Author’s note: This is the analysis of one round of the 2024 Presidential debate between Biden and Trump. It is linked from a more comprehensive article.
Question: (To Trump) What do you say to voters who believe that you violated that oath through your actions and inaction on January 6th and worry that you’ll do it again?
TRUMP: Well, I don’t think too many believe that.
This is the entitlement fallacy. I don’t think it so the question is wrong, or unfair.
Non-responsive. It doesn’t matter how many or few people believe it, the question is, what would he say to them?
And let me tell you about January 6th, on January 6th, we had a great border, nobody coming through, very few. On January 6th, we were energy independent. On January 6th, we had the lowest taxes ever, we had the lowest regulations ever. On January 6th, we were respected all over the world.
All over the world we were respected, and then he comes in, and we’re now laughed at, we’re like a bunch of stupid people.
Non-responsive.
Repeat argument. By this time, the sheer number of repetitions qualifies all these arguments as ad nauseam fallacies.
Irrelevant. The issue isn’t about how good things were under his presidency. The issue is his actions on Jan. 6.
Hyperbole. As always with Trump, we were the best, now we’re the worst.
Every one of these claims about the border, energy indigence, taxes and respect are not only disputed, in many cases they’re false.
What happened to the United States’ reputation under this man’s leadership is horrible, including weaponization, which I’m sure at some point you’ll be talking about, where he goes after his political opponent because he can’t beat him fair and square.
Gaslighting again.
Ad hominem.
Lie. There is no evidence Biden weaponized the Justice Department against Trump. Trump allies in the House, however, have weaponized the Judiciary Committee to impeach Biden, and pursue a vendetta against his son.
Outright hypocrisy since his own platform is to give the President power to prosecute his political enemies.
TAPPER: You have 80 seconds left. My question was: What do you say to those voters who believe that you violated your constitutional oath through your actions, inaction on January 6th, 2021, and worry that you’ll do it again?
TRUMP: Well, I didn’t say that to anybody. I said peacefully and patriotically.
Again, non-responsive. The question is actions, or inactions.
Debatable claim, if not lie. The January 6 Committee analyzed the records, and discovered, among many disturbing facts, that his speechwriters gave him that phrase. But he added many incendiary lines, including, ““We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” Nor did he use the word peaceful in any of his tweets.
And Nancy Pelosi, if you just watch the news from two days ago, on tape to her daughter, who’s a documentary filmmaker, as they say, what she’s saying, oh, no, it’s my responsibility, I was responsible for this. Because I offered her 10,000 soldiers or National Guard, and she turned them down. And the mayor of – in writing, by the way, the mayor. In writing turned it down, the mayor of D.C. They turned it down.
I offered 10,000 because I could see – I had virtually nothing to do. They asked me to go make a speech. I could see what was happening. Everybody was saying they’re going to be there on January 6th. They’re going to be there. And I said, you know what? There’s a lot of people coming, you could feel it. You could feel it too. And you could feel it. And I said, they ought to have some National Guard or whatever. And I offered it to her. And she now admits that she turned it down. And it was the same day. She was – I don’t know, you can’t be very happy with her daughter because it made her into a liar. She said, I take full responsibility for January 6th.
This is a fallacy called scapegoating, and he scapegoats Pelosi, the Mayor and Pelosi’s daughter.
His account makes him sound like he was a friendly supporter of Pelosi and the the D.C. Mayor, when in fact he refused to engage, watched the riot play out on TV, and ignored pleas to call for an end to the riots.
He’s also lying. Pelosi and McConnell both called for the National Guard. But Trump wasn’t even involved. The Capitol Police Board makes those decisions. Nor did he offer assistance to the D.C. Mayor, who also appealed to the Board. Trump was never involved with any discussions.
(Biden argues Trump did nothing to stop the rioters, and the rioters should be in jail.)
TRUMP: What they’ve done to some people that are so innocent, you ought to be ashamed of yourself, what you have done, how you’ve destroyed the lives of so many people.
When they ripped down Portland, when they ripped down many other cities – you go to Minnesota, Minneapolis, what they’ve done there with the fires all over the city. If I didn’t bring in the National Guard, that city would have been destroyed.
