Fact check: Partly true

Harris claimed Trump would be “immune from any misconduct” and have “no guard rails” after a landmark Supreme Court decision in June. The court did rule the core powers, which include the ability to make treaties, veto bills, nominate cabinet members, appoint ambassadors, act as Commander-in-Chief of the military, and grant pardons.) The court also said that presidents enjoy “at least presumptive immunity” for other “official acts” – defined broadly as actions within the “outer perimeter” of official responsibilities but not “manifestly or palpably beyond his authority.”

While the decision is widely construed as granting broad protection for a president, the court said presidents are “not above the law” and enjoy no “absolute” immunity, leaving room for a narrow set of cases where a current or former president could face criminal prosecution. There is also no immunity for “unofficial” acts, the court said.

Trump faces a pair of active federal criminal cases against him brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. The Supreme Court decision does not mean those prosecutions cannot move forward, but it has significantly delayed proceedings and made it more difficult to convict Trump. If he were to win a second term, Trump’s Justice Department could dismiss the Special Counsel and effectively end the cases against him.

Trump defended his administration's role in negotiating with the Taliban in the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and instead slammed the Biden administration for their handling of the final days of the war.

"We did have an agreement negotiated by Mike Pompeo, it was a very good agreement. The reason it was good, it was -- we were getting out. We would have been out faster than that, but we wouldn't have lost the soldiers, we wouldn't have left many Americans behind," he said.

ABC News' David Muir asked the vice president if she felt she bore any responsibility in the way the withdrawal in Afghanistan played out. Thirteen U.S. service members were killed in a suicide bombing at the Kabul international airport.

Harris started her response by defending the administration's decision to end America's longest war.

She then turned to criticizing Trump for the way he negotiated a peace plan with the Taliban that included a date of May 1, 2021, for the final withdrawal of troops -- which President Joe Biden then continued to carry out with a September deadline.

Fact Check: Needs context

The top government watchdog on the Afghanistan war blames Trump’s 2020 deal with the Taliban as “the single most important factor” in the rapid collapse of Afghanistan’s forces a year later. But the same office also says Biden’s decision to stick with a firm withdrawal date of U.S. troops was a factor as well.

Trump’s deal with the Taliban called for the withdrawal of U.S. forces by May 2021 and release 5,000 of its fighters from Afghan prisons so long as they agreed not to attack U.S. forces. According to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, the agreement was seen by Afghan forces as a “signal that the U.S. was handing over Afghanistan to the enemy as it rushed to exit the country.” Trump also had reduced U.S. troop levels to the lowest point in the 20-year war, and Afghan forces weren’t prepared to take over, according to the inspector general.

Biden aides say the poor security situation when he took office in January 2021 put the newly elected president in an almost impossible position. Biden could have surged U.S. troops to the country to try to bolster the weakened Afghan government. But doing so would have extended what was already the nation’s longest war and put American forces at risk of renewed attacks by the Taliban. According to the inspector general, Biden’s announcement that he would stick with a 2021 withdrawal date contributed to the poor morale among Afghan troops, paving the way for a government collapse and subsequent Taliban takeover.