We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

By The New York Post Editorial Board

Sen. JD Vance was accurately describing the migrant crisis fueled by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden when CBS moderator Margaret Brennan decided to insert herself with a “fact check.”

“Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status,” she said smugly.

Vance was rightly annoyed by the interruption and said, “The rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact-check, and since you’re fact-checking me, I think it’s important to say what’s actually going on.”

He then proceeded to truthfully, forcefully explain what “legal status” means:

“So there’s an application called the CBP One app, where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole, and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand.”

At which point CBS decided to CUT OFF HIS MIC.

This was the most shameful moment in a long history of shameful moments by moderators biased against Republicans. They “fact-checked” the truth, then stopped the politician from responding.

It was made all the more partisan by the fact that when Gov. Tim Walz told the howler that “illegal border crossings are down compared to when Donald Trump left office,” which is not even close to true, no one let out of a peep. Some “facts” are too good to check.

Not to be left out, the New York Times posted that Vance’s comments “needed context.”

“There is no way for migrants abroad to apply for asylum through an app,” the Times claimed. “The Biden administration, however, established an app that allows more than 1,000 migrants a day to schedule appointments at a port of entry where they can be granted parole into the country through the CBP One app. The migrants can then apply for asylum once they are in the United States in immigration proceedings.”

Ah. So if someone made an appointment through the app, showed up at the border or an airport, they are going to apply for asylum, right? Is there any chance they would be rejected and sent home? No? Then yes, they are applying for asylum through an app.

The Times is relying on such an idiotic parsing of phrase that there’s only one word to describe it: a lie.

Full op-ed over at The New York Post: