Evidence the 09.10.24 Presidential Debate had serious ethical concerns or at worst rigged?

#54
#54
Majors said:
One convenient relationship that does muddy up the debate for those paying attention is Harris and Dana Walden (Sr. Disney Executive)

The executive, Dana Walden, first met Kamala Harris in 1994. Their husbands, Matt Walden and Doug Emhoff, have known each other since the 1980s. The Waldens — “extraordinary friends,” per the vice president — have donated money to Ms. Harris’s political campaigns since at least 2003, when she ran for district attorney in San Francisco.

Money quote
“In many ways, Dana and Matt are responsible for my marriage,” Ms. Harris joked at a fund-raiser in April 2022 at the Waldens’ home in Brentwood, a wealthy Los Angeles enclave where Ms. Harris and Mr. Emhoff also own a residence.
Click to expand...

Shh. Don't tell the dikwads that think they made excellent points. A candidates preparedness or unpreparedness has nothing to do with the professionalism of the network hosting the debate. The way some of the questions were worded was a red flag. Also, it's my understanding Harris did not answer the moderators initial question but they let it pass without a followup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Majors, whodeycin85 and 2 others
#58
#58
BreatheUT said:
We've heard the opinions:

Kamala won.

Trump won on the substantive issues.

Kamala was presidential.

Trump was all over the place.

Kamala was able to bait Trump into non policy issues and Trump seemingly forgot to hit her on her record.

Kamala was vague and stayed away from policy.

These are all opinions.

What is not an opinion and is universally acknowledged is that the moderators fact checked Donald J. Trump over 20 times. Kamala Harris wasn't fact checked at all. The progressive left thinks this was a good thing. This uneven lines of attack led people to look into the motives of ABC Network which people felt was biased going into the debate.

I'm sure most of us have started seeing the reports of ABC News connections to the Harris campaign. Instead of reading the usual stories I did my own digging.

Key Player: Chrisette Hudlin

In 2013, Harris, then-Attorney General of California, and Emhoff, a Los Angeles entertainment lawyer, were set up on a blind date by Harris' friend, Chrisette Hudlin. Emhoff later confirmed how they met when he shared a birthday message to Harris on Twitter in 2020.

people.com

From a Blind Date to the White House: A Look at Kamala Harris and Doug Emhoff's Loving Relationship

Kamala Harris and Doug Emhoff met on a blind date in 2013 and married a year later. Here is a complete timeline of their relationship.
people.com people.com

Who is Chrisette Hudlin?

Chrisette Hudlin is the wife of Reginald Hudlin. Reginald Hudlin is a director, screenwriter, and producer. Hudlin was president of entertainment for BET from 2005 to 2008.

Doug Emhoff has an entertainment lawyer background.

In 2013, filmmaker Reginald Hudlin and his PR executive wife, Chrisette Hudlin, were grappling with a complex legal issue. They went to Venable’s offices, where they met with Emhoff.

“He impressed us with his ability to see the big picture and resolve conflict,” Chrisette Hudlin said in an email to The Times. Hudlin then took a leap of faith. She gave Emhoff the cellphone number of her best friend, Harris, who was then California’s attorney general, and called to tell her. In her book, “The Truths We Hold,” Harris recounted the episode: “I was in the middle of a meeting, and my phone wouldn’t stop buzzing.” Harris wrote that after ignoring several calls from Hudlin, she finally called her back to check in.

enewspaper.latimes.com

A husband who may also make history

enewspaper.latimes.com

Key Player: Dana Walden

Who is Dana Walden? Dana Walden is CEO of ABC.

Loading…

craft.co

The connection:

REGINALD HUDLIN RECALLS THE UNUSUAL WAY STEVEN BOCHCO GAVE HIM A JOB​

I first met Steven Bochco at a party for Dana Walden [around 1999]. Dana and Steven were very close friends. My wife is very close friends with Dana. In fact, Dana introduced me to my wife.

Reginald Hudlin Recalls the Unusual Way Steven Bochco Gave Him a Job « Hudlin Entertainment

hudlinentertainment.com hudlinentertainment.com


If that wasn't enough here enters.....

Moderator: Linsey Davis

Davis was raised in Medford, New Jersey.[3] She graduated from the Moorestown Friends School in neighboring Moorestown, New Jersey, in 1995.[4] She earned a bachelor's degree from the University of Virginia, where she was a member of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority.[5] She earned a master's degree in communication from New York University.[6]

en.m.wikipedia.org

Linsey Davis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

Alpha Kappa Alpha is part of the National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC). The current International President is Danette Anthony Reed, and the sorority's document and pictorial archives are located at Moorland-Spingarn Research Center. The most notable member is Kamala Harris.

en.m.wikipedia.org

Alpha Kappa Alpha - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

​

How the Republican party and the Trump campaign did not see all of these connections, and have Donald Trump prepared for this is hard to fathom. I would not even have accepted that debate. Only Republicans are stuck on stupid. This whole thing is sinister and dishonest.
Click to expand...
Yes, the debate was 100% rigged!!!!

Trump is actually controlled by Bill Gates due to COVID-shot nanobots, and the evil MSM Disney pedophile moderators used their invisible Israeli space lasers on Donald's head - short-circuiting his microscopic "brain" and causing him to state the following:

"In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in, they’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there."

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

th (8).jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#59
#59
Gandalf said:
Did they give her the questions before hand? Of course they did and moderators were absolutely in the tank for her. But that’s no excuse that Trump should not have hammered her and not gotten sucked in by her baits.

If you can’t handle Kackles and two media, world leaders are going to be hard. Trump was not prepared. Not sure it’s really going to matter in the end but Trump utterly missed a chance to squash her, where Vance or DeSantis, frankly, would wipe the floor with her.
Click to expand...

Link.
 
#60
#60
BreatheUT said:
What is not an opinion and is universally acknowledged is that the moderators fact checked Donald J. Trump over 20 times.
Click to expand...
That is not a fact. At best, it is a wild exaggeration. At worst, it is an outright lie.

Trump was fact-checked 3 times :

1) Trump's claim that Democrats were in favor of executing babies after birth.
2) Trump's claim that Haitian migrants were eating the dogs and cats owned by families in Springfield, Ohio.
3) Trump's claim that he won the 2020 Presidential Election.

..... and no, Trump did not win on substance either. They were equally void of substance. Trump was only there to fear-monger and get personal. You clearly didn't watch the debate, or you wouldn't have made the absurd claim about Trump being fact-checked over 20 times. If you didn't even care enough to watch the debate, why did you care enough to start this silly thread about it a week later?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#62
#62
BowlBrother85 said:
That is not a fact. At best, it is a wild exaggeration. At worst, it is an outright lie.

Trump was fact-checked 3 times :

1) Trump's claim that Democrats were in favor of executing babies after birth.
2) Trump's claim that Haitian migrants were eating the dogs and cats owned by families in Springfield, Ohio.
3) Trump's claim that he won the 2020 Presidential Election.

..... and no, Trump did not win on substance either. They were equally void of substance. Trump was only there to fear-monger and get personal. You clearly didn't watch the debate, or you wouldn't have made the absurd claim about Trump being fact-checked over 20 times. If you didn't even care enough to watch the debate, why did you care enough to start this silly thread about it a week later?
Click to expand...

I was wrong about the number of times fact checked. I was going by different reports on it.
 
#63
#63
MontyPython said:
Link.
Click to expand...

www.dailymail.co.uk

ABC responds to 'whistleblower affidavit' after debate claims

The unverified document, said to be a sworn affidavit signed by a notary public on September 9, has sparked controversy as it has spread online.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

icegif-601.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#64
#64
BowlBrother85 said:
That is not a fact. At best, it is a wild exaggeration. At worst, it is an outright lie.