When you look at all of the – they took over big chunks of Seattle. I was all set to bring in the National Guard. They heard that, they saw them coming and they left immediately.
What he said about this whole subject is so off. Peacefully patriotic.
Still non-responsive, and completely irrelevant.
Now he’s shifting blame*, and engaging in what aboutism*.
More ad hominems and hyperbole.
It’s also a red herring since, as he admits, the riots of which he accuses Biden occurred on his watch. Nor does he even try to connect Biden to the riots, rather implying causation by placing them together in the same paragraph.
It’s also a gross exaggeration since he offers no reason to believe the riots destroyed lives. People were no doubt hurt, and property absolutely damaged. But destroyed lives?
This is *** cherry picking***. He points out the riots, but ignores what caused the riots, the police killing of George Floyd
One other thing, the unselect committee, which is basically two horrible Republicans that are all gone now, out of office, and Democrats, all Democrats, they destroyed and deleted all of the information they found, because they found out we were right. We were right. And they deleted and destroyed all of the information.
They should go to jail for that. If a Republican did that, they’d go to jail.
More ad hominems.
Repeating the claim that Democrats were persecuting him.
The claim that the Jan 6 Committee destroyed records had been debunked, and the Congressman to whom the claim is attributed denies making the claim. In fact, the committee worked hard preserve their work before they disbanded.
Even if some records were destroyed, there is no evidence to suggest the destruction was intentional or they would have exonerated Trump.
Round 8a: Trump convictions
Question: (To Trump) Can you clarify exactly what it means about you feeling you have every right to go after your political opponents?
TRUMP: Well, I said my retribution is going to be success. We’re going to make this country successful again, because right now it’s a failing nation. My retribution’s going to be success.
This is lie. Trump has said in the past he would appoint a special prosecutor to target both Biden and his family if he’s reelected.
Non responsive. The question is what he meant by “you have every right to go after your political opponents”
But when he talks about a convicted felon, his son is a convicted felon at a very high level. His son is convicted. Going to be convicted probably numerous other times. He should have been convicted before, but his Justice Department let the statute of limitations lapse on the most important things.
Red Herring. Hunter Biden’s is neither a President or former President.
More what aboutism, especially since the charges Trump faces are far more serious than tax fraud.
This begs the question. Biden didn’t shield his son from prosecution. Trump has used every trick in the book to delay prosecution.
But he could be a convicted felon as soon as he gets out of office. Joe could be a convicted felon with all of the things that he’s done. He’s done horrible things. All of the death caused at the border, telling the Ukrainian people that we’re going to want a billion dollars or you change the prosecutor, otherwise, you’re not getting a billion dollars.
If I ever said that, that’s quid pro quo. That – we’re not going to do anything, we’re not going to give you a billion dollars unless you change your prosecutor having to do with his son.
This man is a criminal. This man – you’re lucky. You’re lucky.
Contradiction. Trump is now claiming Biden should be prosecuted despite saying earlier he would not pursue retribution.
Contradiction. The claim that Biden should be prosecuted for border policy stands in direct contradiction to his claim before the Supreme Court of Presidential immunity (which he won).
Two more lies. The Department of Justice doesn’t prosecute policy decisions. Nor has Congress impeached any president over policy. His reference to Joe Biden’s connection to Burisma is debatable and likely false.
Trump’s incoherent statement about quid pro quo suggests the practice is improper, even though he Congress impeached him over that very question.
I did nothing wrong. We’d have a system that was rigged and disgusting. I did nothing wrong.
Non-responsive. The question isn’t about his guilt, it’s about whether he will retaliate against Biden.
Also, a lie. All the evidence suggests the DOJ held back on prosecuting Trump until the findings of the January 6 committee forced their hands. If anything, the system benefits him, allowing him to delay prosecution. Besides, a jury of his peers convicted him, not the prosecutors and judge.
(Biden responds by pointing out the “crimes that you are still charged with – and think of all the civil penalties you have. How many billions of dollars do you owe in civil penalties for molesting a woman in public, for doing a whole range of things, of having sex with a porn star on the night – and – while your wife was pregnant?…You have the morals of an alley cat.)
