ABC Whistleblower accuses ABC and Harris Campaign of collusion

[BirdinHand]

Until that appears, there is no reason to believe this.

Holy shit Fletch…we agree on something.



Writing this date down on a calendar.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Breaking: Tragic Death of ABC News Whistleblower Who Exposed Kamala Harris Receiving Debate Questions in Advance (video)​

The ABC News whistleblower who exposed that Kamala Harris received debate questions in advance has tragically died in a mysterious auto accident near Bethesda, Maryland. Was it a tragic coincidence or something more sinister?
Though their life was tragically cut short, the ABC News whistleblower has become a symbol of bravery in the face of overwhelming odds. It takes immense courage to come forward with information that could alter the political landscape, especially when the stakes are so high. The timing of this fatal accident is deeply unsettling, leaving many to wonder what other revelations might have come from this whistleblower had they lived to tell their full story.

Breaking: Tragic Death of ABC News Whistleblower Who Exposed Kamala Harris Receiving Debate Questions in Advance (video) - amg-news.com - American Media Group

ABC News whistleblower who exposed Kamala Harris allegedly receiving debate questions in advance has tragically died in a car accident. This shocking development raises questions about media bias, political corruption, and the integrity of the 2020 election. Trump responds with a bold call: "NO...

amg-news.com

 

[Callen]

The Federal Communications Commission has ZERO enforcement power over a network.
FCC only licenses transmitters and antennas, not television networks.
This goes double for cable and satellite.

ABC is not transmitting over the public airwaves, their affiliates and owned and operated stations are, but that's only about five to eight percent of the audience anyway.
The other ninety percent are not receiving over the public airwaves, they are SUBSCRIBERS to a PRIVATE cable or satellite system, which is not the public airwaves.

Whatever , my point stands. This complaint, if legitimate, must be filed with the body that has the power to act on it. If true it cannot be tolerated, if untrue it must be exposed.

 

[cpwill]

Guys. They already have an excuse why this fictitious person can't testify.

She's really working hard to win Donny back from That Tramp Laura Loomer.

 

[SkyChief]

No you misunderstand me totally. If this is true then it must be brought forward to the courts or the FCC. Don't you agree? .

I don't agree.

The affidavit only becomes relevant when the writer is subpoenaed. The person who submitted the affidavit is willing to testify before Congress.

Anything so egregious, if true, must be brought to a body with authority to act...don't you agree?

No. We know nothing about the whistleblower, other than he (or she) has knowledge of ABC's corruption.

Otherwise it's just a bunch of words anyone could type it. If there is legal action on this I will pay close attention. If not I will put it down to internet BS...is that not fair?

It's possible that it could be a hoax. Like I said, if you don't believe it, disregard (ignore) it. We know FOR A FACT that ABC's moderators fact-checked only Trump during the debate. HUGE RED FLAG right there.

The whistleblower merely offers an explanation for that glaring bias.

 

[CaughtInThe]

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

I don't agree.

The affidavit only becomes relevant when the writer is subpoenaed. The person who submitted the affidavit is willing to testify before Congress.

No. We know nothing about the whistleblower, other than he (or she) has knowledge of ABC's corruption.

It's possible that it could be a hoax. Like I said, if you don't believe it, disregard (ignore) it.

• #52

The whistleblower has been assassinated, do keep up with the latest news

 

[MamboDervish]

• #52

The whistleblower has been assassinated, do keep up with the latest news

It was just another deep state "suicide".

 

[ColdHardTruth]

It was filed prior to the debate. But lets see what evidence he has.

Evidence?

 

[Callen]

The affidavit only becomes relevant when subpoenaed. The person who submitted it is willing to testify before Congress.

Testifying before Congress is a purely political move. The Trump campaign should be acting on this in an official way. If true this is unacceptable and not just political stuff. We will see what they do.

No. We know nothing about the whistleblower, other than he or she has knowledge of ABC's corruption.

We dont even know that.....that is an assumption .

It's possible that it could be a hoax. Like I said, if you don't believe it, disregard (ignore) it.

I will definitely not disregard it if they move forward with this in an appropriate manner and that is not going before Jim Jordan to testify. If true this is huge....and seems to me if true they would want to put this forward in an official and legal way.

 

[911Sparky]

step 1) Remove your hands from your eyes.

step 2) Open your eyes.

step 3) READ the affidavit. (the fact-checking stunt is all right there)

The affidavit means absolutely nothing until it is filed with the appropriate agency, ie civil court, FCC, etc. Remember all the affidavits filed when trump was disputing the election,
but were never filed in court, because they were lies and exaggerations put forth by trump supporters and Rudy. Until that affidavit is filed with a body with the authority to scrutinize it,
and then act upon it, it is a worthless piece of paper.

