عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Takeaways from the Harris-Trump Presidential Debate 

Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)
Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)
TT
TT

Takeaways from the Harris-Trump Presidential Debate 

Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)
Republican presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump reacts in the spin room, on the day of his debate with Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, September 10, 2024. (Reuters)

Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump met on Tuesday for their first and perhaps only debate, a square-off that could have a significant impact on the Nov. 5 election as polls show a tight race.

Here are takeaways from the debate:

RILING HER RIVAL

Harris made a point to get under Trump's skin, as her campaign had forecast.

She urged viewers to attend a Trump rally, where she said Trump would say bizarre things such as windmills cause cancer (something he has, in fact, said) and where, she taunted, attendees would leave out of exhaustion and boredom.

Trump, who prides himself on the crowds he draws, was clearly riled.

"My rallies, we have the biggest rallies, the most incredible rallies in the history of politics," he said. He accused Harris of busing in attendees to her rallies.

Trump then falsely claimed that immigrants in the country illegally were killing and eating people's pets in the city of Springfield, Ohio, an unsubstantiated claim that has circulated on social media and been amplified by Trump's vice presidential running mate JD Vance.

"In Springfield, they're eating the dogs! The people that came in, they're eating the cats!" Trump said. "They're eating the pets of the people that live there."

City officials in Springfield have said those reports are untrue, which the ABC moderators pointed out after Trump’s comments.

"Talk about extreme," Harris responded, laughing.

PLAYING DEFENSE

Another of Harris’ goals, as a former California prosecutor, was to call Trump out for his past actions, particularly his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

An hour into the debate, her strategy appeared to be paying off. Trump was continually on the defensive.

Asked about the Jan. 6, 2021, siege of the US Capitol, he insisted he "had nothing to do with that, other than they asked me to make a speech." He also maintained, falsely, that he had won the 2020 election.

Harris used Trump’s actions as an argument for the country to turn the page.

"Donald Trump was fired by 81 million people, so let's be clear about that, and clearly he is having a very difficult time processing that, but we cannot afford to have a president of the United States who attempts as he did in the past to upend the will of the voters in a free and fair election," Harris said.

The vice president dug at Trump a little more, saying world leaders were "laughing" at him and calling him a disgrace – language that Trump has employed himself at rallies in reference to how he says other countries view President Joe Biden.

A few minutes later, Trump erupted, claiming Harris had received "no votes" in claiming the Democratic nomination and suggesting she replaced Biden as part of some sort of coup.

"He hates her," Trump said of Biden. "He can’t stand her."

The exchanges may have aided Harris' argument that Trump, as she put it, lacks the "temperament" to be president.

RACIAL DIVIDE

Deep into the debate, the long-simmering topic of race came up. Trump was asked why he had publicly questioned Harris’ dual heritage as a Black and South Asian woman.

"I don’t care what she is," he responded. "I read that she was Black. Then I read that she was not Black."

Asked to respond, Harris accused Trump of using race to divide Americans throughout his career. She cited how he and his father turned away Black renters in the 1970s and how Trump led the public outcry against five young Black and Latino men who were wrongly convicted of assaulting a jogger in New York City's Central Park in 1989.

More recently, he openly questioned whether President Barack Obama was a US citizen, Harris noted.

"I think it's a tragedy that we have someone who wants to be president who has, consistently, over the course of his career, attempted to use race to divide the American people," she said.

"I think the American people want better than that," Harris added. "We don't want a leader who is constantly trying to have Americans point their fingers at each other."

Instead of trying to defend his record, Trump pivoted back to the economy and tried to pin Biden’s economic policies on Harris. "She’s trying to get away from Biden," he said.

Harris used the attack to pitch herself again as a change agent.

"Clearly, I am not Joe Biden, and certainly not Donald Trump," Harris said, "and what I do offer is a new generation of leadership for our country."

HANDSHAKE

Heading into the debate, there was a question as to how Harris and Trump, who have never met, would greet each other.

Harris settled the issue, definitively. She walked over to Trump at his podium, extended her hand and introduced herself as "Kamala Harris."

It was a disarming way for Harris to approach a man who has spent weeks insulting her race and gender.

SPARRING ON THE ECONOMY

In the debate’s opening minutes, Trump and Harris went to battle on one of the issues that is top of mind for voters: the economy.

Harris detailed the economic policies she has rolled out in recent weeks, which include a substantial tax credit for small start-ups.

Trump focused his comments on tariffs, saying he would protect the American economy from unfair foreign competition.

While both sides got their jabs in, Harris got to speak first on a topic where she trails Trump in terms of voter trust.

She appeared to force the former president onto his back foot, and Trump essentially played defense on one of his strongest issues.

"She doesn't have a plan" Trump said, after Harris' opening comments. "It's like Run, Spot, Run."

A SCHISM ON ABORTION

The two candidates also engaged in a fractious debate about abortion, an issue where polls show Harris has the upper hand.

Trump defended the US Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that ended constitutional protection for abortion and sent the issue back to individual states, arguing, incorrectly, that it was an outcome desired by both Republicans and Democrats. Democrats have long supported a constitutional right to abortion.

