Playback speed:
In a recent YouTube video (see the entire video below), Benny Johnson analyzes the controversial debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, raising concerns over what many may perceive as a rigged and biased event. Johnson highlights several instances of what he believes to be journalistic malpractice, suggesting that the debate was orchestrated to favor Kamala Harris while undermining Trump.
Critical Points of Bias:
- Unbalanced Fact-Checking:
- Throughout the debate, Trump was fact-checked multiple times, even on sarcastic comments, while Kamala Harris faced no significant scrutiny.
- Johnson notes that fact-checking extended to Trump’s emotional tone, which he finds unfair and overly critical. In contrast, Harris was allowed to speak freely, even though, according to Johnson, she made several false statements that went unchecked.
- Pre-Scripted Responses for Harris:
- Johnson points out that Harris’s answers appeared overly rehearsed, implying she had prior knowledge of the questions. Although her performance was polished, Johnson claims it lacked authenticity, fueling suspicions of a rigged debate.
- ABC News Whistleblower Allegations:
- Johnson brings up a significant allegation from an ABC News whistleblower. According to the whistleblower, the Harris campaign received sample questions virtually identical to those asked during the debate. This gave Harris a substantial advantage, allowing her to prepare detailed, rehearsed responses.
- The whistleblower further claims that there was an agreement to heavily fact-check Trump while sparing Harris from similar scrutiny. A forthcoming affidavit is expected to back this information, potentially exposing how the debate was structured to favor Harris.
Polls Show Trump Winning:
-
Despite the perceived bias and unbalanced treatment, post-debate polling indicated a favorable outcome for Trump. Many viewers believed that Trump had won the debate, which reportedly led to a significant shift in public opinion.
We would appreciate your donation. -
Evangelical Support:
- Johnson notes that Trump maintained overwhelming support among key voter groups, particularly evangelical Christians. According to Pew Research, Trump held a commanding lead with 82% support from this demographic, contributing to his perceived victory in the debate.
Harris Calls for a Second Debate:
-
In response to the polling that favored Trump, Kamala Harris immediately called for a second debate. Johnson interprets this as an attempt by Harris to recover from the initial debate, where she could not secure any viral moments or significant wins despite the alleged media support.
-
Johnson’s Critique of Harris’s Performance:
- Johnson criticizes Harris’s reliance on pre-scripted answers, suggesting that her performance falters when she doesn’t have a script. He suggests that Harris’s debate performance was so structured and polished that it felt more like a staged production than a genuine exchange of ideas.
The Whistleblower Affidavit and Potential Consequences:
-
The forthcoming affidavit from the ABC News whistleblower could provide explosive evidence regarding the alleged debate rigging. If the affidavit proves that Harris received the questions in advance and that Trump was intentionally targeted, it could be a serious breach of journalistic ethics.
-
Johnson emphasizes that this development could be a turning point in terms of public trust in the media and the broader political landscape. The perception that the debate was manipulated to harm Trump’s chances could erode confidence in future debates and media coverage.
Summary:
Benny Johnson’s video presents a compelling argument that the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris may have been unfairly skewed to favor Harris. With claims of whistleblower testimony, unbalanced fact-checking, and pre-scripted responses, many are questioning the event’s integrity. Despite the alleged bias, polls showed Trump emerging as the victor, prompting Harris to call for a second debate. The forthcoming whistleblower affidavit could reveal the depth of the alleged rigging and its impact on the debate’s outcome.
