The Debate…

[LurkerNoMore]

Someone mentioned a word salad?

How are you going to bring down grocery prices?
Windmills
Restricting food imports
Being popular
Oil drilling

---
Pressed on grocery prices, Trump struggles to answer (again)
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Pressed+on+grocery+prices%2C+Trump+struggles+to+answer+%28again%29

At his latest town-hall-style event, Donald Trump was asked by a woman in Michigan how, in a second term, he’d bring down the cost of groceries. The former president responded with a great many words, including comments about windmills, though he didn’t quite get around to answering the question directly.

To the extent that there was a kernel of an idea in the Republican’s response, Trump suggested that he expected to lower food costs for consumers by restricting food imports, which really doesn’t make any sense.

This was not, however, an isolated incident. The GOP candidate also fielded some voters’ questions in Wisconsin a few weeks ago and was asked about how he’d lower consumer prices. Trump struggled to answer then, too.

Three weeks before that, he also fielded questions from voters at the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota, one of whom asked about high consumer prices. Trump initially responded by talking about his popularity among those at the event, before suggesting that oil drilling — which the United States is already doing at record levels — will solve everyone’s troubles.
---

[Grape Ape]

Trump says a lot of things. The problem is he's lied so much, that even if he told the truth, many folks would understandably believe it is a lie.

Does Trump have a selective memory or is he senile and honestly cannot remember what he says?

Trump has claimed to know “nothing” about the conservative road map for a second term, but some of his top former advisers are heavily involved with it, including Russ Vought.

"I know nothing about Project 2025," he said in a Truth Social post Friday June 5th. "I have no idea who is behind it.”

'Vought, one of the key authors of Project 2025. He is also the Republican National Committee’s platform policy director.'

Vought has spent years churning out plans for a second Trump administration. Now he's helping drafting the GOP's 2024 platform — and could be White House chief ..'
 
Trump spoke highly about the group's plans at a dinner sponsored by the Heritage Foundation in April 2022, saying: “This is a great group, and they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do and what your movement will do when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/project-2025-trump-heritage-foundation-what-know-rcna161338

He has repeatedly denied ever having any plans to implement project 2025.  He's even said it was written by fringe elements and completely denounced it.

He said the same about the federal abortion ban.

Kamala has said the opposite on so many things - fracking, gun buyback, etc that she has no  right to lecture anyone about accusing her of something she says she won't do.  Her own words contradict her.

Trump has never endorsed 2025 or the Federal abortion ban.

But it is amazing how subjective folks are with Trump - they take him literally at face value without context when it suits them (bloodbath, won't have to vote anymore), but then say he doesn't mean what he says when it doesn't.

[Dos Equis]

Why does this sound more and more exactly like the type of rabbit hole retarded Qoach would fall for?   

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=ABC+Finally+Addresses+MAGA+%E2%80%98Affidavit%E2%80%99+Claiming+It+Helped+Harris+Win+Debate.

Which article are you citing? 

And ABC issuing a blanket denial does not debunk anything.

[chaos]

What is hilarious is that she stays to "stop with rhetoric" of saying she's going to take guns.

This is after she said Trump would implement Project 2025 and a federal abortion ban, after Trump has repeatedly said he won't.

It's typical for them, the hypocrisy, to avoid the glaring faults with their candidates. It's one of the things dems do well, stick together no matter how idiotic the subject.

[Primemuscle]

He has repeatedly denied ever having any plans to implement project 2025.  He's even said it was written by fringe elements and completely denounced it.

He said the same about the federal abortion ban.

Kamala has said the opposite on so many things - fracking, gun buyback, etc that she has no  right to lecture anyone about accusing her of something she says she won't do.  Her own words contradict her.

Trump has never endorsed 2025 or the Federal abortion ban.

But it is amazing how subjective folks are with Trump - they take him literally at face value without context when it suits them (bloodbath, won't have to vote anymore), but then say he doesn't mean what he says when it doesn't.