 

[911Sparky]

I could type that out myself.......what substantiates it? Has anything been filed with the courts or the FCC? Are you not the least bit curious as to the veracity of it?

trumpers have no doubt the affidavit is real, it aligns with their beliefs. They could care less if it is true because they think it will hurt Harris. It won't.

 

[Airyaman]

Even Erick isn't buying it.

 

[SkyChief]

The affidavit means absolutely nothing until it is filed with the appropriate agency, ie civil court, FCC, etc. Remember all the affidavits filed when trump was disputing the election,
but were never filed in court, because they were lies and exaggerations put forth by trump supporters and Rudy. Until that affidavit is filed with a body with the authority to scrutinize it,
and then act upon it, it is a worthless piece of paper.

I was not aware that the person who signed the affidavit died. I agree that, at this point in time, the affidavit is worthless.

However, there was blatant bias with ABC's moderation - that cannot be denied. They fact-checked Trump on numerous occasions, and fact-checked Kamala (who lied like a rug) ZERO times.

The bias and corruption should be obvious. But the affidavit is trash at this point.

 

[Rogue Valley]

When one is known to be a prolific and habitual liar, and proceeds to lie again on-air in front of 67 million viewers, the moderartors have a duty, if they are able, to correct Trump's lies.

Don't lie and corrections are not necessary.

 

[CaughtInThe]

I'm gonna need more info from these two

 

[Airyaman]

Lol.



"Imaginary whistleblower killed! No wait, not killed!"

Anything can happen with imaginary people.

 

[Callen]

However, there was blatant bias with ABC's moderation - that cannot be denied. They fact-checked Trump on numerous occasions, and fact-checked Kamala (who lied like a rug) ZERO times.

Two or three times and only on extremely egregious lies....not the other 30 lies. They challenged him on the false and hateful accusations against Haitians in Springfield and the lie that live birth babies were being murdered. They let the rest go. Trump never once challenged Harris but you think the moderators should have done his job? She challenged him almost every round. She didn't expect the moderators to do her job for her.

 

[SkyChief]

. . . . Trump never once challenged Harris but you think the moderators should have done his job? She challenged him almost every round. She didn't expect the moderators to do her job for her.

I think that the moderators should have fact-checked Kamala Harris with the same rigor that they fact-checked Trump. That would have shown that they were impartial, and not favoring one candidate or the other.

The fact that they made ZERO attempts on fact-checking Kamala revealed a glaring bias toward one candidate - and voters witnessed the obvious bias.

I expect undecided/independent voters to consider this when they decide who actually did better in the debate.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Lol.



"Imaginary whistleblower killed! No wait, not killed!"

Anything can happen with imaginary people.

 

[Kblaster49]

The subject of this thread consists of speculation and pictures of documents that anyone could have fabricated. And no links. Why are people giving this any credence ?

 

[Callen]

I think that the moderators should have fact-checked Kamala Harris with the same vigor that they fact-checked Trump. The fact that they made ZERO attempts on fact-checking Kamala shows a glaring bias toward one candidate - and voters witnessed the obvious bias.

I expect them to vote accordingly.

Not sure what she said that was so glaringly false that it needed a fact check but if that's how you saw it that's how you saw it.....the polls are seeing it differently.

 

[eohrnberger]

Even without such a document, it's undeniable and obvious to anyone who watched that the entire debate and the moderators were biased towards Harris.

I whole heartily agree.

No Republican should ever agree to debate on, or appear on ABC "News" shows again until they clean up their act,

I think this should also be applied for ANY interviews, interaction, anything. Not a single word to any ABC 'journalist' other than 'no comment'. Just freeze ABC right out of everything.

or else just openly admit they are not an impartial news organization.

ABC has shown that they aren't a 'news' organization, more so a Democrat propaganda arm.

 

[Airyaman]

The subject of this thread consists of speculation and pictures of documents that anyone could have fabricated. And no links. Why are people giving this any credence ?

Why do MAGAns give any of the various conspiracy theories over the past several years any credence? Because they want them to be true to get any justification from being a Trump supporter. It must be exhausting to be a Trumpster.

 

[Demon]

Below is a 6 page Affidavit signed under oath and date stamped the day before the debate.

It is by an ABC News Employee accusing ABC News and the Campaign for Kamala Harris of agreeing to a secret deal before the debate to avoid certain questions, and to not fact check Kamala Harris' statements during the debate.

They claim to have audio recordings of conversations verifying his statements.

This would certainly explain why Harris was able to get away with the "Very Fine People" and "Bloodbath" lies without a challenge from the moderators.

The Whistleblower has offered to testify before congress


View attachment 67532608
View attachment 67532609
View attachment 67532610

I know this has already been asked, but I haven't seen an answer to it........do you have a link for this?