There has been a ton of analysis after former President Trump’s stop at a McDonald’s in Pennsylvania.
Which prompted the New York Times’ latest attempt to fact-check whether Vice President Kamala Harris ever worked at McDonald’s — a narrative she’s recently revived as part of her “middle-class” upbringing. The story, which Republicans have openly mocked, first surfaced in 2019 during Harris’s presidential campaign, yet it never appeared in her earlier biographical accounts, including her memoir. This raises the central question: What evidence does the Times offer to back Harris’s claim? Unfortunately, the answer leaves much to be desired.
For real: the greatest fact check of all time pic.twitter.com/A5lkL759zl
— Kyle Smith (@rkylesmith) October 21, 2024
The Times piece asserts that Harris worked at a McDonald’s in the Bay Area over 40 years ago, framing it as a relatable anecdote. Yet, despite the importance of verifying a biographical detail that Harris herself has woven into her campaign narrative, the article falls embarrassingly short of investigative rigor. No tax records, no job references, no former managers, no co-workers — not even a mention of the location where she allegedly flipped fries. Instead, the entire fact-check relies on secondhand assertions from an anonymous friend and the Harris campaign. That’s it.
This is biased even for the @nytimes. McDonald’s has no record of her working there. The Times found no one who worked with her or employed her. It’s the only blue collar job she claims to have had. She does not mention the job in an early resume at the time. She does not mention…
— Marc Thiessen 🇺🇸❤️🇺🇦🇹🇼🇮🇱 (@marcthiessen) October 21, 2024
The Times dismissed former President Donald Trump’s challenge to Harris’s McDonald’s story as “false,” likening it to his earlier, debunked birther claims about Barack Obama. However, the McDonald’s anecdote was suspiciously absent from Harris’s past resumes and political speeches until 2019 — which raises the legitimate question of whether this is just another conveniently fabricated narrative. Rather than investigate these inconsistencies, the Times chose to frame the question as a baseless political attack.
Folks, this was the Times trying to cover for Kamala but in the end they actually made the whole thing worse.
The fact check acknowledges that the only source Kamala has is “a friend.”
It’s no wonder the left is losing their mind over this.