Politicians lie. They tell folks what they want to hear. I have posted/said this multiple times. Both candidates are presently attempting to moderate what they originally championed in order to broaden their support. If you want to believe what Trump only recently claims about project 2025, go for it. 

VP Harris was at least honest enough to admit that once she knew more about fracking, she realized it would not be a good thing to do. On the other hand, Trump first supported and then claimed not to know what Project 2025 was or who was involved in it.

BTW, do you know what year it was that VP Harris opposed fracking? I believe it was when she was a senator which had to be at least four years ago. Trump was 'in bed' with the project 2025 folks earlier this year, about 6 months ago.   

[Dos Equis]

Politicians lie. They tell folks what they want to hear. I have posted/said this multiple times. Both candidates are presently attempting to moderate what they originally championed in order to broaden their support. If you want to believe what Trump only recently claims about project 2025, go for it. 

VP Harris was at least honest enough to admit that once she knew more about fracking, she realized it would not be a good thing to do. On the other hand, Trump first supported and then claimed not to know what Project 2025 was or who was involved in it.

BTW, do you know what year it was that VP Harris opposed fracking? I believe it was when she was a senator which had to be at least four years ago. Trump was 'in bed' with the project 2025 folks earlier this year, about 6 months ago.

Harris has not been honest about fracking.  She wanted to ban fracking for years.  Now she claims that she vowed not to ban fracking during her debate in 2020.  She lied.  All she said in 2020 was that Joe Biden would not ban fracking.  She is a liar.  And not just about fracking. 

[Primemuscle]

Harris has not been honest about fracking.  She wanted to ban fracking for years.  Now she claims that she vowed not to ban fracking during her debate in 2020.  She lied.  All she said in 2020 was that Joe Biden would not ban fracking.  She is a liar.  And not just about fracking.

Yada, yada, yada, politicians lie.

Did you watch the 2020 debate? Did she or did she not vow not to ban fracking then? Seems she kind of hedged her bet at that debate when it seems Harris didn’t actually say she changed her own position on the issue—instead she said then-Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden “will not end fracking.” Wouldn't you suppose she would have to change her position on fracking when she became Vice President?

The point I made is that in June of this year, Trump supported Project 2025, less than 6 months later he says he knows nothing about Project 2025. Like Harris he could have said he once supported it until he learned out more about it now, he feels differently. People, even politicians change their minds which is fine. Pretending you never heard of something and know nothing about it different when you obviously do, is quite a leap from simply changing one's mind about something.

[Grape Ape]

Politicians lie. They tell folks what they want to hear. I have posted/said this multiple times. Both candidates are presently attempting to moderate what they originally championed in order to broaden their support. If you want to believe what Trump only recently claims about project 2025, go for it. 

VP Harris was at least honest enough to admit that once she knew more about fracking, she realized it would not be a good thing to do. On the other hand, Trump first supported and then claimed not to know what Project 2025 was or who was involved in it.

BTW, do you know what year it was that VP Harris opposed fracking? I believe it was when she was a senator which had to be at least four years ago. Trump was 'in bed' with the project 2025 folks earlier this year, about 6 months ago.

He has never once said he would do it.  He has said the opposite every time.

He also said he made mistakes with his appointed positions when he first got in office, and won't make them again.  He's also working with Gabbard, etc RFK Jr, Musk, on transition and such.  There will be no project 2025.  There might be elements of it, because there are some good things in there, but nobody will give the office of the President the power it states, and there will be no tribunals and such.

It's telling that you say all politicians lie, and subjectively not believe Trump, but believe Harris changed her position because "she learned more"....She changed her tune because the left needs to win PA.  Even the liberal pundits know that.

Former Bill Clinton adviser Doug Schoen:

Payne told Schoen that Harris' insistence her values haven't changed even as her stance on fracking has evolved felt like a "wink and a nod to the core crew."

