in this context is a chilling illustration of how executive power can be abused in service of the president's personal vendettas. It helps explain why Paramount is keen to appease Trump by settling his laughable lawsuit, which CBS accurately described as "completely without merit."
The FCC complaint is equally groundless. As Nathan Simington, another Trump-appointed FCC commissioner, noted in October, "broadcast news distortion is an extraordinarily narrow complaint category." He added that "CBS could easily remove the predicate for any further discussion by releasing the transcript" of the Harris interview. Carr himself said something similar around the same time. "In my view," he told Glenn Beck, "the best way forward" would be to "release the transcript," which would mean "there's no reason to have this before the FCC."
Now that CBS has released the transcript, it should be obvious to Carr that 60 Minutes did nothing close to intentional misrepresentation or deliberate distortion of the news. But in truth, there was "no reason to have this before the FCC" at all. Based on the constitutionally dubious distinction between broadcast journalism and journalism in every other medium, the commission is second-guessing editorial judgments that are indisputably protected by the First Amendment, even when they are sloppy, mistaken, irresponsible, or unethical—none of which is true in this case.
The FCC is scrutinizing CBS at the behest of a vindictive president who reflexively alleges nonexistent torts, crimes, or regulatory violations based on news coverage he views as unfair to him. Trump's petty, wildly hyperbolic grievances do not deserve a respectful hearing from any rational person, let alone from a government agency with the power to punish news outlets for journalism that irks him.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Another take:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2025/02/06/cbs-is-supposed-to-turn-over-the-unedited-kamala-harris-interview-with-60-minutes-n2651639
Bias aside, it is pretty evident that 60 Minutes "cleaned it up" for her
Sullum is flat out lying about Trump flat out lying. These Democratic Party shills in libertarian skin suits twist wording and definitions into knots. I hope Sullum gets sued too.
Just watched a JRE clip that went up three hours ago and already has over half a million views; the level of corruption that is coming out is nothing short of astounding and beyond a black swan event.
I believe media is in total chicken little mode and are desperate to try to get a handle on this or to somehow mitigate the disruption. That is what we are seeing with these repetitious articles to the effect of "wait, look over here, TRUMP!"
it's like everything I've ever dreamed of taking place right in front of me.
Yeah, this is where their lame "Musk is violating security laws!" bullshit is coming from.
They're butt-blasted that their years-long graft and influence-peddling machine got exposed.
As a reader, I’ll testify JS:dr.
Oddly enough, every JS;dr can be answered with Orange Man Bad.
JS;dr so help me god.
Reason should add JS;dr tee shirts to their merch.
It would be the number one seller. Free JS:DR shirt with every subscription.
From the other dumb article this morning:
I can’t imagine how thick headed you have to pretend to be to totally misss the point that it IT IS NOT HER ANSWER THAT IS THE ISSUE, ITS THE CBS EXECS COLLUDING BEHIND THE SCENES TO MAKE HER LOOK BETTER once the answer is was known to be a disaster- an In-kind campaign contribution
We are supposed to believe Fox News should pay up $780mil for failing to fact check Giuliani in real time, but this is OK
Sigh. As always, it's (D)ifferent.
The entire legal case for distortion/deception falls apart once the phrase "make her look better" enters into the argument. If the whole issue boils down to a claim that's entirely subjective (how Kamala is "made to look") vs objective (the answer in the story isn't her response to that question).
As does the idea that anyone on either side could be conclusively proven to be lying.
Without access to the full transcript, it's not hard to see how someone could see both "versions" and conclude that the editors swapped in a different answer, but with the transcript it's easy to prove that isn't the case. The real question with all of this is why CBS and 60 Minutes would choose to go through so many weeks of their reputation being dragged in national headlines when it all could have been ended in a matter of hours by simply publishing the full transcript on their website?
This seems to truly be a case where the question of why be so secretive if they've got nothing to hide? The entire purpose of the interview was for national publication, so there's nothing about posting the full transcript along with the edited footage/transcript that would be inconsistent with the purpose of what their actual job.
60 Minutes' whole thing, from the day they started out, has been collecting hours of interviews, and then editing it down to a few minutes that make you look good if they like you, or make you look bad if they don't. (Almost always the latter.) They've been doing it so long nobody with an ounce of sense agrees to be interviewed by them without making their own recording of the interview, and most people with sense just refuse to be interviewed by them, period.
