The bombshell claims of 'ABC whistleblower' who says Harris got help in debate

Several bombshell claims were made last week in an allegedly sworn statement purportedly penned by a staffer at ABC News.   

The unverified document alleged close collaboration between the network and Kamala Harris's team ahead of the debate on September 10, and was first published Sunday by an X account with the name 'Black Insurrectionist'.

Most notably, it alleged the station gave Harris questions ahead of the presidential showdown, while agreeing to a series of other preconditions.

Also disallowed were inquiries about Harris's stint as California Attorney General, and those involving her brother-in-law, Tony West. The document includes several other stipulations, as well as redactions obscuring the supposed staffer's identity. 

A statement from ABC did not address the specific claims, instead saying: 'ABC News followed the debate rules that both campaigns agreed on... No topics or questions will be shared in advance with campaigns or candidates.' 

The unverified document, said to be a sworn affidavit signed by a notary public on September 9, starts as follows: 'My name is [redacted.] I reside at [redacted] New York.

'I have worked for ABC news for over 10 years in various technical and administrative positions.'

The alleged staffer goes on to state how they have 'observed significant transformations in the nature of news reporting at the organization' within that span, as well as a 'shift from unbiased reporting to a model influenced by external factors.'

The person then disclaims they are not a supported of Donald Trump, and that the intent of the document is solely to 'address concerns regarding perceived biases within news reporting within my employer's debate.'

The document, again, is dated the day before the event, but proof that the alleged affidavit was written the day indicated remains unseen.

A seal from the notary public described is also absent, though there are a series of redactions seemingly designed to protect the person's identity.

The document then gets into the political climate predating the debate, and how since it was announced that it would be aired on ABC, staffers 'had expressed hope of a debate where issues that were important to everyday Americans would be discussed.'

They then cite 'promises made [that] the candidates would be held to firm discussions regarding their proposed policy stances and that the debate would not deteriorate into an ad campaign,' where candidates would simply make blanket statements without specific policy or explanation as to...'

The end of the sentence is censored, as is several others.

The next section offers some supposed insight into the political landscape of the ABC office, which they claimed saw employees 'looking for a fair and honest debate' question 'the clear biased that is well known throughout the company.'

It specifically mentions ABC News moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis, and, more obliquely, some C-suite staffers at the station and its connected companies.

'It is common knowledge that Debate Moderators as well as Chief Executive Officers of my employer are well known not to support Donald Trump,' the section, titled political position clarification, reads.

'This led to several employees speaking up in regards to how fair the debate was going to be. 

'We were given assurances that the debate would be fair and neither the Harris campaign nor the Trump campaign would REDACTED unfair advantage,' it continues, before citing the alleged whistleblower's 'concerns regarding journalistic integrity.'

'It is my belief that contemporary news organizations, including ABC News, no longer adhere to impartiality,' the supposed staffer asserts on the subject. 

'The influence of commercial interests and substantial donors appears to affect news presentation, resulting in selective reporting and biased narratives. 

'I have personally witnessed news stories being cut from programming and not reported at all due to the influence of certain corporations linked to our parent company.'

The name of the company, however, is redacted. ABC News' parent companies include ABC, ABC News Holding Co., and Disney General Entertainment Content.

The next section is titled 'Observations pertaining to debate fairness,' and includes 'specific instances related to the debate' that 'raise concerns about procedural fairness.'

The first was that the Harris campaign supposedly '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 [Harris's] appearance.'

The next unsubstantiated stipulation was that Trump 'would be subjected to fact- checking 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,' the unverified document continues.

'In fact, various people were assigned to fact check observations it was perceived candidate Trump would make during the debate.'

It adds how Harris's team supposedly 'required assurances that Donald Trump would be fact checked', allegedly 'via multiple communications with the Harris campaign. 

'The Trump campaign was not included in the negotiations,' it goes on to state.

The document proceeds to point out how this, if true, would be unethical, and how both parties should be involved in such talk.

It then claims that 'the Harris campaign was provided with sample questions that, while not the exact questions, covered similar topics that would appear during the debate.'

Such assertions, like the others in the document, have not been substantiated. 

This is a developing story; please check back for updates.