"Just help me get over the hump and I got your back," he said, imitating Harris. "How do you see it playing out?"

Schoen agreed with Payne.

"I think that's a fair statement. I think it also means, 'Whatever I say, don't take seriously because whatever I say, my values are your values, so what I say today and what I say tomorrow doesn't really matter.' It's artful politics and frankly gives her the freedom to say and do anything she needs to do to get elected, which in the short term might be helpful, in the long term, I dare say is disastrous."

He pointed to Pennsylvania polling averages from Real Clear Politics showing Harris and former President Donald Trump in a dead heat at 47.7% and 47.2%, respectively. Schoen called those numbers the "key to the election."

"Whomever wins Pennsylvania is very likely to be the next president," he said. "It's effectively a tie, and if she is perceived to be against fracking, which was her stated position in 2019, it could cost her western Pennsylvania and ultimately the state and the presidency."

But at the end of the day, you yourself said all politicians lie - which was my original point - Harris has no moral high ground to lecture Trump on him saying what she'd do, because she is doing the exact same thing.  The only difference is they are making assumptions Trump will do the opposite of what he says, and Trump is using Harris' own words.

[Dos Equis]

Yada, yada, yada, politicians lie.

Did you watch the 2020 debate? Did she or did she not vow not to ban fracking then? Seems she kind of hedged her bet at that debate when it seems Harris didn’t actually say she changed her own position on the issue—instead she said then-Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden “will not end fracking.” Wouldn't you suppose she would have to change her position on fracking when she became Vice President?

The point I made is that in June of this year, Trump supported Project 2025, less than 6 months later he says he knows nothing about Project 2025. Like Harris he could have said he once supported it until he learned out more about it now, he feels differently. People, even politicians change their minds which is fine. Pretending you never heard of something and know nothing about it different when you obviously do, is quite a leap from simply changing one's mind about something.

Megyn Kelly brings the receipts about Kamala Harris lying about fracking.  I posted this in the Harris thread.

Why isn't the media all over this?  The reason this is so important is she has to win PA to win the election and fracking is a huge industry in PA.   

Megyn Kelly Brings Receipts on Kamala Harris' Lies About Her Fracking Position During CNN Interview

[/youtube]

[Humble Narcissist]

Politicians lie. They tell folks what they want to hear. I have posted/said this multiple times. Both candidates are presently attempting to moderate what they originally championed in order to broaden their support. If you want to believe what Trump only recently claims about project 2025, go for it. 

VP Harris was at least honest enough to admit that once she knew more about fracking, she realized it would not be a good thing to do. On the other hand, Trump first supported and then claimed not to know what Project 2025 was or who was involved in it.

BTW, do you know what year it was that VP Harris opposed fracking? I believe it was when she was a senator which had to be at least four years ago. Trump was 'in bed' with the project 2025 folks earlier this year, about 6 months ago.

Politicians lie but only republicans get called out for it by MSM "fact checkers."

[LurkerNoMore]

Which article are you citing? 

And ABC issuing a blanket denial does not debunk anything.

ABC doesn't have to debunk anything.     The onus is on the one making the claims to have some sort of proof behind.  Issuing a redacted "affidavit" that is later proved to contain source material, car crash claims and laughable excuses as follow up doesn't prove anything either.  Maybe Black Insurrectionist should have created such a rabbit hole for the mouth breathers to tumble into.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=How+the+Debate+Whistleblower+Car+Crash+Conspiracy+Went+Viral

---
Two days after the debate, Black Insurrectionist claimed to have access to an affidavit from an ABC News whistleblower, outlining the ways in which Harris was given an upper hand.

“I have just signed a non-disclosure agreement with the attorney of the whistleblower,” he wrote. “The affidavit states how the Harris campaign was given sample question [sic] which were essentially the same questions that were given during the debate and separate assurances of fact checking Donald Trump and that she would NOT be fact checked.” He added that he would release the affidavit after the attorney redacted the whistleblower’s name.