It would completely spoil their thing if they typically allowed people to see the original interview.
Righteous indignation works in comments sections of the Internet. But the problem is that in court it doesn't matter how true you want something to be. If it isn't real, it cannot be used as evidence. Conversely, if it *is* true, you're in business.
Obviously Trump is lying. It's just what he does. What is so perplexing and infuriating is the fact that otherwise-normal people play along - even when they stand to gain nothing. It's the mystery of our time that so many Americans have opted to treat the utter nonsense Trump says as true- whether or not they know it it is patently false. Simply putting in the effort to watch the entire unedited 60 Minutes footage is capitulation to the nonsense. But that is the bane of reality. If no one sticks up for it and everybody gets to invent their own things don't work very well. Democracy *certainly* doesn't. The best anyone who has grown weary of the stupid shit he says is to prove in court why it is nonsense. Trump is an expert at idiot-jitsu, using the other persons own gullability and desire to believe what Trump claims. Normal people have thwart it in court which is tedious and expensive and takes time. One of of Trump's favorite idiot-jitsu moves is to threaten a lawsuit. The idiots think that he would never open himself up to legal jeopardy if he wasn't right, even though he never plans to argue the original claim in court (remember Rudy's "election fraud" lawsuit in which he told the PA court "This is not a case of fraud"? No? You been 'jitsued!). Trump pushes things as far as he can without opening himself up to jeopardy and then drops it. He won't ever even testify in court! It's just so fucking sad and so fucking dumb. When people who believe the outlandish shit Trump says come to a site called "Reason" and argue that Trump tells the truth it's even sadder.
Watch the tape and compare the two transcripts. It is abundantly clear that the broadcast version has been scrubbed to make Kamala appear less incompetent - not to save time.
I have and you are wrong.
How ridiculous. Who do you think you're tricking? We all saw the leak ages ago, we didn't need a "transcript" to tell us whether or not CBS selectively edited the tape to hide her screwup.
The cold hard facts are that Kamala Harris was stumped when asked how she would pay for her plans & then admitted that our taxes would go up, it's a big deal, something that the voters should have heard, and 60 Minutes deliberately hid it in the broadcast.
Maybe next time do a little "freethinking", Freethinksman, before trying to pettifog us.
You either haven't watched the videos or you're a liar.
Or, more likely, both. Why is it that lefty slimy piles of lying shit choose handles hoping someone will credit them with the ability to reason? See 'sarcasmic' who is nothing but a slimy pile of lefty shit.
Did the edits make Kamala look better? Yes or no?
You retards are in such denial.
Is that really the question though? Sullum is arguing about legal distinctions. Trump makes very specific legal claims in the lawsuit he brought. Sullum is arguing those claims are not true from a legal standpoint. Is Sullum wrong? I guess we'll see how it goes in the courts.
CBS edited an interview in the hopes of making Harris appear to have at least two brain cells, with the intent to influence the audience and the election.
That cannot be denied.
The whole question of which cut makes Kamala "look better" is entirely subjective. For trump to be lying (in a legal sense), he has to know that what he's said is factually false, so the question becomes completely unprovable in a context were you'd have to prove that he actually holds one opinion but is expressing the opposite, and even then, it's dubious since there's no objectively "true" or "false" opinion regarding which way she looks better or worse. Not to mention that the personal opinions of the show's Director and the segment's editor would become germane to the question of which one they thought looked "better" as opposed to "more concise".
Cutting for a more concise answer could be done in the interest of fitting the time constraints of a commercial network format as much as it could be done to make Kamala look less "rambling"; at the point in the election cycle that the interview aired there can't have been that many people left in the Harris camp who didn't know that she's barely coherent on a good day and normally uses the maximum number of words possible to say absolutely nothing whenever she can get away with it (such as while being interviewed by an arm of the DNC press department such as CBS)
Obviously Trump is lying.
Not about this, he's not.
-jcr
This reminds me of Jafar from Disney's Aladdin.
"He's obviously lying."
Fuck off and die, nonthinksTDS-addled shit.
Kochs were never trumpers. They are not happy. Hence the two ridiculous top articles today. Get used to it...or find better material to read
Sullum is finally broken, ML. His TDS case is terminal.
I'm still enjoying "being unburden by what has been".
Her campaign (and the media gaslighting that went along with it from covering for Joe to the bitter end) is the gift that keeps on giving.
