Posted on 09/15/2024 12:37:03 PM PDT by Red Badger
Documents are being reported by prominent đť•Ź users as being the rumored ABC News whistleblower affidavit. If they are real and if the information in them is accurate, then this is a legitimate bombshell that will be widely ignored by all of corporate media.
The skeptic in me wants to wait to hear from “official” sources, including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson who is allegedly in contact with the whistleblower. But everything about the document seems to jibe with not only what has been rumored but also what we saw during the ABC News presidential debate last week.
Here are the first six pages of the document (TL:DR highlights below):
Here are some of the key points according to the whistleblower’s affidavit:
* ABC News was coordinating with Kamala Harris’ campaign far more than with Donald Trump’s campaign.
* They agreed to not ask questions on certain subjects that would have been detrimental to Harris. The same considerations were not offered to Trump, nor did his campaign ask for them.
* “Sample” questions were provided to the Harris campaign and not to Trump’s.
* Fact-checks on Donald Trump were required by the Harris campaign.
* Harris was not to face comparable fact-checks.
* Split-screen views were required to favor Harris.
* It is noteworthy that the affidavit was signed, notarized, and mailed out BEFORE the debate.
The fact that everything the whistleblower detailed appears to have happened makes this exceedingly damning.
Can this turn into something big? Can this be used against the Harris campaign, ABC News, or both? It’s hard to tell. In a sane world this would be the bombshell that annihilates ABC News’ credibility and shreds the prospects for Team Kamala. Since we don’t live in a sane world there’s no telling whether this will be memory-holed, debunked, subjected to massive gaslighting, or a combination thereof.
We’ll see. All we know for sure is that if this is real and accurate, it needs to be shared far and wide.
If it is true will the FCC do anything about it?
The question is will the DOJ?....
The whistleblower is the only commenter that I have seen before or after the debate, who has noted that there were no questions about Joe Biden’s health. Until proven otherwise , this alone would show by prior ABC-Harris agreement as the whistleblower alone has exposed it. Fact: Joe Biden’s incapacity is the sole reason why she is the nominee. Finally, the dog has barked. The first and most important question to Harris should have been , “What did you know and when did you know it?” She needs to answer this again and again throughout the remainder of the campaign. It’s enough for Trump to do the second debate for him to make sure it is well publicized and that she gets pressed very hard on it.
The real bombshell: “They agreed to not ask questions on certain subjects that would have been detrimental to Harris. The same considerations were not offered to Trump, nor did his campaign ask for them.”
What, Harris asked for them? She asked that her questions not be on certain subjects.
Why is this in bloggers and personal instead of on the side bar under breaking?
TPTB are assuming w/o don’t know Jack Scheisse. He’s out next of Ken. Jus the ol boy with the still down yonder. 700+ mm private weapons and know how ain’t no thing for country boys.
Y’all come back now, ya hear?
I can’t arrest to the veracity of this, but the wife told me the whistle blower was killed in an automobile accident in Bethesda, MD. Where she got the info I don’t know.
Very easy to fix. ABC should release all of the emails sent to the Harris campaign.
All of the questions to Trump were about the past. All of the questions to Harris were about the future. Her closing speech confirmed rhymed with the rest of the debate on a level that is not possible on the fly.
So we really, really have a true republic anymore.
This isn’t 1800 where people got news from others mostly and a few newspapers.
People get their news from media. If media is faking the news then how free really are we???
p
I think that story was from a satire site.
The whistleblower has secret recordings to prove the claims.
I hope they have been distributed far and wide for safe keeping of many copies.
Hmm.
Please see the first paragraph of page three.
It supports my contention that accommodations could have been made for President Trump so the mic was closer to his face and he didn’t have to hunch over to speak into it. It was not good optics and now that I read this, I’m sure it was deliberate.
“This story appears to be false and I’m glad to hear it.”
This was MTG’s reply after posting this rumor on X.
OK.
RE: The affidavit is dated BEFORE the debate.
Isn’t it because the ABC-Kamala campaign collusion occurred BEFORE the debate? If so, it shouldn’t be surprising.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.