By I & I Editorial Board, Isuues & Insights | September 20, 2024
It would be helpful to voters to know that a “whistleblower” says ABC rigged last week’s debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. But outside of conservative media, it’s being largely ignored, because the legacy press covers its own and as zealously as it does the Democratic Party. Whether the claims are true or not – the existence of the whistleblower remains unconfirmed – the mainstream media’s loyalty to Democrats is uncomfortably similar to the relationship Pravda had with the Central Committee of the Soviet Union’s Communist Party.
To quickly recap, the unnamed whistleblower said ABC agreed to fact-check Trump while ensuring “Harris would not face comparable scrutiny.” The plan was so detailed that “various people were assigned to fact check observations it was perceived candidate Trump would make during the debate.”
“In fact,” says the whistleblower, the “Harris campaign required assurances that Donald Trump would be fact-checked.”
These agreements were reached on calls that the Trump campaign was not a part of although all discussions regarding the rules and negotiations were supposed to include both sides.
The affidavit also says Harris was provided with sample questions that, while not the exact questions that would be asked, nevertheless “covered similar topics that would appear during the debate.”
There were also issues that could not be raised – Joe Biden’s health; Harris’ performance as San Francisco’s district attorney; her brother-in-law and “key campaign adviser” Tony West, who allegedly “fleeced taxpayers for billions to give to left-wing groups and lawyers” – since they would reflect poorly on Harris.
“I have observed a pronounced bias against Donald Trump within ABC News,” the affiant continues, while also noting “many” ABC employees “questioned the clear bias that is well known throughout the company.”
The network denies the charges, which is expected. It’s not going to issue a statement that says, “Yeah, you caught us, we cheated for the Democrats.”
What gives the allegations more than a muted ring of truth is that the affidavit was filed, according to its contents, the day before the debate and the charges match the moderators’ actions. It was as if the whistleblower got a copy of the script. So much of what is asserted checks out with what everyone saw.
It also looks bad for the network because Dana Walden, a Disney co-chair who oversees ABC News, has been a close friend of Harris since the 1980s, and their husbands closer for even longer.
Furthermore, Linsey Davis, one of the ABC moderators – and co-conspirator, depending on whose point of view is being taken into account – and Harris are sorority sisters.
Trump would have fared better if the debate had been on another network, but he says the Harris team insisted that she would debate only on ABC. While it’s obvious why, it’s chilling to think that the cabalists aren’t terribly concerned about the striking conflict of interest. To them, it’s just another act of impropriety they will get away with.
But what else should we expect when 28% – that’s a staggering number – of Democrats say the country would have been better off if Trump had been assassinated?
One would think that despite the connections, there would be some fidelity to journalistic standards. But clearly that’s asking too much. At least for the left. Remember that Trump found out in 2015 that “his friendship with the late Fox News chairman Roger Ailes did not spare him a mauling from Megyn Kelly, one of the moderators of the Republican candidates’ debate,” the Telegraph reminds us.
There are no ideologues in the West like those who pose as objective reporters and editors. At times some have internal struggles with the real journalist within. But the propagandist always wins.
We’ve seen this behavior in history’s bloody revolutions. The revolutionaries and their followers believe so deeply in their cause they’ve been willing to kill and destroy. (Of course, those at the top, the Lenins, the Castros, the Guevaras, the Sandinos, and the Ortegas are interested only in power. The revolution is a cover for their tyrannical ambitions.)
Anyone involved in politics in this country who believes in their party, their ideology, their agenda so completely that they feel that their ends justify whatever means they choose needs to back off and reassess. Get away from politics. Find meaning somewhere else, because a blind commitment to the Democrats’ efforts to establish single-party rule, its one and only truth, and its demand for conformity, is toxic to discourse and a threat to our republic.
Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day – without fear or favor.
Original article link