They changed her answer. That’s called fake news. Or lying. You pick.
They completely changed it to a response to a different question in one case, and in several others, truncated it to make it more succinct and less rambling / incoherent.
It's pretty blatant, even CBS said they edited it, so the question is, in the case of the 'longer' interview, did they snip it for time, as they claim, or to help her look better? Well, now we have the transcript to see for ourselves. To me, it looks a lot like they edited it to make her look more clear and precise, less 'word salad'. Which is not allowed by law (FCC, FEC, etc).
Clearly, though, people will see what they want to see, as evidenced by this article, and Joe Lancaster's article. But there have been many, many others who look at this and say, wow, that's corrupt to the core (and illegal).
I’m curious to see what is uncovered during discovery. I suspect the internal communications will look much like CNN and that defamation case they just lost.
He's just pissed because they show everything that comes out of his babbling mouth.
"it cannot possibly be guilty of broadcast news distortion, which requires "evidence showing that the broadcast news report was deliberately intended to mislead viewers or listeners." "
Let's see, they took a rambling, confusing, and otherwise unintelligible response to a simple question, trimmed out the repetitive parts and made it look like she gave a vague, but direct answer to the question... they intentionally tried to make viewers think she could answer a direct question.
Wasn't this like her only interview that wasn't on a sex-related podcast? The American public leaned on this interview a lot more than any normal interview in a normal campaign.
What CBS should have done immediately after being accused of manipulating the responses was to simply post the actual, unedited footage on the internet immediately, so that their innocence or guilt could be assessed by the voters.
Cutting interviewees responses in half is not normal, stop trying to pretend it is.
She did do that podcast with Shannon Sharpe, but that was more about trying to salvage her flailing numbers with black men more than anything else. And she fucked that up, too.
Most Black people never bought her "Black" persona, and many found it offensive. That alone might have tipped the election.
LOL.
So why did CBS not release the full transcript or the full video of the response before election day?
For the same reason the New Statesman wouldn't release the full transcript of the Roger Scruton interview: Corporate Journalism dies in sunlight.
It is amazing that would have stymied Trump's lawsuit, but they could not do the simplest thing to contradict.his complaints.
I wonder why?
I read earlier today that releasing an an unedited interview sets a bad precedent. Also Tariffs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now you're flat out lying too!
Pretty sure that's spot-on. Reason said they just released the original.
Blame Judge Merchan. If Trump's hush money contract with Stormy Daniels was election interference, then all kinds of things are election interference.
Oh FFS. It used to be the case that cheating on your spouse is kinda bad for a GOP candidate. What with all the religious right and moral majority fucks voting. But maybe adultery IS a campaign bonus? Dubious.
Second, it wasn't just the cheating. It was the context/timing. Because of the other news about Trump's 'pussy grabbing' it might lead a reasonable person to conclude that BOTH things might have a negative effect on female voters, religious voters, or both. In fact, Trump and Cohen and others DID believe that. Hence, the payoff.
The jury also believed that. Because they heard all the evidence.
Which felony did the jury agree on to raise the misdemeanors to felonies not a lawyer?
He’s got no fucking idea. From reading his bullshit here I’ve determined that my command of the law is homogeneously superior to his. And I am not, nor have I have ever been, a lawyer.
Well when the libertarian moment finally arrives and we kill all the lawyers both you and Windy will be safe.
I wouldn’t mind hunting them.
""The jury also believed that. Because they heard all the evidence.""
Most people falsely convicted were done so by a jury.
The "believe the jury" would keep anyone falsely convicted in prison. The jury can be wrong.
You'd think an "attorney" would know that; well, I suppose a competent one would.
The jury can be wrong.
Or the prosecution/judge tampered with evidence to fool a jury.
Or the jury instructions are unconstitutional. Such as this case.
It’s all of the above! And so much more!
"Oh FFS. It used to be the case that cheating on your spouse is kinda bad for a GOP candidate."
Bill Clinton proved personal character does not matter in any way. Do not get pissy that others are abiding by the rules set down.
"Second, it wasn't just the cheating. It was the context/timing. Because of the other news about Trump's 'pussy grabbing' it might lead a reasonable person to conclude that BOTH things might have a negative effect on female voters, religious voters, or both. In fact, Trump and Cohen and others DID believe that. Hence, the payoff."
