Fact-Checking Lindsey Graham at the Richland County GOP
- CUBNSC
- Aug 19
- 6 min read
By Javar Juarez | Columbia Urban Broadcast Network
Columbia, SC — At a Richland County GOP gathering hosted inside the law offices of Willoughby, Humphrey & D’Antoni, P.A., Senator Lindsey Graham delivered a steady, crowd-pleasing performance. His remarks ranged from immigration and Medicaid to Israel and Russia. At times he leaned on his friendship with Donald Trump, at others on his faith. The senator was challenged directly by libertarian hopeful Jason Brenkus, but Graham’s rebuttal underscored both his dominance in the room and the loose grip his challenger had on the crowd.
The Border Isn’t “Secure”—and ICE Isn’t Always Careful
Graham hailed the partisan “Big Beautiful Bill”, claiming it delivered $175 billion for border security, ICE expansion, and detention capacity—framed as critical to preventing tragedies like the death of nursing student Laken Riley at the hands of a repeat-entry offender.
Reality check: Border crossings have dipped—from about 85,000 apprehensions in early 2025, to just over 6,100 in June, a 92.7% year-over-year drop. But absolutely zero crossings? Not even close. Monthly figures still include thousands of interactions, even into the summer of 2025.
Moreover, both the Obama and Biden administrations deported more people than Trump—Biden logged 271,000 removals in 2024 alone, outpacing Trump’s worst year, and Obama averaged far higher annual numbers. Graham’s invocation of Laken Riley’s death also omitted a key fact: ICE already had legal authority to issue detainers upon arrest.
Advocates say this was an operational failure, not purely a beds-on-the-floor problem. ICE enforcement continues to cause dismay. In Los Angeles, agents mistakenly detained U.S. citizens—schools now institute “safe zones.” In Chicago, raids drew protests and chaos.
Bottom line: Border security remains a work in progress—not “secure.” ICE already has broad removal authority—but enforcement is often careless, not coordinated. Infrastructure without oversight isn’t the fix; accountability is.
Medicaid, Rural Hospitals, and Work Requirements
Graham argued that President Obama wrongly put “able-bodied people” on Medicaid, defended GOP work requirements, and claimed $800 billion in projected savings. He dismissed warnings of rural hospital closures, citing a $50 million support fund.
Fact check: The weight of peer-reviewed research runs in the opposite direction. Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act has been shown to stabilize rural hospitals by reducing uncompensated care. Non-expansion states like South Carolina have suffered more closures like the old Fairfield Memorial Hospital in Winnsboro. Graham’s claim that restricting access protects rural care does not match the evidence.
Lindsey Graham on Putin, India, and Tariffs
Graham floated one of his boldest foreign-policy claims: that Trump rattled Vladimir Putin by “putting tariffs on India,” one of Russia’s biggest oil customers, while selling weapons to Ukraine.
Fact check: The administration did expand tariffs on Indian goods in 2025, but there is no evidence those moves forced Putin toward compromise. India’s purchases of Russian crude remained high—more than 1.7 million barrels per day in 2025. Analysts point to U.S.-EU sanctions and price caps, not India-focused tariffs, as the real tools squeezing Russia’s energy revenues.
Israel, Gaza, and Faith-Based Appeals
Graham thundered that Hamas alone bears responsibility for the war in Gaza. He called Israel’s enemies “religious Nazis,” compared the conflict to Pearl Harbor, and framed his support in religious terms: “God blesses those who bless Israel.”
Fact check: Hamas’s October 7 attack initiated the current round of violence, but Graham’s framing omits the humanitarian toll of Israel’s military response. United Nations agencies estimate more than 62,000 Palestinian deaths since 2024, with thousands of children among them. U.S. weapons transfers have drawn scrutiny under American and international law. Graham’s invocation of faith avoids grappling with the scale of civilian suffering.
The Brenkus Exchange
Libertarian candidate Jason Brenkus tried to puncture Graham’s inevitability with a tortured metaphor: if Graham bragged that a 5% turnout boost would secure his win, Brenkus vowed he would send 5% the other way to take it back. The line fell flat, muddied by anxious delivery. Graham cut him down with a simple retort: “You’re going to lose.”
The exchange mattered less for its content than its contrast. Brenkus appeared flustered, trying to couch policy in scripture about loving enemies. Graham appeared practiced, doubling down on his belief that America must “fight them over there” and that Israel is an indispensable ally. The moment revealed fissures within the right about endless wars—but also how little appetite Republican voters have for libertarian restraint.