A few days later, he did so, producing a clumsily redacted, typo-filled, strangely-formatted document, dated September 9. The affidavit claimed that Harris was promised she wouldn’t be questioned about the health of Joe Biden or her tenure as “Attorney General in San Francisco”—a position that doesn’t exist.

When people pointed out a range of such shortcomings, Black Insurrectionist took to feuding with those arguing the document appears to be obviously fake. After claiming that the document was sent to Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson in unredacted form, he signaled a retreat. “I have gone as far with it as I can,” he tweeted on Monday morning. “The rest is up to the whistleblower and Congress.”

As word of the supposed affidavit picked up steam, so too did a tale about the untimely death of the person purportedly behind it. On Sunday, Rep. Taylor Greene tweeted, “The ABC whistleblower who claimed Kamala Harris was given debate questions ahead of the debate has died in a car crash according to news reports.”

---

[Dos Equis]

ABC doesn't have to debunk anything.     The onus is on the one making the claims to have some sort of proof behind.  Issuing a redacted "affidavit" that is later proved to contain source material, car crash claims and laughable excuses as follow up doesn't prove anything either.  Maybe Black Insurrectionist should have created such a rabbit hole for the mouth breathers to tumble into.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=How+the+Debate+Whistleblower+Car+Crash+Conspiracy+Went+Viral

---
Two days after the debate, Black Insurrectionist claimed to have access to an affidavit from an ABC News whistleblower, outlining the ways in which Harris was given an upper hand.

“I have just signed a non-disclosure agreement with the attorney of the whistleblower,” he wrote. “The affidavit states how the Harris campaign was given sample question [sic] which were essentially the same questions that were given during the debate and separate assurances of fact checking Donald Trump and that she would NOT be fact checked.” He added that he would release the affidavit after the attorney redacted the whistleblower’s name.

A few days later, he did so, producing a clumsily redacted, typo-filled, strangely-formatted document, dated September 9. The affidavit claimed that Harris was promised she wouldn’t be questioned about the health of Joe Biden or her tenure as “Attorney General in San Francisco”—a position that doesn’t exist.

When people pointed out a range of such shortcomings, Black Insurrectionist took to feuding with those arguing the document appears to be obviously fake. After claiming that the document was sent to Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson in unredacted form, he signaled a retreat. “I have gone as far with it as I can,” he tweeted on Monday morning. “The rest is up to the whistleblower and Congress.”

As word of the supposed affidavit picked up steam, so too did a tale about the untimely death of the person purportedly behind it. On Sunday, Rep. Taylor Greene tweeted, “The ABC whistleblower who claimed Kamala Harris was given debate questions ahead of the debate has died in a car crash according to news reports.”

---

The affidavit, sent before the debate, is proof. 

What are you quoting?  You are posting a link that has numerous stories. 

[LurkerNoMore]

The affidavit, sent before the debate, is proof. 

What are you quoting?  You are posting a link that has numerous stories.

The affidavit is FAKE.  There is no proof.

Why do you think the anonymous person behind it suddenly "died in a car crash"? 

[Dos Equis]

The affidavit is FAKE.  There is no proof.

Why do you think the anonymous person behind it suddenly "died in a car crash"?

You have no idea if the affidavit is "fake."  It could be fake.  It could be authentic.  It should be investigated. 

What source are you citing? 

[LurkerNoMore]

You have no idea if the affidavit is "fake."  It could be fake.  It could be authentic.  It should be investigated. 

What source are you citing?

If it were real, then why does no one know where it was filed?  Not to mention the very fact the misspellings are a tip off and the notary seal/stamp that they claim is on there, really isn't.  (NY you can use either a seal or stamp).  Have you ever heard of a notary not using a seal/stamp? Of course, Mike Johnson was claimed to be someone who was mailed a copy.  But he won't confirm it.  (As of yet.)

You can read any source and get the gist of it.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=ABC+responds+to+viral+%27whistleblower+affidavit%27+claiming+Kamala+Harris+received+debate+help

[Primemuscle]

He has never once said he would do it.  He has said the opposite every time.

There are videos of Trump showing his support for project 2025. He changed his tune when this became a political liability, and he needed to gain support from more moderate Republicans. People, including Trump change their positions for a variety of reasons.

He also said he made mistakes with his appointed positions when he first got in office, and won't make them again.  He's also working with Gabbard, etc RFK Jr, Musk, on transition and such.  There will be no project 2025.  There might be elements of it, because there are some good things in there, but nobody will give the office of the President the power it states, and there will be no tribunals and such.[/quote]

If by chance Trump wins the election, I guess we will find out whether there will be a 'project 2025.' I take it that you think Gabbard who was a Democrat in 2020, an Independent in 2022, and indorsed Trump in a 'moment' ago. RFK was a Democratic Presidential candidate until it was obvious in October 2023 that he would not become the Democratic nominee, so he changed his mind, an instead ran as an Independent, only to endorse Trump when he said, "In my heart, I no longer believe that I have a realistic path to electoral victory." Elon Musk decided to vote vote for Republican for the first time in 2022. Prior to this his political leanings were all over the place. Hmmm, people change their minds for a number of reasons.

It's telling that you say all politicians lie, and subjectively not believe Trump, but believe Harris changed her position because "she learned more"....She changed her tune because the left needs to win PA. Even the liberal pundits know that.

In 2020 four years ago, she’d backtracked. As vice president, Harris even voted to increase leases for fracking as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. Are you saying she knew four years ago that she needed to win Pennsylvania? She knew four years ago she would be the Democratic Presidential nominee. Heck not only is she smart, she apparently is also psychic.

[Dos Equis]

If it were real, then why does no one know where it was filed?  Not to mention the very fact the misspellings are a tip off and the notary seal/stamp that they claim is on there, really isn't.  (NY you can use either a seal or stamp).  Have you ever heard of a notary not using a seal/stamp? Of course, Mike Johnson was claimed to be someone who was mailed a copy.  But he won't confirm it.  (As of yet.)

You can read any source and get the gist of it.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=ABC+responds+to+viral+%27whistleblower+affidavit%27+claiming+Kamala+Harris+received+debate+help

Yes I have heard of a notary not using a seal or stamp.  Not the norm, but not unheard of.  But it needs to be investigated. 

You are quoting from something then linking a search to numerous articles, making it impossible to know what source you are actually quoting.

[LurkerNoMore]

The highlight of the entire debate was watching the debate audience go crazy for Trumpy.  He said "They went crazy".

Except there was no debate audience.  Cognitive tests anyone?  I remember red hats crying for one just a couple months ago.   

---
Trump claims audience ‘went crazy’ for him at his debate with Harris – but there was no audience

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Donald+Trump%27s+Debate+Crowd+Comment+Sparks+Confusion%3A+%27They+Went+Crazy%27

Donald Trump has been roasted for claiming that the audience at the presidential debate with Kamala Harris “went crazy” for him – despite the fact that there was no live audience present.

The former president often claims his crowd sizes are huge – even wildly asserting he drew in a bigger crowd than Martin Luther King Jr during the March on Washington – but this time, he appeared to go even further by claiming there was one at all.
---

[Primemuscle]

The highlight of the entire debate was watching the debate audience go crazy for Trumpy.  He said "They went crazy".

Except there was no debate audience.  Cognitive tests anyone?  I remember red hats crying for one just a couple months ago.   

---
Trump claims audience ‘went crazy’ for him at his debate with Harris – but there was no audience

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Donald+Trump%27s+Debate+Crowd+Comment+Sparks+Confusion%3A+%27They+Went+Crazy%27

Donald Trump has been roasted for claiming that the audience at the presidential debate with Kamala Harris “went crazy” for him – despite the fact that there was no live audience present.