Trump was fact-checked 3 times :

1) Trump's claim that Democrats were in favor of executing babies after birth.
2) Trump's claim that Haitian migrants were eating the dogs and cats owned by families in Springfield, Ohio.
3) Trump's claim that he won the 2020 Presidential Election.

..... and no, Trump did not win on substance either. They were equally void of substance. Trump was only there to fear-monger and get personal. You clearly didn't watch the debate, or you wouldn't have made the absurd claim about Trump being fact-checked over 20 times. If you didn't even care enough to watch the debate, why did you care enough to start this silly thread about it a week later?
Click to expand...
Just curious, would it have bothered you if the moderators fact checked Kamala about Project 25, Trump wanting a National abortion ban even though he has constantly said it’s a state issue and about what he said about Charlottesville while not fact checking Trump once? On top of that, let’s say Fox was hosting instead of ABC. I’m betting you would’ve been screeching every bit as loud as those that are now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and whodeycin85
#67
#67
Gandalf said:
www.dailymail.co.uk

ABC responds to 'whistleblower affidavit' after debate claims

The unverified document, said to be a sworn affidavit signed by a notary public on September 9, has sparked controversy as it has spread online.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

icegif-601.gif
Click to expand...
The headline you linked doesn't even reflect the actual headline of the article:

ABC responds to viral 'whistleblower affidavit' claiming Kamala Harris received debate help​

"ABC News insists it did not break debate rules after a document claiming to be from an anonymous 'whistleblower' said there was close collaboration between the network and Kamala Harris’s team before the presidential showdown."

Anyone can create a sworn affidavit swearing anything without consequence. This "story" has no traction, but if it comes to light that ABC did break the rules, I'll be right there with you slamming them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf
#68
#68
nypost.com

Kamala’s softball ABC sit-down shows network’s bias – and how she has nothing to say

Kamala Harris gave another interview that reveals why she hides from questions.
nypost.com nypost.com

"She told the Los Angeles Times the idea of live fact-checking emerged from the June debate between Trump and Joe Biden on CNN.

“People were concerned that statements were allowed to just hang and not [be] disputed by the candidate, Biden at the time, or the moderators,” Davis was quoted as saying.

She references only Trump even though Biden made false claims, such as saying no American soldiers died on his watch despite the fact that 13 service members were killed in his abandonment of Afghanistan.

That didn’t concern ABC.

It’s only takeaway was to fact-check Trump.

Most troubling, Davis revealed that specific questions were asked of Trump because she and Muir studied hours of his speeches and anticipated his answers.

They then devised corrections based on his expected answers.

In effect, they selected questions designed to catch Trump making statements they could declare false.

That’s more like election interference than public service. "
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT
#69
#69
BowlBrother85 said:
That is not a fact. At best, it is a wild exaggeration. At worst, it is an outright lie.

Trump was fact-checked 3 times :

1) Trump's claim that Democrats were in favor of executing babies after birth.
2) Trump's claim that Haitian migrants were eating the dogs and cats owned by families in Springfield, Ohio.
3) Trump's claim that he won the 2020 Presidential Election.

..... and no, Trump did not win on substance either. They were equally void of substance. Trump was only there to fear-monger and get personal. You clearly didn't watch the debate, or you wouldn't have made the absurd claim about Trump being fact-checked over 20 times. If you didn't even care enough to watch the debate, why did you care enough to start this silly thread about it a week later?
Click to expand...
There was no debate held, it was an attack on him by the mods and camala.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and InVOLuntary
#71
#71
Septic said:
when things don't go donny's way, it's because it was rigged.

Shower Song
Click to expand...

Yet, in this instance it appears at least from the affidavit that it was rigged. Right? For the record I didn't watch the debate.

I'm not sure if this would constitute criminal and civil fraud, but I would say its going down that road.

Of course, if Biden took Trump out with a Hellfire missile, and he couldn't make it to the debate... that's probably on Trump too.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top