On a saturday in recorded history. First of all we need to upgrade your saturday. Second, i would agree it was a standout experience. I am not on some with people as you may know and i am a little bit awkward. I had no idea what to expect but particularly doing that thing with you with being next to each other chatting with each other and talk about this crossover and talk about what it is like to do these shows and our overlap and what it is like to work with each other, t it was moving and cool and i ov like you. Most of the stuff we ndtalke about, it is the first time we have ever talked about it. It was listen. I think it was between 35 and 40 minutes and something like that and i could've done three hours and just have gotten warmed up and it was just great. If we will ever do another event like that let's volunteered to do it again. I will do that. Rachel, happy sweet 16. Yes, it is my anniversary. Yes. You are now 16 years old. My sweet 16. You are 16 and tv years which makes you two years older than i am. Thank you. Well, they are finally trying and here is the latest attempt. T the elements of the news media that have been accused of saying washing donald trump know they are guilty of exactly that. Some guof them, like the new yo times, they really really are trying to do something about it but this is their first try. So it is in perfect. The first tried by the new york times was published night under the headline as the debate looms trump is now the one facing questions about agent capacity with a sub headline reading his rambling sometimes incoherent public statements have stirred concern among voters in the article doesn't use the term saying washing which describes the way some in the news media edit his crazy statements down to a shape that allows them to try to make sense of them. The article does offer the new york times own confession about doing exactly that. Here is the new york times confession in writing tonight in this article. Often, his mangled statements are summarized in news accounts in ways that don't give the full picture of how baffling they can be. In the new york times has done that. They have done that every single day in the new york times has been covering donald trump the politician. And this includes in this article tonight. They couldn't get through the whole article without doing it. And in this article they are trying to cure itself of its habit of saying washing saying sane washing donald trump. And there were people who clapped enthusiastically for donald trump incoherent response to a question about childcare, a response that wasn't an answer. It was a widely criticized incoherent jumble that didn't answer the question in any way and in an article the new york times thought they could cure this sane washing habit by doing a larger portion instead of these short bits they used in the coverage of it. Here is the attempt pedicure of its own habit of sane washing in which in the end it sane washes him a grin again. They say because quoting donald trump at length can provide additional context and here is a more extended account of his reply on affordable childcare. It is a very important issue but i think when you talk about the kind of numbers that i'm talking about, because childcare is childcare, there is something you have to have an in this country you have to have it. When you talk about those numbers compared to the kind i am talking about by taxing foreign nations, at level they aren't used to, but they will get used to it very quickly and it won't stop them from doing business with us, they will have a very substantial tax when they sent product into our country, those numbers are bigger than any numbers that we are talking about including childcare that it will take care. And after running that extended incoherent response by donald trump, the new eyork times the in the very next paragraph, sane washed it with this interpretation. What he seemed to be saying is he would raise so much money by imposing tariffs on imported goods that the country could use the proceeds to pay for child care and in itself that would be a disputable policy assumption. A disputable policy assumption. That is the single most disturbing thing i have read in the new york times about the new york times and let me just read this once again. What he seemed to be saying was he would raise so much money by imposing tariffs on imported goods that the country could use the proceeds to pay for child care and in itself that would be a disputable policy assumption. It was a time not long ago and everybody at the new york times, and i mean everyone, including the printers and delivery truck drivers knew what a terrace is terrace tairiff is and they say it would be taxing foreign nations in the new york times allows that to stand as a fact in its campaign reporting. That means the new york times campaign coverage and the economic coverage is hopelessly lost in this campaign. How slowly do i have to say it for the new york times campaign reporters to understand it for the very first time? i have said it many times before and i understand the new york times campaign reporters are too busy to be watching this program and i don't expect them to learn any of this from me but i expected them to learn this by the end of the first th year of high school. A tariff is imposed by the united states of america and paid for by the people of the united states of america and nobody else ever. The entire point of a tariff is to raise the price of the foreign product to the american consumers so the consumer doesn't want to buy it anymore because it is too expensive. All economists understand that american tariffs function as sales taxes paid by american consumers and economists consider tariffs sales taxes. Yes, they do raise money and yes, they are the only way the federal government raise money before the imposition of income taxes. And the only way the american government can raise money is nt from the american people and the american government can't tax anyone other than the american people. The night before the debate the new york times is telling its readers that donald trump's are taxing for nations. Yes, he tells a lot of lies and it's impossible to keep up with anyone of those but the lie on this the new york times in an article designed to take on his lies and incoherent ramblings prints his tariff lie and let sit stand in the only question is whether they would make enough money or raise enough money to pay for child care. The same thing about his response from childcare last week with the new york times trying to tell you that donald trump seems to say that his tariffs would raise so much money that it could be then used to pay for child care but then maybe donald trump wouldn't use it for that. Donald trump didn't say one word about paying for child care are using that revenue to pay for child care and there's not a single thing in his response that any sane person can convert to donald trump suggesting that the federal government should in any way do anything to pay for anybody's childcare and the new york times hallucinated that explanation into existence and after