The former president often claims his crowd sizes are huge – even wildly asserting he drew in a bigger crowd than Martin Luther King Jr during the March on Washington – but this time, he appeared to go even further by claiming there was one at all.
---

LOL! Maybe it was an imaginary audience just like the imaginary crowd numbers at his rallies.

[Grape Ape]

There are videos of Trump showing his support for project 2025. He changed his tune when this became a political liability, and he needed to gain support from more moderate Republicans. People, including Trump change their positions for a variety of reasons.

Feel free to post them.

If by chance Trump wins the election, I guess we will find out whether there will be a 'project 2025.' I take it that you think Gabbard who was a Democrat in 2020, an Independent in 2022, and indorsed Trump in a 'moment' ago. RFK was a Democratic Presidential candidate until it was obvious in October 2023 that he would not become the Democratic nominee, so he changed his mind, an instead ran as an Independent, only to endorse Trump when he said, "In my heart, I no longer believe that I have a realistic path to electoral victory." Elon Musk decided to vote vote for Republican for the first time in 2022. Prior to this his political leanings were all over the place. Hmmm, people change their minds for a number of reasons. 

The common theme with all of them is they changed their minds because the Democratic party they knew and supported ceases to exist.  They have all more or less said that.  It's a testament to what the Democratic party has devolved into.

In 2020 four years ago, she’d backtracked. As vice president, Harris even voted to increase leases for fracking as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. Are you saying she knew four years ago that she needed to win Pennsylvania? She knew four years ago she would be the Democratic Presidential nominee. Heck not only is she smart, she apparently is also psychic.

I guess Clinton's advisor was wrong? Ryan Grim, etc and all the other liberals who follow politics for a living who said it are wrong  too?  Do some research on why she changed her mind four years ago as you say.  I will give you a hint, it wasn't PA at the time, and it wasn't because she had some epiphany that it was all of a sudden completely safe.

[Coach is Back!]

The affidavit is FAKE.  There is no proof.

Why do you think the anonymous person behind it suddenly "died in a car crash"?

Did this fool really say the affidavit is fake? lol

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE:

🚨🚨🚨🚨

The ABC Whistleblower who claimed ABC News gave @KamalaHarris the Presidential debate questions ahead of the Presidential debate has exclusively given me a copy of the official complaint they filed with the SEC today. 

See screenshots of the submissions below: 👇🏻

As of today, The Securities and Exchange Commissioner (SEC) has acknowledged receipt of two complaints lodged against @Disney , the owner of ABC News @ABC. The complaint, seen below, states that ABC News and their Parent company Disney colluded with the @KamalaHarris Presidential Campaign to influence the Presidential debate on 9-10-24 and to further influence the outcome of the 2024 Presidential Election.

@DavidMuir @LinseyDavis

The Complaint shows documents uploaded to the official SEC complaint system and a screenshot of the uploaded file that the Whistleblower claims contains evidence of this collusion.

Below are the documents that were exclusively provided to me today.

🚨Submission Number: 17268-694-586-914 was submitted successfully on Friday, September 20, 2024 at 08:55:41 AM EDT

🚨Submission Number: 17268-178-298-389 was submitted successfully on Friday, September 20, 2024 at 10:16:25 AM EDT

The Whistleblower complaint that was submitted to the SEC today reads:

“I have heard and observed conversations and have evidence in hand of ABC News, a wholly owned subsidiary of Disney Media Networks, which is a division of The Walt Disney Company, collusion between ABC news and the Kamala Harris campaign for the Presidency of the United States. It is my belief from the context of the conversations, that ABC news in the debate held on September 10, 2024, and at other various times before and after this debate to influence the Presidential election. I would like to emphatically state, that I am not a Donald Trump supporter and have never voted for Donald Trump. The context of the conversations heard and among other observations is that ABC News is working with the Kamala Harris campaign, and that Disney may exact monetary or other future considerations if they aid in the election of Kamala Harris. I have sat idly by for years and watched the media on both sides of the political spectrum become nothing more than campaign ads for politicians. It is clear that there are multiple considerations being exchanged in this current Presidential campaign. I have enclosed further evidence for your consideration. Please note, this evidence contains personal information of mine and I wish for it to remain undisclosed for safety considerations for my family.”