Documents that were both not public AND generated after the election would impact said election...how?
The issue is not the hush money itself, right? Because that would be unbelievably unconstitutional.
"The jury also believed that. Because they heard all the evidence."
Just like Democrat juries in Alabama in the 1950's right? Those Klansmen were ALL innocent because, well obviously, the juries said they were and that is proof, per you.
If Trump presented himself as a family values candidate with an image like Pence, then it would hurt him. But Trump’s life has played out in the tabloids for over 40 years. So there were no surprises, nor did he make any pretensions to be like Pence. That’s why it didn’t hurt him.
The supposed coverup referred to here occurred over 6 months AFTER the election as well.
Violating causality was not among the charges.
Trumps philandering ways have literally been known for fucking decades. Obviously that wasn’t a big deal to the people that supported his first run. What a stupid fucking argument.
They had a choice between a guy who cheated on his wife, and a whore who tried to murder a guy by suppressing the DNA evidence that exonerated him, and has literally committed slavery by keeping convicts beyond their sentences to use them a cheap labor.
It's pretty clear which was the lesser evil.
-jcr
That is a very great point!
So the full video showing that CBS edited it to make Harris look better is somehow evidence that CBS didn't edit the video to make Harris look better?
Yep. You got it.
Kind of makes you wonder what "journalistic sin" really means.
Working for Fox?
CBS didn't edit it as flagrantly as Trump thought they had when CBS was keeping the actual interview secret. Trump didn't lie, he mistakenly assumed that CBS wouldn't be covering up some trivial editing. But CBS _did_ edit the interview to make Harris look better.
In any case, the intent of Trump's lawsuit isn't to win, it is to get discovery of CBS's emails and other evidence revealing how they make decisions about editing and coverage - which I suspect will reveal that they are operating as a propaganda agency rather than a news agency.
Not that that is news, either - it was pretty clear to me back when 60 Minutes used a memo supposedly written about Bush on a typewriter in 1973, but _obviously_ printed decades later from Microsoft Word on the default settings. Dan Rather knew what typewriting looks like - he read the news from typewritten pages for decades - but he so loved slandering Bush that he ignored the obvious fraud.
Is everyone who writes for this rag a goddamn liar?
Seems so, especially in the midst of events that has significant potential to upend their world, and reveal them to be complicit liars in the process.
It’s like Mike Benz said; we’re all basically living in the Truman Show.
Every institution is fake.
Except for maybe Good Liz.
I still held out hope for Haircut until the Politico article.
CBS:
Crap
Broadcasting
System
The legacy media wonders why they are losing viewers.
And the democrat party still can't figure out why they lost so badly.
You can't fix stupid.
Trump always lies, why is this a surprise?
Even for you, this is really low effort. Maybe go back to your fainting couch and recharge. A cold compress and a cup of chamomile tea might help.
They can’t pay Molly anymore.
Hey 50 cents is, well less than 50 cents used to be.
MG is Tony, but I think we've all figured that out by now. I've muted him and his socks because I recoil at the thought of him wacking off to my comments...
Well, calling Tony stupid makes him horny.
Sp does going to his local bathhouse.
I do believe Miss Molly has a case of the vapors!
I hear that new hemlock tea is just the think this month.
Nothing that a tank of nitrogen can't fix.
"chamomile tea"
You misspelled rat poison.
So does the media.
Or perhaps you bought into the BS that Biden wasn't in a mental decline.
F-
Try harder tomorrow.
Damn, this is low energy, low effort, even for someone as lazy as you, Molly. Did your last paycheck from USAID bounce?
Knocking a 179 word answer down to...20 words. Seems a bit sus.
Molly.
Godiva.
Is.
A.
Lying.
Slimy.
Pile.
Of.
Lefty.
Shit.
I like how CBS has just released the heretofore never-seen transcript, but Trump is "LYING"... I guess his secret copy from before the election must have shown the same thing, I guess.
Also, it is my opinion that it should be a media organization's policy to release full transcripts of every interview-- especially when it's of a president or major politician-- ESPECIALLY during a high stakes election.
It's not hard.
Here's our interview of Candidate X.
You can find the full transcript of the interview on our website.
Hiding things from the media is only a crime if Trump does it.
Again, this is the same media that a month earlier was shocked, *SHOCKED!* to discover that Joe Biden wasn't fit to run for another term.