doing that of his madness , the new york times then says it is a disputable policy yo assumption. No, it is not. It is a completely impossible. What this article does do is prove to you how deep the actual intellectual rot is at the new york times and at the reporting and editorial levels going all the way up to the top and this is a big article for the new york times tonight. And it had to be examined by multiple editors to make its way into print. Everyone of them was completely cool with donald trump's insanity about tariffs. The new york times was happy to put in print that they are taxing for nations and that lie, the new york times let stand unchallenged. Everybody working in the business section of the new by k times is embarrassed this and everybody in the business section, editors and reporters know the truth about tariffs but they are not the reporters and that and they have no input with that campaign coverage. The new york times and the rest of the news media has a been enabling his lies about tariffs a think ull years in they were doing that because donald trump was telling bigger lies than lies about tariffs and more destructive lies, lies about elections and lies that have gotten people killed. For years i have been occasionally or repeatedly thinking about these lies about tariffs multiple times a year ou and it's been a very lonely pursuit. It is much a much worse than i thought and then i know there are people working at the d new york times believe donald trump when he says tariffs are taxing foreign nations and there are people at the new york times who allow that to go into print uncontested that have forgotten whatever was they were supposed to learn in high school about them. They let his lies simply seep into the political system and seep into the very soil of american politics without ever examining or disputing donald trump's lies about tariffs and lies that give people false hope about what is possible. This means that we should be sitting here tonight with absolutely no confidence that there is anyone, anywhere working at abc news who knows what a tariff is. I didn't think that yesterday but i now think it is possible because of what the new york times doesn't know about them and i thought the new york times was the best about the stuff in the one person who works at abc news who i know what a tariff is is george stephanopoulos who worked on that issue as a member of e the representative staff and worked with others in the white house with president clinton but he has no role in the debate ha tomorrow night hosted by abc news so when donald trump lies about tariffs, it will be the job of vice president harris alone with no help from the moderators to try to undo 10 years of lying to america about what a tariff is and who pays one and that is how unbalanced this debate will be before it even starts. Kamala harris won't just have to fend off new trump lies to tomorrow night but sendoff 10 years of the accumulated weight of trump lying including on subjects that the news media has never made an attempt of any kind to challenge donald trump and what is the toughest question you heard a reporter asked donald trump about tariffs? the answer is none. There has never been a temp trump question put to him. 24 hours from now you'll be hearing many commentators saying much about this and in that sense she won't just be debating donald trump but debating the news media, reviewers of umthe debate, many of them who don't comprehend the fundamental facts of government. Like a tariff is not taxing foreign nations. We will be a tariff nation and will be to another country so i am a president who is a tariff president and attacks increase president i am not because we will lower the taxes when i am back in the white house. Tariffs are taxes on you. The reason no previous president ever wanted to be called a tariff president is because all of those presidents new that americans pay american tariffs. And all of their voters knew that too. Joining us now is the principal deputy campaign manager for the harriswalz campaign, quentin fulks. Thank you very much for joining eve. And in ate th thinking about just the tariff issue alone , you can see what vice president harris is up against tonight in that debate just a lie donald trump tells tomorrow night but the lie he has been building upon and the many lies he has been building upon and adding to over the years so that so many people take those things without even questioning them like this issue. Yes. He has been lying to the american public for the past 10 years and lying to the american public his whole life. This is very clear and there is only one candidate in the selection that is looking out for the middle class. Donald trump is lefor the ultra wealthy. Every time he opens his mouth, he is lying about it. He is for the ultrawealthy and giving corporations and the wealthy major tax breaks they spent on the middle class and the vice president is fighting for the middle class which is why you hear her introducing proposals to cap the cost and stop price gouging on food, to make sure that people can afford down payments on homes and continue to give american child tax credits and on the flipside you hear donald trump doubling down on tariffs which would, in fact, be a $4000 increase on the average middle class family in this country and that is what donald trump d is for and he is lying about it. The polls are tightening with in one sense they aren't it and most of the swing state polls have been within the margin of error and they are now in a intighter version with a margin of error and what do you see in the movement in the polls recently? i see we have to continue to communicate with voters and we have always known this will be a razor thin margin race no matter how it turns out. But we have to continue to put e in the work and vice president harris and governor walz are the clear underdogs in the selection and we have been the moment we started and partially because what you have laid out e because of the inconsistent fact checks of donald trump or a lack thereof in the lies he is telling about this country. We will continue to put in the work and build apparatuses across battleground states and continue to have the vice president and the governor across this country prspeak dirt the to voters which we will do immediately after the debate with a new way forward tour and that is how we will win this election. We are confident that as voters here vice president harris takes on donald s trump tomorro and be ready to share her vision for a new way forward with the choice crystal clear but our campaign will put in the work. When you look at tomorrow pu night's debate, how will the harris campaign be scoring a win? what would define winning this debate? look, at the end of the day it's not what our campaign things but what the voters think. To me that is a victory coming h into it because at the end of the day we do know this race about the future, about voters. They will hear those lies and about ripping away freedoms from people in the country and mainly reproductive freedom for women of reproductive age and one third