🚨This was the brief statement on the complaint which was partially cut off in submission photo🚨

Here are the screenshots of the Whistleblower’s official complaint to the SEC today regarding their alleged claims of having evidence that @ABC News gave @KamalaHarris’s campaign the questions for the Presidential debate against Donald Trump ahead of the debate.

ABC News and Disney must issue a statement immediately.

https://x.com/lauraloomer/status/1837206001675592155?s=46

[Coach is Back!]

i=QfxMnQre09Gd3-By

[LurkerNoMore]

Did this fool really say the affidavit is fake? lol

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE:

🚨🚨🚨🚨

The ABC Whistleblower who claimed ABC News gave @KamalaHarris the Presidential debate questions ahead of the Presidential debate has exclusively given me a copy of the official complaint they filed with the SEC today. 

See screenshots of the submissions below: 👇🏻

As of today, The Securities and Exchange Commissioner (SEC) has acknowledged receipt of two complaints lodged against @Disney , the owner of ABC News @ABC. The complaint, seen below, states that ABC News and their Parent company Disney colluded with the @KamalaHarris Presidential Campaign to influence the Presidential debate on 9-10-24 and to further influence the outcome of the 2024 Presidential Election.

@DavidMuir @LinseyDavis

The Complaint shows documents uploaded to the official SEC complaint system and a screenshot of the uploaded file that the Whistleblower claims contains evidence of this collusion.

Below are the documents that were exclusively provided to me today.

🚨Submission Number: 17268-694-586-914 was submitted successfully on Friday, September 20, 2024 at 08:55:41 AM EDT

🚨Submission Number: 17268-178-298-389 was submitted successfully on Friday, September 20, 2024 at 10:16:25 AM EDT

The Whistleblower complaint that was submitted to the SEC today reads:

“I have heard and observed conversations and have evidence in hand of ABC News, a wholly owned subsidiary of Disney Media Networks, which is a division of The Walt Disney Company, collusion between ABC news and the Kamala Harris campaign for the Presidency of the United States. It is my belief from the context of the conversations, that ABC news in the debate held on September 10, 2024, and at other various times before and after this debate to influence the Presidential election. I would like to emphatically state, that I am not a Donald Trump supporter and have never voted for Donald Trump. The context of the conversations heard and among other observations is that ABC News is working with the Kamala Harris campaign, and that Disney may exact monetary or other future considerations if they aid in the election of Kamala Harris. I have sat idly by for years and watched the media on both sides of the political spectrum become nothing more than campaign ads for politicians. It is clear that there are multiple considerations being exchanged in this current Presidential campaign. I have enclosed further evidence for your consideration. Please note, this evidence contains personal information of mine and I wish for it to remain undisclosed for safety considerations for my family.”

🚨This was the brief statement on the complaint which was partially cut off in submission photo🚨

Here are the screenshots of the Whistleblower’s official complaint to the SEC today regarding their alleged claims of having evidence that @ABC News gave @KamalaHarris’s campaign the questions for the Presidential debate against Donald Trump ahead of the debate.

ABC News and Disney must issue a statement immediately.

https://x.com/lauraloomer/status/1837206001675592155?s=46

That is not an affidavit.  It is a complaint.  Good lord you are stupid.

[chaos]

The lovely  Laura Loomer 
Mr Trumps newest looniest best friend
Madge  Taylor Greene will not be happy

Hang in there, maybe one day you can be Trumps friend.

[chaos]

there is a long queue to be his friend and judging by the above mentioned ladies his present friends have to fight hard for his favor

Keep up the hard work, I'm sure he'll take notice soon.