Debt, Deficits, and the “Bankruptcy” Frame
Graham warned that the U.S.—now burdened with a $37 trillion debt—is headed for bankruptcy unless entitlement reform is enacted. He painted an urgent picture of a country teetering on the brink.
Clarification (as the author): This debt is serious—but “bankruptcy” is a political metaphor, not a fiscal diagnosis. The U.S. issues debt in its own currency, benefits from global reserve-currency status, and still attracts investors. Insolvency is not on the table. The danger lies instead in rising interest costs, political gridlock, and deficit-driven policy choices.
How Did We Get Here?
In the first six months of Trump’s second term, deficit-heavy legislation—including the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBBA)—has accelerated the national debt far faster than projected.
CBO projections: The OBBBA will add nearly $3.4 trillion to deficits over the next decade, not including the additional $551 billion in interest costs tied directly to the bill between 2025 and 2034.
Debt milestones: The national debt surged past $37 trillion years earlier than expected, a threshold once forecast for the 2030s.
Debt-to-GDP: CBO now projects federal debt could climb to 124% of GDP by the mid-2030s—or nearly 129% if Trumps temporary tax cuts are made permanent.
Fiscal dominance risk: With interest payments ballooning, Trump has openly pressed for Federal Reserve rate cuts to ease the government’s borrowing costs. Economists warn this pressure erodes Fed independence, shifting monetary policy to accommodate fiscal needs.
Credit ratings: S&P reaffirmed the U.S. credit rating at “AA+,” citing tariff revenues as a short-term offset (roughly $21–50 billion in recent months). Yet Moody’s has issued sharper warnings about long-term sustainability.
The numbers do not support Graham’s metaphor of bankruptcy, but they do reveal a sobering reality: the debt is growing faster than expected, and the cost of servicing it is accelerating. The danger is not a sudden collapse, but a steady erosion of fiscal space and institutional credibility.
Graham’s warning about “bankruptcy” is misplaced. The real story is that recent partisan bills and continued tax cuts have supercharged the debt. America is not bankrupt, but it is more vulnerable—and that distinction matters.
Voting Rights and Voter ID
Graham added to his list of priorities a familiar Republican demand: “You’ve got to show up and prove who you are to vote.” He cast this as a common-sense safeguard against fraud.
Fact check: South Carolina already requires government-issued photo identification at the polls. Voters must present a driver’s license, DMV-issued ID, passport, military ID, or voter registration card with a photo. Those without ID can cast a provisional ballot if they sign an affidavit explaining a “reasonable impediment.” The South Carolina Election Commission reports that cases of voter fraud are vanishingly rare—between 2000 and 2019, the state referred just a handful of cases for investigation out of millions of ballots cast.
Nationally, multiple studies—including a 2014 Washington Post review of over 1 billion ballots—found voter impersonation fraud rates between 0.0003% and 0.0025%. By contrast, voter ID laws disproportionately burden rural, elderly, low-income, and Black voters who may lack transportation or resources to secure proper identification.
Graham’s rhetoric therefore amplifies a problem that does not exist at scale, while potentially justifying laws that make it harder for marginalized communities to exercise their constitutional right to vote.
Final Take
Lindsey Graham delivered exactly what his audience came for: patriotic confidence, moral certainty, and unflinching loyalty to Donald Trump. He carried himself with the authority of a senior statesman, brushing aside hecklers and challengers with practiced ease.
But the record doesn’t match the rhetoric. The current border situation is not “the most secure in history.” Medicaid expansion has preserved rural hospitals, not shuttered them. Tariffs on India never cornered Putin. Israel is indeed a vital ally, but slogans cannot obscure the tens of thousands of civilians killed in Gaza. And while America’s debt is a serious challenge, the nation is not bankrupt.
Perhaps most telling, Graham claimed the bill would give South Carolinians an additional $2,800. Yet neither the bill text nor independent CBO analysis supports that number. It appears more like a partisan talking point than a concrete benefit. H.R.1 provides no state-specific guarantee of dollars for South Carolina families.
In the end, Graham’s rhetoric is polished, but his claims are not always grounded in fact. For South Carolina voters, the real question is whether performance and loyalty are enough—or whether truth and substance still matter.
Comments