We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

There are only two possibilities pertaining to that “60 Minutes” interview in which at least one of Vice President Kamala Harris’ answers to a critical question was edited in her political favor: Either Kamala’s handlers insisted upon redoing some of her comments, or the program unilaterally assisted in cleaning them up on its own.

Whichever possibility reflects reality, CBS is now engaged in a cover-up; and until CBS makes a full transcript and video of the interview available, there’s a strong case that the outlet made an in-kind donation to Kamala’s campaign, which would be illegal.

The network on Sunday released a statement denying accusations of “deceitful editing.” By way of excusing itself, CBS said it had made a still-confounding edit to one of Kamala’s answers related to U.S.-Israel relations because “the portion of her answer on 60 Minutes was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects in a wide ranging 21-minute-long segment.”

Taken at face value, the explanation is an admission that producers chose to air a more flattering (“succinct”) portion of Kamala’s comments when a separate version showing the same exchange was posted online beforehand and was widely panned because of the vice president’s ridiculous, unintelligible response. Taken in context — CBS’s declining to release a full, accurate transcript, plus video, and its decision to make that specific edit (and potentially others) — it’s a much seedier situation.

No matter which way you cut it, following either avenue through to its logical conclusion demonstrates CBS to have made editorial decisions that either violate its journalistic standards (to the extent they exist) or potentially expose the network to legal penalties for violating campaign finance law.

Just to drive home the point, Donald Trump was criminally prosecuted and convicted for virtually the same alleged transgression. The former president was accused of failing to comply with campaign finance laws by paying a lawyer to settle a legal dispute and neglecting to specify the details during an election year. Similarly, CBS arguably donated time and resources to assisting Kamala’s campaign without publicly disclosing its contribution.

If Democrats and the media are as devoted to the integrity of our elections as they profess, then it’s only reasonable that the Justice Department intervene and perhaps appoint a special counsel to investigate whether any laws were broken by CBS.

If “60 Minutes” heeded the Kamala campaign’s request to re-shoot full answers to even a single question, then the program has irreparably shattered whatever is left of its reputation as a prestigious news magazine. If “60 Minutes” surreptitiously edited its program after initial public criticism proved harmful to a political candidate, then it may need to disclose its campaign contribution, which would have been illegal anyway.

Which one is it? Representatives for CBS News didn’t respond to my email on Tuesday. But the fact that they have only released an interview transcript that voters know for a fact is incomplete, at minimum, makes this a cover-up, a scandal.

Eddie Scarry is the D.C. columnist at The Federalist and author of “Liberal Misery: How the Hateful Left Sucks Joy Out of Everything and Everyone.”