That doesn’t work well when your goal is to get a specific candidate elected, as opposed to being a journalist.
Sarc, for reference, this is gaslighting.
The cope is thicker than blood.
Reason must REALLY have USG money in their pockets.
As with much of MSM, they're in panic mode.
Maybe they are just worried Masnick and Yglesias will start sleeping on their couches without USAID funds.
Trump Is Flat-Out Lying About the 60 Minutes Interview With Harris
Like "Joe Biden is competent to run for another term." lying... or some other kind of lying?
You fuckers shit the bed and betrayed even your own constituents. You aren't defending democracy or free speech, you're defending a silent coup of your own party.
lol now do so why's he getting the money and not the discovery?
This is discovery.
this is surrender.
Sarc didn't see a similar situation with CNN just occur and how damning the discovery was in that trial.
George Stephanopolis shat the bed so dramatically that his employer, ABC, had to pay $1M in trump lawyer fees and $15M towards the Trump Presidential Library... I hope Trump puts a big, beautiful brass plaque in the lobby, thanking George & ABC for their generous donation and support!
Doesn't Trump have a golden toilet? Let's just take these two things to their logical conclusion.
A toilet where the bowl is crafted in George Stephanopoulos’ likeness with the opening of the bowl the mouth?
We can add discovery to the list of words sarc doesn't understand.
Luckily, the legacy terrestrial broadcast industry is dying, if not already dead. Only very old people are keeping it barely alive.
So, the type of news organizations that would be subject to the FCC’s broadcast news distortion rule will dwindle down to nothing before too much longer.
You'd think that would mean that the type of news distortion that goes on everyday on legacy cable tv news networks (also dying) and the internet would then be able to continue business as usual. But Carr has his censorship sights set on those mediums as well, assuming of course that he finds the coverage somehow not being fair to conservatives and/or the right.
I watched both versions. There is no doubt whatsoever that CBS did, in fact, commit fraud and journalistic malfeasance with that editing job. In the edited version, Comrade Harris sounds intelligent. In the raw footage, she comes across as the chaotic baboon that she truly is. Her answer was as garbled as can be, using many words and saying absolutely nothing.
Reason has once again reaffirmed my decision to stop wasting my money supporting them.
Do you Trump defenders sing while you carry the goalposts?
And here we go with the massive case of TDS from Sarc yet again.
He has principles!
1. Trump always wrong
2. Democrats always right.
The accurate response, if you suffer neither from TDS nor MAGAism (i.e. normal people) is:
1. Trump often wrong.
2. Trump often lying.
3. Democrats often wrong.
4. Democrats often lying.
5. Republicans often wrong.
6. Republicans often lying.
7. Media often wrong.
8. Media often lying.
9. Sycophants always wrong.
Don't be a sycophant. It'll only bring you heartbreak.
Ahh yes. The both sides are equal play. A favorite of many in denial.
A+
Didn't Democrats do it first or something?
They did edit it to make Harris seem competent when the whole answer proves otherwise. You need to put this interview in its proper context: a sitting VP and candidate for potus doing an interview so the voters can be informed about the candidate. It isn't a regular interview. They edited it in a way to leave the voters with the impression that Harris isn't an incompetent person who rambles on about nothing. Why are you lying about Trump when you say he lied about the editing?
Hey, Sullum, how much did you get paid by USAID and other government agencies?
Such an intelligent response! I'm genuinely impressed.
Glad you are.
It wasn't a complex comment thus as you're easily impressed, you must have a simple mind and a very mid (at best) IQ. Fits your name well, as you're very "average". Now go fuck off with the other troll socks.
What a slimy pile of TDS-addled shit!
I don't understand why the media can't get this right. They do literally thousands of these interviews every year and air promos. So a basic question no one seems to want to investigate is how normal is it for the media to edit promo interviews and the interviews themselves? Seeing as the media is in a good position to answer this most basic of questions, why don't they do it?
And lest you all think I am picking on CBS, this goes for FOX and all the other right-wing media orgs. It's quite obvious that FOX gives Trump softball questions and rarely challenges him. Is that not corrpt and a form of election meddling? That too would be a basic question the media could investigate and report on.
No, instead we are given drips like this to keep us engaged. It's stupid. It's petty. It's on-brand for Trump of course and we are all falling for it. It's pretty unbelievable that we are still reading about this story and equally unbelievable that the trolls in the comment section seem to not see through Trump's tactic.
The news media always edits in a neutral manner!
https://theweek.com/articles/627055/what-katie-courics-deceptive-editing-teach-about-media-bias
It’s trump’s fault cbs edited answers!
It's OK to use a brief (truncated) response in a promo reel, but the decision to have the actual interview response truncated is the offense. Leaving half an interviewees answer on the cutting room floor is a manipulation that changes the response.
It's pretty clear-cut.
Here's a simple example:
Interviewer: "Do you like pizza?"
Actual response: "No, I love it!"
Promo version: "No."
Aired Interview response: ""I love it!"
But in this case, it would be more like:
Interviewer: "Do you like Pizza?"
Actual answer: ""Lord no, I've never eaten that, I can't imagine putting something so disgusting in your mouth - they don't clean the oven, they make the pizza with their bare hands, if it's a hot day their sweat gets into the food, no, I don't like pizza."
Answer broadcast: "no, I don't like pizza."
And just like that, an unhinged answer become acceptable, and the viewer never learns about the interviewees obsession with how pizza is prepared...
According to this article, that would not be a manipulation of the response.
"Then i noticed she was sitting on her - sweet can - So i grabbed her - sweet can - Just thinking about her - can - I just wish i had her sweet - sweet - sweet can..."
I had to log in solely to congratulate you for the excellent Simpsons reference that had me giggling.
Thankfully the comments are doing a decent job pointing out the flaws, and I don't have much to add. The only thing I think isn't getting enough is the idiotic suggestion that because it failed in the end it wasn't "election changing" and therefore not Trump lied. If it had a 1% shift in opinion that the truth wouldn't have produced, that's election changing even if it was insufficient to shift the result.
Yeah, I immediately recognized that from the Simpsons, circa 1993 if I recall correctly. Great episode, and quite apropos.
If, and a huge if, that 60 Minutes video aired without content editing would have cinched for people how stupid and unprepared Kamala was for the White House and caused a 1% vote swing to Trump, with down-balloting, the Republicans may have won even more seats in the House and the Senate, there would have been a considerable effect.
(run-on sentence, I know)
You're engaging a steaming pile of lefty shit who has no interest in anything like honesty.
The whole issue was the criticism that Harris was an empty suit spewing "word salad" gibberish in lieu of articulate policy responses. The 60 Minute edit wasn't for brevity, or any other legit purpose. It was expressly to rebuff the word salad/empty suit charge by the opposition. It was manipulation motivated by advocacy. Trump was correct.
When is this site going to change its name to Resistance?
Note to the writer: What you are referring to as "lying" is known to rational people as speculation. You see, you can't "lie" about the content of a document that you haven't seen and won't see for many months. Hope that clears things up for you.
So, how did Trump lie again? CBS didn't release the transcripts before he made the accusations, ergo he couldn't have known his statements weren't completely true. Thus, it isn't a lie, at worst it is an unsupported accusation. A lie requires you to be knowingly misrepresenting the truth. It isn't a lie if your make a mistake on unknown or faulty information. Fucking Jakey is the one lying here, as he should fucking know as an editor that an accusation or speculation, no matter how far it's wrong, based on no evidence or incomplete evidence cannot be a lie.
I thought Harris's "edited" comments were absurdly stupid, much like I find Sullum's TDS. At least, Sullum's found a good place to work at CNN...er, I mean, "Reason" Magazine. I say this as a libertarian who doesn't particularly like Trump.
This is, like, the biggest story ever about the biggest scandal in history. Wars should be started over this or anything even related to it. And not little wars. Big wars. Wars that require old men to polish up stories about what they were doing when the enemy was at the gate.
I am so glad so many here are defending the ramparts and manning the barricades. Thank you for your service
Nothing to see here! Move along!
We're just taking a break from all that winning! It can really take a toll on you!
I'm glad to see Biden/Harris supporters defending the wasteful spending of USAID, good to know where they stand on US taxpayers funding LGBTQIA+2 plays snd comic books in foreign lands...
How was the r/FedNews protest?
You failed ar your appeal to ridicule to again defend attempted media manipulation.
None of us wrote this article dumbass.
Narcissists are always correct. If you disagree, the response is Narcissistic rage.
One of the things I like about this story is how it compares to Project Veritas. When PV caught Planned Parenthood on video discussing illegally selling body parts the left media simply claimed the videos were "highly edited", and refused to discuss the matter. Once again we see Trump following the leftist playbook and those same leftists decrying it as so illegitimate it should disqualify Trump from leadership.
Where was Sullum article saying the edits didn't change the nature of the discussion and the underlying issue needed to be addressed? Why is Sullum pretending this is a new tactic rather than recognizing it as one he has supported in the past? Where were the jeffsarcs discussing how these tactics showed the NGO system routinely breaks the law while a corrupt left media protects them? All of these were busy covering for PP and their focus today on how outrageous these same tactics are just shows they fully support the left media narrative.
That was Daedelin originally in California. He was dealing with California AGs for a decade. Think it was only finally dropped last week.
And ironically Kamala was deeply involved in the PV lawfare if memory serves me.
Yeap. Emails show her communicating with the California chapter president of PP yo go after Daedelin.
This was an excellent point!
Sure, sure, 60 Minutes deceptively edited that interview.
But after reading excerpts I'm simply relieved we dodged the Harris bullet. Honestly her answers were just pffffffffft... I mean FFS, what the hell is coming out of her mouth?!
I think the people saying this is a nothing burger are deliberately ignoring the context. MSM was making miracles happen, moving heaven and earth to make Harris' gibberish make any sense whatsoever. While at the same time taking anything Trump said and making sound as evil as possible.
Maybe I don't like Trump, but oh my god, it could have been Kamala...
"... that CBS did not commit any journalistic sins when it presented an edited version of Harris' response to a question about Israel."
If CBS's editing of the Harris interview was kosher under journalistic standards, then I'm less confident that I can trust journalism than I was before I knew that.
The slimy pile of TDS-addled shit Sullum is flat out lying every time he posts anything about Trump.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
The RECORDING of the "interview" proves the opposite of what you claim.
It’s a frivolous claim.
The context of what they edited does matter and I fail to see how advocacy journalism is any different from the terribly low standard of journalism that exists today.
We can rely in TDS-addled shits to lie about most anything, TDS-addled shit.
She had multiple responses that were like 140 words that they cut down to a fraction of that. Trump might be hyperbolic, but he isn't lying. CBS was doing her a favor and everyone knows it.
Good Lord, Jacob. You are really full on committed to hating anything Trump related with every fiber of your being every day from here until JD Vance is elected.
I don't even like the guy, but I'm honorable enough to admit when he was right. CBS took a raving gibbering idiot and did everything in their power to make her seem like she could rub two brain cells together without her hair catching fire. And they did it because they were in the tank for her, and desperate to make her likeable in contrast to Trump. They failed. Miserably.
Trump isn't "flat out lying" about anything here. YOU ARE.
Who cares?
She lost. We did not vote for her. Even the democrats did not come to safe her.
End of story.
We care because we want discovery. I think we're well over a hundred comments mentioning it. Yet still no mention in any Reason article on the topic. Which makes us want it more.
I figured it out. Sullum and whoever he associates with are shitfaced drunk like sarc all the time, and he doesn't actually understand why editing out all that footage matters.
shadydave from the other article puts it well:
I think I'm done. The comments are fun, but if I wanted to visit The Jacobin I would. This is ridiculous. She literally spouted incomprehensible gibberish when asked a question, and instead of airing the gibberish answer, they simply cut and pasted a less gibberish answer from a different part of the interview.
And why did they do that? Because they were trying to get her elected. The notion that they weren't completely in the tank for her isn't worthy of a response.
Trump and Harris both frequently sounded brain-damaged. Harris didn't have the age-related excuse. Whenever Trump sounds coherent he is usually spouting untruths or exaggerations.
Don't tell me the right-wing media didn't and now doesn't avoid airing Trump when he sounds like he is sliding into dementia. Media is biased.
Trump's masterminds/overseers like Vought and other Heritage Foundation types who actually produce policy want a government like Victor Orban's in Hungary. No press but the state-sponsored press. Let's at least have a government-sponsored press (Fox News, America One etc.) as well as an opposition press so we can try to pick out snippets of truth.
Lol.
Nice try Jacob.
"Don't tell me the right-wing media didn't and now doesn't avoid airing Trump when he sounds like he is sliding into dementia. Media is biased."
Don't.
Tell.
Me.
You.
Are.
Not.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
We can see you are. Fuck off and die, asshole.
Look at the precedent. We have precedent from just last year that hiding anything embarrassing is election interference.
This hid a lot worse than Trump's affair with Daniels. Cutting for time is one thing, but this is almost to the level of ghostwriting.
I personally think neither is interference, but we cannot have condemnation of Trump while this clearly worse action is left unchallenged.
Abolish the FCC
I saw the video YOU ARE LYING.
The edited an incoherent rambling fool into a semi-human of still low quality.
My fellow Jews will see how anti-Semitic REASON is becoming. Her answer on Israel was INVERTED.
SHAME ON YOU
Sullum misses the point. He’s enslaved by TDS.
Harris ONLY did the 60 minutes interview to rebuff weeks of ( justified) criticism that she was incapable of handling serious interviews. Much of that criticism had been grounded on her “ word-salad” habit when replying to any spontaneous, unscripted query.
In short, the pressure of the exchange always left her in the default mode of rambling and babbling. Triple-talk reflexively came her way when dealing with the moment.
The 60 minutes interview was designed, primarily, to demonstrate her ability to do otherwise. You go, girl. The interview would establish her verbal balance and dexterity.
Except it did not. She blew it. The word salads were served up buffet style, repeatedly. It was classic Kamala tripping over her brain.
So the issue isn’t whether “ journalistic practices” were suitably followed, via the edits, to retain the essence of her replies. The issue is whether the edits deprived the public of seeing and hearing Kamala as the word-salad queen, whose crown she had richly earned.
That’s what the edits did, and only a fraud would deny it.
"Sullum misses the point."
You assume the steaming pile of TDS-addled shit Sullum is capable of *seeing* the point.
The asshole needs to make the world a better place by getting reamed with a barb-wire-wrapped broom stick until death.
BTW, asshole (Sullum), make sure your grave site is not public knowledge. I don't want to stand in line to piss on it.
Article summary:
'Libertarian' rag simps for the lies of a Marxist communist traitor and the 'news' (regime propaganda) apparatus that tried desperately to prop up her sad, drunk, incompetent arse.
Pretty funny.
Who let the J6er out of the padded cell?
Two things can be true at the same time. Trump is greatly exaggerating the extent of CBS editing the interviews, but it's also clear they did edit them for political purposes to make Harris sound more cogent. CBS has every right to do that, but at what point does this become unreported campaign advertising?
Jacob better hope RFK isn't confirmed or that TDS vaccine he so desparately needs might never make it to the market.
Well, I watched it and for some reason you can see what so many can clearly see 🙂 Her Israel response was altered to the opposite of what she said.
Good article, but LOOTER POLITICIAN LIES THROUGH TEETH is hardly Pulitzer Prize subject matter. Indeed, one wishes it were actual news instead of a summary of every Kleptocracy gang since the 1872 election fraud, where the candidate who won both the popular and electoral votes was declared loser at bayonet-point. Corrupting the LP with treasonous Jesus MAGAts was simply more of the same.
You’re a pathetic joke here. Did you know that?
Whenever you see such a hyperbolic headline, you know what you are about to read is the flat out lie. Why is Sullum even here at a regime supporting organization posing as "libertarian" news outlet, when he could gleefully bleat with the rest of the herd in what is left of regime media?
Either Sullum has finally resorted to trolling for clicks, or his TDS has him becoming completely unhinged from reality.
He is a fucking pile of TDS-addled shit who needs to be reamed with a barb-wire-wrapped broom stick until we get the desired result, making the world a far better place.
Fuck off and die, Sullum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuGPuhANqZk
HFS, I could only watch a minute of that. I’m f’ing embarrassed for her and our country that she rose as high as she has. It speaks to the complete disdain most have of Trump that she received any electoral votes.
Trump never said CBS made up Harris' words. He said they were deceptively edited, which they in fact were to make Harris sound coherent. By choosing only the last sentence of those paragraphs of word salad, Harris almost sounds like she has a brain stem. What CBS did is equivalent to finding a string of words that make sense in the random output of those million Shakespeare-typing monkeys and using that to claim that the monkeys are geniuses.
And sullum is once again shown to be a slimy pile of TDS-addled shit who should get reamed with a barb-wire-wrapped broomstick until it causes his death and results in an improvement for humanity.
Fuck off and die, sullum; make your family proud.