Okay, the last bit about sex with a porn star and morals of an alley cat was inappropriate and over the top. He gets a demerit for using a move from Trump’s playbook.
TRUMP: I didn’t have sex with a porn star, number one.
The jury disagreed, even though that wasn’t what the trial was about. And the evidence suggests otherwise. He bragged about the encounter later, and paid for her silence.
Number two, that was a case that was started and moved – they moved a high-ranking official, a DOJ, into the Manhattan D.A.’s office to start that case. That case is going to be appealed in one.
After the fact fallacy. Just because Matthew Colangelo worked for the DOJ before he worked for Alvin Bragg, it doesn’t mean New York and the DOJ colluded.
The link is tenuous. Bragg is an elected official who hired former DOJ official Matthew Colangelo after Biden filled his position with a political appointee.
We had a very terrible judge, a horrible judge, Democrat. The prosecutor were all high-ranking Democrats, appointed people. And the – both the civil and the criminal.
Another brain fart. He just cuts out mid sentence and never finishes his thought.
Another ad hominem. Just because the players were Democrats doesn’t make the case a conspiracy.
Guilt by association. Just because the judges may have been Democrats, it doesn’t mean they colluded. The criminal and three civil trials were unconnected.
A jury convicted Trump. Even the ultra-conservative Wall Street Journal disputes Trump’s claim.
He basically went after his political opponent because he thought it was going to damage me. But when the public found out about these cases – because they understand it better than he does, he has no idea what these cases are. But when he – they – when they found out about these cases, you know what they did? My poll numbers went up way up. You know that because you’re reporting it. And we took in more money in the last two weeks than we’ve ever taken in in the history of any campaign, I don’t think any campaign has ever taken.
Hundreds of millions of dollars came pouring in because the public knows it’s a scam and it’s a guy that’s after his political opponent because he can’t win fair and square.
Non responsive. Just because he gained support doesn’t mean he wasn’t guilty or the victim of a conspiracy.
Totally irrelevant.
This is the bandwagon argument. Just because most people believe something doesn’t make them right.
Round 8b: MAGA Republicans
Question: (To Trump) Do you believe that the tens of millions of Americans who are likely to vote for President Trump will be voting against American democracy?
(BIDEN suggests that if they understand Trump’s actions and still support him, then yes. He then mentions the events at Charlottesville, Virginia.)
TRUMP: Jake, both of you know that story’s been totally wiped out. Because when you see the sentence, it said 100 percent exoneration on there. So he just keeps it going.
This is a highly debatable claim. Trump is sticking to a narrow interpretation of events in which he walked the “very fine people” comment back later. Even the Snopes article which agrees with Trump also admits he tried to blame the left for violence. And this is where the false equivalencies continue despite his denial. Yes Antifa protestors threw eggs, water bottles, and fireworks at police and journalists, but that’s hardly violence on the scale of sporting rifles, and crashing into crowdsof protesters with a car.
He says he ran because of Charlottesville. He didn’t run because of Charlottesville. He ran because it was his last chance at – he’s not equipped to be president. You know it and I know it.
It’s ridiculous. We have a debate. We’re trying to justify his presidency.
His presidency, his – without question, the worst president, the worst presidency in the history of our country. We shouldn’t be having a debate about it. There’s nothing to debate.
He made up the Charlottesville story and you’ll see it’s debunked all over the place. Every anchor has – every reasonable anchor has debunked it.
And just the other day it came out where it was fully debunked. It’s a nonsense story. He knows that.
And he didn’t run because of Charlottesville. He used that as an excuse to run.
The assertion that Biden is lying about his motivation to run is an ad hominem.
The claim the debate shouldn’t be occurring is a version of the argument from incredulity (I can’t believe we’re even discussing this), and also begs the question.
The suggestion that the only purpose of the debate is to justify Biden’s presidency is a red herring and a lie. The purpose of the debate is to determine which of the two candidates is better suited to the presidency, or whether Trump is suited for a second term.
Neither of his claims responds to the question, “are the tens of millions of Americans who are likely to vote for President Trump voting against American democracy?”