This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

ABC, whose one-sided presidential "debate" has been described as a campaign contribution to the Kamala Harris agenda, is not saying whether it has reported, or will report, the event as that contribution.

It was Beth Brelje, an award-winning investigative journalist and elections correspondent for the Federalist, who wrote the ABC debate this week was a "90-minute ambush to boost Kamala Harris."

She explained, "Working as a team, ABC hosts David Muir and Linsey Davis propped up Harris and repeatedly tried to vanquish Trump by talking over him, cutting him off, and asking bizarre questions they did not ask Harris. At one point, Davis jumped in for Harris and offered a rebuttal to one of Trump's comments on abortion, a move beyond the scope of a moderator.

"It was not a debate, but a campaign contribution. That's not a big surprise from either moderator, as Muir hosts the most Trump-negative network news evening broadcast and Davis has a long track record of promoting Democrat talking points including stolen election claims from Hillary Clinton."

She cited their focus on Jan. 6, 2021, and their decision to essentially ignore the economy, which is the top voter issue.

"Not once did the moderators acknowledge the attempted assassination of Trump. Nor did they question Harris about the lax security the Biden-Harris administration provided for Trump on the campaign trail that contributed to the shooting," she said.

That leaves the formula simple: "In broadcasting, where advertising is sold by the second, time really is money. A 30-second commercial in the February Super Bowl cost $7 million. CBS charged $225,000 for a half-minute ad during a 2016 debate between former President Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. CNN sold ad packages for the June 27 debate between Trump and President Joe Biden for a minimum of $1.5 million per package, which included two 30-second ads, plus a few online ads."

While ABC's charges weren't known right away, assuming a "lowball" figure of $225,000 for half a minute, the 90-minute campaign promotion "comes to a contribution to the Harris Walz campaign of at least $40.5 million."

Now Brelje reports that ABC isn't saying much.

"The Federalist asked ABC in an email if it reported the debate and the performance of its moderators as an in-kind contribution, or any other category of contribution, to the Harris presidential campaign. And if not, when does the company plan to do so? The company indicated that it saw the email but did not answer the questions," she wrote.

Meanwhile, ABC has been bragging about the "19 million total viewers" of the event, which "enriched" the Harris campaign with its "favorable political infomercial."

She wrote, "The Federal Election Commission (FEC) defines an in-kind contribution as a non-monetary contribution to a campaign. This sort of campaign donation is limited to the same value as a financial donation, but corporations are barred from making such contributions."

The FEC itself told the Federalist it would not comment on specifics.

Brelje described, "The result was a so-called debate that was just another in the long line of attempted Trump takedowns. It was a 90-minute advertisement for Harris in front of a record audience, and that makes it a high value in-kind donation from ABC to the Harris campaign."

There were further conflicts, too, as it was revealed moderator Davis was a sorority sister of Harris, and the ABC News chief, Dana Walden, was a "close personal friend" of Harris who introduced her to her now-husband.