(WND News Center)—ABC News is apparently pressing the panic button in the wake of fierce criticism of its Sept. 10 presidential debate between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris.
A sworn statement by an ABC News whistleblower exposing network bias favoring Harris continues to be in focus regarding “assurances” to the Democrat’s campaign days before the event.
Now David Muir, anchor of ABC’s “World News Tonight” and co-moderator of the debate, is defending his performance during the matchup, as ratings for his evening news broadcast have plunged some 12% in the aftermath.
Note the date of the tweet below, almost a week before the debate. ABC gave Kamala Harris assurances that she would be favored in the debate on Sept 10. The ABC whistleblower confirmed this in a sworn affidavit the day before the debate. The ABC presidential debate was rigged in… https://t.co/7v9ffkfPJH
— WorldNetDaily (@worldnetdaily) September 17, 2024
“ABC News has offered assurances to the Harris campaign that if there is significant cross talk between Harris and Trump, the network may choose to turn on the mics so that the public can understand what is happening, the moderator would discourage either candidate from interrupting constantly and the moderator would also work to explain to viewers what is being said, according to the source familiar,” CNN reported.
ABC News insists it did not break debate rules, initially stating: “ABC News followed the debate rules that both campaigns agreed on and which clearly state: No topics or questions will be shared in advance with campaigns or candidates.”
A network spokesperson later told the Daily Beast: “Absolutely not. Harris was not given any questions before the date.”
The X account that posted the purported affidavit, @DocNetyoutube, reacted to ABC’s denial, stating:
Yesterday, ABC made a statement regarding the whistleblower affidavit. The only thing ABC said was that they did not give the questions or the topics to the Harris campaign. Well, nobody accused ABC of doing that. ABC has been accused of the following:
1.) Giving the Harris campaign sample questions, similar to the actual questions that would be used for the debate.
2.) Agreeing to give Harris a smaller podium and other arrangements to minimize the size differential between Harris and Trump.
3.) Fact Checking would be done for Donald Trump and NOT Kamala Harris
4.) Harris campaign gave questions to ABC that were not to be included in the debate. Including questions regarding her time as DA in SF and her time as California Attorney General.Out of all these accusations, the fact checking of Trump has been admitted to. The podium and split screen appearance to keep the height differential have already been proven, ABC did NOT deny communications with the Harris campaign without the Trump campaign being present and they will never deny that because they cannot. According to the whistleblower, ABC executives made numerous phone calls with the Harris campaign without including the Trump campaign on the call. Everything the whistleblower has submitted has been proven except for sample questions. There will be another tweet later today announcing action to be taken against ABC and the affiliates of ABC.
As WND reported Sunday, Sept. 15, an ABC News whistleblower released an affidavit punishable by perjury specifying allegations that the network made numerous assurances to the Harris campaign to favor the Democratic nominee for president.
ABC whistleblower affidavit has been released by @DocNetyoutube this morning. It alleges as a sworn statement under penalty of perjury that ABC coordinated with the Harris campaign to give her sample questions, assurances that Trump would be fact checked and Kamala would not, and… pic.twitter.com/DNyI2clpvS
— WorldNetDaily (@worldnetdaily) September 15, 2024
The sworn statement indicated: “It was agreed that Donald Trump would be subjected to fact-checking during the debate, while Kamala Harris would not comparable scrutiny. This was widely known throughout the company that Donald Trump would be fact-checked. In fact, various people were assigned to fact check observations it was perceived candidate Trump would make during the debate.
“In fact, [the] Harris campaign required assurances that Donald Trump would be fact checked. This was done via multiple communications with the Harris campaign whereas the Trump campaign was not included in the negotiations. To my understanding, any rules negotiations and conversations pertaining to the debate should have had both the Trump and Harris campaign involved, the Harris campaign had numerous more calls regarding the debate rules without the Trump campaign aware or on the call.”
The statement also says: “The Harris campaign was provided with sample questions that, while not the exact questions, covered similar topics that would appear during the debate.”
“Furthermore, the Harris campaign imposed serious restrictions on the scope of questioning, including:
- No questions regarding the perceived health of President Joe Biden.
- No inquires regarding her tenure as attorney general in San Francisco.
- No questions concerning her brother-in-law, Tony West, who faces allegations of embezzling billions of dollars in taxpayer funds and who may be involved in her administration if elected.
The whistleblower claims to have “observed a pronounced bias against Donald Trump within ABC News. Employees expressing favorable views towards him experience significant concerns about potential retribution.”
On Tuesday, Muir called the controversy over ABC’s performance “just noise.”
“All of the noise that you hear afterward about you know, ‘Which candidate won the debate, did the moderators win or lose?’” Muir told the audience on ABC’s “Live With Kelly and Mark.”
“That’s just noise. You all know that. The most important thing to remember is you all have the power.”
He said it was the “duty” of him and co-moderator Linsey Davis to discuss issues of importance to Americans, mentioning their inquiries about the border crisis, economy, reproductive rights, Afghanistan and the peaceful transfer of power.
“These are all really important issues, the issues of our time, really, and I always say as a moderator, what the candidates decide to do with that time – you can ask the questions, but they’ll answer with whatever they choose to answer with, and you have to be ready for whatever might come your way, even the most unexpected of moments,” Muir said.
ABC's David Muir says that the controversy surrounding his historically awful moderation of the presidential debate is "just noise."
Well his ratings are DOWN 12% following the debate. Less people are listening to his nightly noise now. Good! pic.twitter.com/XBH6KPLxni
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) September 17, 2024
Muir’s appearance on Tuesday’s talk show was perhaps prompted by a 12% drop in ratings for his nightly news broadcast since the debate.
Fox News reports: “Muir’s ‘World News Tonight’ averaged 6.7 million viewers on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, the three episodes following the debate, after averaging 7.6 million in 2024 leading up to the debate.
“The 12% drop in viewers for ‘World News Tonight’ is more significant than slight declines ‘CBS Evening News’ and ‘NBC Nightly News’ saw when comparing the three episodes following ABC’s debate to the year-to-date totals, although Muir’s newscast remained the No. 1 broadcast evening newscast.”
ABC News fact-checked Trump at least five times during the Sept 10 debate, but preferred not a single fact-check for Harris.
Davis told the Los Angeles Times last week that her intense fact-checking of Trump was influenced by the June 27 debate on CNN that prompted President Joe Biden to exit the 2024 race.
“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 told the paper.
On Sunday, five days after the debate, Martha Raddatz of ABC News finally admitted Harris was wrong when she said during the debate there is “not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world.”
“Our fact-checkers found that to be false,” Raddatz said.
“There are currently 900 U.S. military personnel in Syria, 2,500 U.S. troops in Iraq. All have been under regular threat from drones and missiles for months. We also have action in the Red Sea,” Raddatz added. “Also, every single day, the Navy SEALs, Delta Forces special operators can be part of any sort of deadly raid.”
Neither Muir nor Davis alerted their 70 million debate viewers to the egregious falsehood by Harris.
Follow Joe on Twitter @JoeKovacsNews
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
