Remember that blatantly biased national debate on Sept. 10, hosted by ABC tv? The one where Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump were not at all “fact-checked” by ABC editors David Muir and Linsey Davis five days? The one that was marketed as a genuine debate and which resembled a 90-minute Harris campaign commercial?
The Center for American Rights has lodged complaints with the Federal Elections Commission ( FEC ) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), requesting that ABC and its local affiliate be held accountable for two violations: one alleged campaign donation violation and one concern about the company’s television broadcast license.  ,
Unlike write advertising, broadcast radio belong to the consumer. While anyone can get some papers, began their own magazine, and say whatever they want, there is a finite amount of airwaves across the spread variety, so they belong to people. In order to serve the public, the FCC licenses certain portions of the radio to broadcasters with the state that they must use a certain portion of their spread time for that purpose.
In a phone interview with The Federalist, Daniel Suhr, an attorney at the Center for America Rights, said,” One of the responsibility of stewarding the radio in the public interest is that disputes may be fair and impartial, and there must be accountability from the regulator.” The internet have been pushing the boundaries for years, and ABC’s work went beyond what someone had previously done.
Public Reprimand
The Center for American Rights filed a problem with the FCC, naming WPVI-TV Philadelphia, which produced the conversation in conjunction with ABC. WPVI holds the transmit license.
The issue states that the consumer has a right to be “honestly informed,” and that the FCC has pledged to “investigate when presented with’evidence of a broadcaster’s goal to improve a particular election.” ” Over and over again, the]FCC] has warned against conversation software and script choices that’ serv]e ] the political attention of one of the applicants.'”
According to the problem, the editors ‘ “obvious bias comes from the queries they did not ask, the issues they did not raise.” There were no concerns about the abrupt switch from Harris to the Democratic presidential candidate, or about Biden’s visible mental decline, or about why Biden is still in business if he is unfit to run for office.  ,  ,
Trump’s attempted execution was likewise disregarded. Harris was never questioned about the effectiveness of the Secret Service, who was to blame, or what safety measures should be taken to avoid additional challenges.
The Center for American Rights claims that the FCC’s “public attention standard” for commentators, which forbids “news deformation… and media destruction,” was broken.
The problem asks WPVI to be publicly criticized” for carrying software contrary to its public curiosity obligations.”  ,
A request for comment for this review was not received by WPVI or ABC.
” Media have been pushing the boundaries for years, and ABC’s work went beyond what people had previously done,” Suhr said. In the most recent vice-presidential conversation, he observed a similar issue. The vice-presidential conversation serves as additional proof that the rules must be enforced. It goes against the law’s and debate’s main values.
The FCC has informed WPVI of the issue, Suhr said. The broadcast station has 30-60 days to respond. It will not be resolved before the vote.  ,
In-Kind Donation
The Federal Election Commission is informed in the problem that although the FEC permits broadcasters to hold member debates, this was not a genuine debate. That makes it a 90-minute prime-time broadcast in-kind plan commitment, Suhr said. That is, a product of a candidate’s company rather than cash. It poses a problem because it is against the law for a business to contribute money or spend money in connection with any political vote.
” ABC News did not give fair and impartial treatment of prospects, in doing so, they misled more than informed electors”, the FEC problem reads. It demonstrates Harris ‘ right to pass false claims without being given any notice as well as the crucial fact-checking of Trump, live on television, and other factors. For the first time in this century, Harris cited the fact that there is not one member of the United States military who is on active duty in a combat area in any battle zone.
Harris even criticized Project 2025, written by the Heritage Foundation, as anything Trump supports. Her strategy ads continue to present this processing. ” Trump has repeatedly said he was n’t involved in its writing, does not believe in its policies, and wo n’t implement it”, the complaint notes.
” If Donald Trump were to be reelected, he will sign a national pregnancy ban”, Harris lied without delay. Trump has stated on numerous occasions that he favors a state-level abortion restrictions and opposes a nationwide abortion ban.
It would have been worth tens of millions of dollars if ABC had set promotion costs for what appeared to be a 90-minute advertisement for Harris. That could be considered an unauthorized, illegal contribution, and could result in charges for ABC.  ,  ,  ,
The FEC and FCC does research these issues and concern decisions, Suhr said.
For more vote information and updates, visit , electionbriefing.com.
Beth Brelje covers The Federalist’s votes coverage. She is an award-winning analytical columnist with years of internet experience.