"I did a great service in doing it. It took courage to do it," Trump said.

Trump contended that some states allow babies to be aborted after birth, a point corrected by ABC News moderator, Linsey Davis.

Harris flashed some outrage at Trump’s assertion that abortion becoming a states-rights issue was a popular result, referring to states that have passed restrictive bans.

"This is what people wanted?" Harris asked. "People being denied care in an emergency room because healthcare providers are being afraid of being hauled off to jail?"

Trump was asked whether he would veto a federal abortion ban if one were passed by Congress. He insisted it would never happen, but refused to answer the question definitively.

WORLDS APART

One of the most heated policy discussions came when Trump and Harris clashed over how they would handle Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

The candidates' responses revealed the degree to which their views on America's role in the world fundamentally differ.

Trump refused to say he wanted Ukraine to win the war, even as ABC moderator David Muir pushed him on the point, saying only that he wanted to wrap up the conflict as soon as possible.

Harris shot back, arguing that what Trump really wanted was Ukraine's quick and unconditional capitulation.

"If Donald Trump were president, (Russian President Vladimir) Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now," Harris said.

'WEAPONIZED' JUSTICE

In one heated exchange, Trump and Harris accused each other of conspiring to "weaponize" the Justice Department in a bid to go after their enemies.

Trump said the indictments he faces for conspiring to overturn his 2020 election loss and for his mishandling of classified documents - as well as his conviction for forging documents related to hush money payments to a porn star - are all the result of a conspiracy cooked up by Harris and Biden.

There is no evidence for that assertion. Harris shot back by pointing out that Trump has promised to prosecute his enemies if he wins a second term.

"Understand this is someone who has openly said he would terminate, I'm quoting, terminate the Constitution," Harris said.

The exchange underlined how Harris and Trump see the stakes of this election as existential. Both see their opponent as a threat to democracy itself.

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

Bin Laden Met Saddam’s Envoy, Linking 9/11 to Iraq Invasion

Saddam Hussein convenes with members of his regime in Iraq. (Getty Images)
Saddam Hussein convenes with members of his regime in Iraq. (Getty Images)
TT
TT

Bin Laden Met Saddam’s Envoy, Linking 9/11 to Iraq Invasion

Saddam Hussein convenes with members of his regime in Iraq. (Getty Images)
Saddam Hussein convenes with members of his regime in Iraq. (Getty Images)

What’s the most dangerous mission someone could take on? A meeting between Saddam Hussein’s envoy and Osama bin Laden in Sudan. US intelligence under President George W. Bush soon found out about it.

This meeting became a key justification used by Washington to invade Iraq, taking advantage of the post-9/11 atmosphere in the US after al-Qaeda, led by bin Laden, attacked New York and Washington on September 11, 2001.

In truth, there was no reason for bin Laden to influence Saddam Hussein’s future. The two men came from very different worlds. Saddam was the president of a major country in the region, not a faction leader.

He belonged to a secular party, choosing a Christian, Tariq Aziz, as foreign minister—a rare decision in the Middle East. Saddam also wasn’t known for playing along in decisions where he wasn’t in control.

But the decision to meet in Khartoum still cost Saddam, even though the meeting was a failure. A former Iraqi intelligence officer said US forces later seized a document showing that the Iraqi envoy advised against working with bin Laden, advice that was followed.

The 1990s in Sudan were extremely risky. During this time, President Omar al-Bashir’s regime made three major blunders: hosting al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, sheltering international fugitive Carlos the Jackal, and involving Ali Osman Taha, the regime’s second-in-command, in an assassination attempt on Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak in Addis Ababa.

A rare photo shows Omar al-Bashir and Osama bin Laden in Sudan.

Bin Laden didn’t dwell much on the events in Khartoum in August 1994, when French commandos arrested Carlos and took him to France, where he still sits in prison.

Moreover, the al-Qaeda leader couldn’t foresee Sudan’s regime forcing him out of the country.

The regime, however, had no option but to reduce the risks. Bashir dismissed top security officials and decided to expel the “Arab Afghans.”

One day, Bashir and his deputy informed Hassan al-Turabi that bin Laden’s departure had been arranged. They then visited bin Laden, and a military plane flew him to Afghanistan.

The Taliban then gave bin Laden a safe haven, though Mullah Omar never imagined this would lead to his regime's downfall. In the late 1990s, questions about bin Laden were common when speaking with Sudanese officials.

In an interview, Bashir said that bin Laden came to Sudan after the Afghan war to invest in roads, airports, and agriculture—industries his family had been involved in for a long time.

According to Bashir’s statements, bin Laden didn’t have followers or networks in Sudan, just a small group of close aides who stayed out of the public eye.

But the US had made him a global threat, seeing him everywhere, even after he left Sudan, despite knowing he lived in isolation in a distant country.

While Bashir downplayed it, he had met bin Laden several times during his stay in Khartoum, and it's unlikely he was unaware of the ties between bin Laden and Sudanese security officials.

