A recent revelation about MSNBC host Rev. Al Sharpton has sparked fierce backlash from conservatives after it was disclosed that he received a $500,000 payment from Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign just weeks before conducting a glowing interview with her.
The timing and the nature of the payments have raised questions about fairness and impartiality in media.
Sharpton’s Softball Questions Raise Eyebrows
Sharpton’s interview with Harris, which aired last month, quickly attracted attention for its soft questioning, leading critics to accuse the Reverend of bias.
The Washington Free Beacon unearthed campaign finance records revealing that Sharpton’s non-profit, the National Action Network (NAN), was paid handsomely by the Harris campaign.
These records show two $250,000 payments, one on September 5 and another on October 1, just prior to the high-profile interview.
Critics Claim Payments Were a Manipulative Tactic
Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge fund manager and supporter of former President Donald Trump, was among the most vocal critics.
Appearing on Megyn Kelly’s show, Ackman suggested that the payments were a deliberate attempt to influence public opinion and manipulate viewers.
Others on social media echoed his sentiment, with one X (formerly Twitter) user sarcastically asking, “Aren’t political campaigns supposed to GET donations?”
Harris Campaign’s Strategy Backfires
The payments to Sharpton were part of a larger $5.4 million fund the Harris campaign allocated to Black and Hispanic advocacy groups.
The goal was to bolster Harris’ appeal to minority voters, but the strategy largely backfired.
In the months following these payments, Harris’ support among key demographic groups, including Black and Hispanic voters, declined significantly—losing 7% of Hispanic voters and 8% of Black voters compared to Biden’s 2020 numbers.
Sharpton’s Birthday Video and the Favoritism Allegations
The controversy over Sharpton’s interview intensified when it was revealed that two days after receiving the second payment from Harris’ campaign, Sharpton aired a video on his MSNBC show featuring Harris.
In the video, the vice president wished Sharpton a happy birthday and praised his leadership.
Harris referred to him affectionately as “Rev,” calling him “a voice of truth” and “a voice of conscience.”
Two weeks later, Sharpton’s interview with Harris continued to sing her praises, with his questions seeming carefully crafted to align with messages Harris was promoting on the campaign trail, including references to the legacy of Shirley Chisholm.
This raised further suspicions about Sharpton’s impartiality.
Critics Call the Interview a ‘Campaign Commercial’
Many observers, including former Congressman John Linder, were quick to call out the interview as little more than a “campaign commercial.”
Linder argued that the payments to Sharpton’s non-profit should have triggered a formal disclaimer noting that the interview had been effectively “paid for” by the Harris campaign.
Others voiced concerns over what they viewed as a pattern of celebrity endorsements and payments to high-profile figures like Oprah Winfrey and Lizzo, claiming that this only further eroded public trust in Harris’ campaign.
Campaign Spending Raises Further Questions
As the Sharpton controversy unfolded, more questions arose about how the Harris campaign had burned through more than $1 billion in just a few months, ultimately leaving it $20 million in debt.
Among the questionable expenditures were six-figure sums spent on setting up Harris’ appearance for a ‘Call Her Daddy’ podcast interview and a $1 million payment to Oprah’s production company.
The ongoing fallout from these revelations has led many to question the effectiveness and transparency of the Harris campaign’s spending, as well as its efforts to influence public opinion through strategic media appearances and financial backing.
This article was published on TDPel Media. Thanks for reading!Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn