Posted on 09/16/2024 5:23:56 PM PDT by Nicojones
ABC News has yet to comment on a document said to be from an anonymous 'whistleblower' that claims there was close collaboration between the network and Kamala Harris’s team before the debate.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Also, Megyn Kelly dives deep into this today: “Breaking Down the Plausibility of the ABC Whistleblower’s Debate Claims”
It boxes in more than ABC. It affirms what Trump has been saying about ALL of the media, all along.
Yeah, but we’re a threat to democracy, right ABC?
This is interesting, by holding back the hard evidence, if ABC commits to anything, they can be shown to lie.
Notarization means nothing regarding the truth of the statements, it only means that a notary witnessed the signature and attest to that signature being consistent with some id information presented at the time or that the person signing is personally known to the notary. This document does not appear to be part of any court proceeding - so there is no further assurance of its validity. I’m not saying its false, but this, by itself is proof of almost nothing. If it was filed in a federal court, there would be perjury and Rule 11 sanctions potential that would suggest its credibility. But this is just a piece of paper.
The claims are true, everyone knows that. The question is, what does the evidence show?
They’re having their lawyers take a look at things.
They can’t comment. The affiant claims to have audio recordings. ABC has no idea what is on those recordings, if they exist at all. So they have to stay mute. They can’t rebut anything less the be ridiculed by their own words.
I took the notarization as being in place to prove the date of signing
These documents were created BEFORE the “debate”, apparently.
She sure did, not long at all after the bomb dropped yesterday.
She's in position to have all the info mentioned in the affidavit, so she could well be the whistleblower.
Yes all true. Except that he signed it 2 or 3 days before the debate, and sent out multiple copies with time stamped tracking data before the debate, including one copy to the Speaker of the House. That helps his credibility. It suggests he knew the fix was in before the debate even happened.
What you neglect to mention or do not understand it is the date of the notarization that validates the affidavit. It was notorized BEFORE the debate and predicted exactly what happened which is especially damning to ABC.
Do you think that the affidavit predicting exactly what happened adds to its veracity?
If this is proven ABC should lose their broadcast license!
> by itself is proof of almost nothing <
Yep. The whistleblower document that I saw had every name blacked out, including the name of the notary.
Do I think there was collusion between ABC and the Harris team? You betcha. But as it stands today, that document is little more than a conversation piece.
I know it’s risky. But it’s past time for the whistleblower to do the right thing. He needs to put all his cards on the table.
Didn’t we all witness them rigging it?
67 million eye witness and it’s all caught on tape.
This is like a whistleblower saying the 2020 election was stolen - or the indictments against Trump are bogus. Yeah, we know.
The problem isn’t lack of proof - the problem is that those in government who are supposed to protect us - they are the perpetrators - they have all the power and there aren’t enough people with big enough balls to go up against the government.
Yes, I really want to hear those or read the transcripts.
Anyone who watched the debate and had an ounce of intelligence could tell it was stacked by the ABC network and its biased “moderators” against Trump, with him being called for fact checking and not Kamala, him being interrupted and not Kamala, him being shown side by side to enhance Kamala’s position and height, him being derided and her respected, him being the victim of lies told by the moderators and not her. The sworn affidavit explains this biased corruption of a “debate” that we could all openly see and the one-sided fact checking was confirmed by words out of the mouth of the female moderator, Kamala’s sorority sister. So its not a big surprise, just further confirmation which is very helpful in scoping the truth out about the utter lack of objectivity in the “news” business.
If it’s election interference, wouldn’t it be a crime?
I was right. I though ABC stood for din do nutin.
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.