Sudanese politician Hassan al-Turabi reaffirmed Bashir’s claims of bin Laden having been building roads and airports.

“He wasn’t involved in public or intellectual circles and stayed out of the media. We talked about Afghanistan, and I shared our concerns that after the Soviets left, the fighters would be skilled in destruction but not in building a stable society, much like the French Revolution,” said al-Turabi at the time.

“I told him (bin Laden) Kabul fell before they were ready to establish a Muslim society as they envisioned,” added al-Turabi.

When asked who pushed for Osama bin Laden’s exit from Sudan, he said: “It was the British, acting on behalf of the Americans.”

“Saudi Arabia didn’t apply direct pressure—they’re always polite. Bin Laden felt his presence was straining relations between Sudan and Saudi Arabia, which have very close ties. With about half a million Sudanese working in Saudi Arabia, none were expelled. Bin Laden didn’t want to harm that relationship,” he explained.

Bin Laden returned to Afghanistan, entering a dangerous new phase. Soon after, the Taliban took over and welcomed him. Within two years, bombings at US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania led Washington to blame bin Laden.

Osama bin Laden’s home in Sudan. (Asharq Al-Awsat file)

The accusation was repeated after the attack on the USS Cole in Aden. Bin Laden made statements suggesting he was at war with the US, but no one expected him to bring the fight to American soil on September 11, 2001.

When President Bush justified the Iraq invasion, he listed allegations against Saddam, including weapons of mass destruction, repression, and mass graves.

The most controversial claim was that Saddam’s regime was cooperating with al-Qaeda. However, the US administration did not provide evidence for this claim, and no concrete proof of a connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda was presented.

Curiosity about the contact between Saddam and bin Laden had journalists setting out to find more information.

While answers couldn’t be obtained from Saddam’s opponents or his former colleagues, insights from Iraqi intelligence were available.

Salim al-Jumaili, head of the American Affairs Division in Iraqi intelligence, who was involved in the initial outreach to bin Laden, agreed to talk.

Before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, Iraq and Saudi Arabia had a good relationship, marked by a security agreement that limited interference and intelligence activities.

Saddam praised Saudi Arabia and King Fahd for their support during the Iran-Iraq War. According to a former Iraqi official, King Fahd tried hard to resolve the situation and return to negotiations after the invasion, but Saddam had gone too far.

The invasion led to the collapse of the security agreement. As news spread about Iraqi opposition groups contacting Saudi Arabia, Iraqi intelligence suggested canceling the agreement, but Saddam refused.

When reports about these contacts continued, Saddam demanded monthly updates.

Eventually, he believed Saudi Arabia was backing efforts to overthrow him and ordered intelligence to “act strongly to undermine the American military presence in Saudi Arabia.”

“When the president issues such an order, all security agencies must try to fulfill it. At that time, I managed the Syria division and had connections with the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, specifically Adnan Okla’s group,” said al-Jumaili.

“Adnan’s brother, Abdul Malik, told us that the Brotherhood had links with bin Laden and could deliver our message. I met Abdul Malik in Baghdad, and he agreed to help. I gave him a message saying we shared a goal of removing US forces from the region and were open to cooperation. We provided about $10,000 for travel expenses,” he revealed.

“The contact returned after a month or so and reported that bin Laden’s stance was very rigid. Bin Laden said the Iraqi regime was infidel and responsible for the presence of US forces in the region, and he was not interested in meeting or cooperating with us. This was in the early 1990s, before al-Qaeda’s actions escalated to the level of September 11.”

“I also heard from Farouk Hijazi, head of external operations, that bin Laden gave a similar response through another channel,” added al-Jumaili.

Al-Jumaili later discovered that Farouk Hijazi had visited Khartoum and met with bin Laden, arranged by al-Turabi.

“Hijazi informed the president that no cooperation with al-Qaeda took place. This is what Bush referred to when he mentioned the president sending an envoy to bin Laden. Bush likely knew there was no real cooperation but didn't mention it to justify the invasion,” al-Jumaili said.

Hassan al-Turabi. (AFP)

Another source, who requested anonymity, said bin Laden showed some flexibility regarding the Iraqi regime during his meeting with Hijazi.

Bin Laden “requested that if there were to be any cooperation, his camps be set up outside Iraqi control and that he have freedom in choosing targets and timing.”

Saddam, after learning of this, was told by Hijazi that cooperating with bin Laden would be complex and risky. Saddam then decided to end the matter entirely.

The consequences of that risky meeting are clear.

Saddam was executed, and Hijazi, who had fled to Syria, was captured at the Syrian-Iraqi border and also executed. Years later, US forces tracked down and killed bin Laden in Pakistan.

Cities sometimes take dangerous risks beyond their means and end up facing harsh realities.

Khartoum paid the price for harboring wanted figures and was punished before it could address the damage.

Some believe that under Bashir, Khartoum aimed to become a center of anti-Western activity, while al-Turabi wanted it to be a hub for political Islam, like Khomeini’s Iran. Both men pushed Sudan beyond its limits.