Posted on 09/16/2024 7:16:14 AM PDT by bitt
In recent days, calls for an investigation into ABC’s moderation of last week’s presidential debate have reached a fever pitch, with many questioning the glaring bias displayed during the event.
The moderators repeatedly fact-checked Donald Trump while allowing Kamala Harris to peddle unchecked lies and propaganda.
Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS) revealed on Friday that a Senate investigation into ABC News and Kamala Harris’s campaign is underway. Marshall suspects collusion between ABC and the Harris team, citing Kamala’s unusually prepared responses as evidence that she knew the questions ahead of time.
Former Clinton advisor Mark Penn also joined the fray, calling for a third-party investigation into the internal communications at ABC News.
“There should be an independent review of all internal texts and emails to find out whether there was a plan to fact-check one candidate, effectively rigging the debate,” Penn stated during an appearance on the John Solomon Reports podcast.
It has also been revealed that Kamala Harris shares a close connection with ABC’s lead moderator, Linsey Davis. Both are members of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., and with Harris’s rise as the Democratic nominee, AKA recently formed a PAC in support.
None of these connections were disclosed to the public ahead of the debate, raising serious questions about conflicts of interest.
According to a post-debate interview, Linsey Davis admitted she worked with co-moderator David Muir only to fact-check Trump throughout the event.
On September 12, 2024, the Twitter-X account “Black Insurrectionist” dropped a bombshell tweet claiming to have access to a signed affidavit from an ABC whistleblower. The tweet reads:
“I will be releasing an affidavit from an ABC whistleblower regarding the debate. I have just signed a non-disclosure agreement with the attorney of the whistleblower. The affidavit states how the Harris campaign was given sample question which were essentially the same questions that were given during the debate and separate assurances of fact checking Donald Trump and that she would NOT be fact checked. Accordingly, the affidavit states several other factors that were built into the debate to give Kamala a significant advantage. I have seen and read the affidavit and after the attorney blacks out the name of the whistleblower and other information that could dox the whistleblower, I will release the full affidavit. I will be releasing the affidavit before the weekend is out.”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/screenshot-2024-09-16-at-12.42.32am.jpg
By Sunday, the alleged affidavit was released, and it didn’t hold back. In part, the affidavit stated:
“Observations Pertaining to Debate Fairness: I have noted specific instances related to the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris that raise concerns about procedural fairness: The specific instances of perceived bias are as follows:
The Harris campaign received particular accommodations, including, but not limited to, the providing of a podium significantly smaller than that used by Donald Trump, and assurances regarding split-screen television views that would favorably impact Kamala Harris’s appearance relative to Donald Trump.
It was agreed that Donald Trump would be subjected to factchecking during the debate, while Kamala Harris would not face comparable scrutiny. This was widely known throughout the company that Donald Trump would be fact checked. In fact, various people were assigned to fact check observations it was perceived candidate Trump would make during the debate. In fact, Harris campaign required assurances that Donald Trump would be fact checked. This was done via multiple communications with the Harris campaign whereas the Trump campaign was not included in the negotiations. To my understanding, any rules negotiations and conversations pertaining to the debate should have had both the Trump and Harris campaign involved, the Harris campaign had numerous more calls regarding the debate rules without the Trump campaign aware or on the call.
The Harris campaign was provided with sample questions that, while not the exact questions, covered similar topics that would appear during the debate. […]
..MORE
(MOST INTERESTING...)
““Observations Pertaining to Debate Fairness: I have noted specific instances related to the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris that raise concerns about procedural fairness: The specific instances of perceived bias are as follows:
The Harris campaign received particular accommodations, including, but not limited to, the providing of a podium significantly smaller than that used by Donald Trump, and assurances regarding split-screen television views that would favorably impact Kamala Harris’s appearance relative to Donald Trump.
It was agreed that Donald Trump would be subjected to factchecking during the debate, while Kamala Harris would not face comparable scrutiny. This was widely known throughout the company that Donald Trump would be fact checked. In fact, various people were assigned to fact check observations it was perceived candidate Trump would make during the debate. In fact, Harris campaign required assurances that Donald Trump would be fact checked. This was done via multiple communications with the Harris campaign whereas the Trump campaign was not included in the negotiations. To my understanding, any rules negotiations and conversations pertaining to the debate should have had both the Trump and Harris campaign involved, the Harris campaign had numerous more calls regarding the debate rules without the Trump campaign aware or on the call.
The Harris campaign was provided with sample questions that, while not the exact questions, covered similar topics that would appear during the debate.”
Thought we knew 90% of all this ahead of time or figured it out when it was happening.
Why go to all the trouble with a new podium when all she needed to do was get a step.
It has also been revealed that:
<><>Kamala shares a close connection with ABC journo and debate moderator, Linsey Davis.
<><>they are sorority sisters
<><>Both are members of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.,
<><>AKA Sorority recently formed a PAC to raise money for Harris.
None of these ABC/Harris connections were disclosed to the public
ahead of the debate, raising serious questions about conflicts of interest.
Tom Fitton (Judicial Watch) would be better person to put in touch with. He’s a great lawyer. Gateway Pundit is only a blogger.
p
JUDICIAL WATCH
425 Third Street, SW, Suite 800
Washington, D.C.
Phone: 1 202 646 5172
Email: info@judicialwatch.org
Web site: www.judicialwatch.org
This does not instill faith that any of this is real. Don't get me wrong, I know she got the questions in advance. We all do. We know it was 3 against 1 on that debate stage. When an outlet other than the Baitway Pundit gets on board, I might change my mind.
Be careful what you push out there, FReepers! Some of it truly is #FakeNews, even on our side, and it makes us look like idiots.
ABC has more to hide than tell not surprised.
None of these ABC/Harris connections were disclosed to the public
ahead of the debate, raising serious questions about conflicts of interest.
The sole reason why Harris is the nominee is Joe Biden’s incapacity. It should have been the first question asked of her, “What did you know, when did you know it ?” The whistleblower put his finger right on it, before the debate. Meantime, either before or after the debate, I have not seen a discussion of the lack of curiosity on this uppermost topic from anyone in the Trump community, let alone outside it. You being so dismissive, no doubt had discussed this elsewhere, show us. The dog finally barked and his name is ABC Whistleblower.
So he wasn’t Seth Rich’d in a car crash?
Unping me.
You write too much in your headline of ping messages.
Still looking for your discussion of why the most pertinent of all questions was left out, other than that indicated by the whistleblower. I thought the usual method of whistleblowers was to maintain anonymity to avoid retaliation.
I welcome proof of the claim. I hope the whistle-blower comes forth with some.
“X” marks the spot.
I wonder why the ABC bimbo didn't ask Harris and Trump about women who get a big leg up in their careers by 'sleeping with the married boss/powerful man' who 'helps'? Trump was always asked about anything sexual even if only an innuendo.
“Gateway Pundit is only a blogger.”
The Gateway Pundit is an online publication with full-time journalists and editors, that receives over 100 million pageviews per month. You can’t really dismiss it as a mere “blog.”
So ABC considered it a DEI debate?
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.