Sarah Sanders accused of sharing 'doctored' video to justify CNN ban

It most certainly is not. It is just in light of Due Process that he has been allowed back in while the case is decided.

I don't think you've got that right. No such EO has been signed. It would be strange to sign an EO in order to establish internal White House procedure. I wouldn't have thought that it would take an EO to do that. It would be a little bit overkill!

 

Only if you're trying to manipulate the video. Otherwise you just do a Save As... and pick the video format, which is exactly consistent with this video.

 

You are still on this? Does the propaganda live on, even after the fraudulent nature of the video is no longer in doubt? When CNN took the White House to court, the White House didn't present the video and didn't bring up their false accusation that the doctored video helped them sell. That is because the purpose of the doctored video was to, once again, dupe their followers.

If one saw the original, and put the whole thing in context, one would see, that the entirety of the news conference was tRump being an a**hole. Apparently he was butt hurt over losing the protection of the House Republicans. This is just the first phase of tRump spinning out of control, as the cold fingers of justice come closing in.

 

They didn't slow down anything. Now you're just making up crap.

 

The White House never said there was battery. The truth shall set you free.

 

I sourced that they did with 2 non American sources.

 

The White House was one step removed from the doctoring, but they promulgated it. The latest I can find on the fact that it was deliberately doctored to deceive.



I don't know who that bloke is or whether he is partisan.

 

Seriously you don't watch these two videos side by side and see how totally pathetic this attempt at finding micro-differences is between the two video formats? This really does remind me of the 9-11 truthers trying desperately to justify their conspiracy.

 

Why would TrueScotsman be laughing? What did he do to deserve a "well done?"

 

Did you miss this? http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ustify-cnn-ban.545465/page-40#post-1069891965

 

No. There is a deliberate fiddle and only at the relevant (the allleged and absurd karate chop) part of the interchange between that woman and Acosta.

 

Because he resolutely stood his ground in the face of many stupid people who ridiculed him about what he predicted would be the outcome of this inititial legal action. And to give myself a pat on the back.....I was there openly agreeing with him. But....he did not need me. He was right, at all times. His idiot detractors en masse were.......wrong.

 

He predicted that the judge would allow Acosta to have access to the White House while the case is worked through?

 

Even before it was started...or is 'filed' the correct US term? He even got the reason correct.....due process.

 

All this proves is the AP knows how to lie.

We already knew this.

Lolz at "not slowing down images correctly".

We all know lefties know how to lie.

A frame at a time.

 

Okay....can you show me how and why that bloke (who made sense to me) is a liar. Does he have form for lying? Please explain.

 

He is citing computer video as evidence, instead of what happened.

When lefties get the upload patch, perhaps they will understand.

 

That makes no sense. Did you look at that YouTube thing I posted, or am I wasting my time telling you that the Earth is not flat?

 

Lol at you tube thing you posted.

You are wasting your time thinking a video of a video convinces me.

Fidelity isn't the left's friend, is it?

Try to get well regulated.

 

Okay......I guess you are an IT guru, which I am not, by a very,very long shot. Hence, my questions. Are you an IT guru? Did you actually look at that You Tube thing I posted, or not?

 

Why is it you feel the need to appeal to an "IT guru"?

Didn't you see and understand what happened?

I bet children in Japan can figure it out.

 

Maybe they can. You keep not saying.......did you watch that You Tube thing I posted on not?

 

Now if your basic point is whether I saw what happened.......well yes, I sure did, and I am one of a very few, maybe the one and only Mohawk who had never heard of Acosta before. I had never even seen a Presser of Donald's before that one.

So.....I come with clean, unsullied hands.

With that not partisan and innocent clarity, I saw a reporter doing what reporters here do as standard fare. I saw some strange woman come out of nowhere to crouch, tiger like ready to pounce.....and that she did maybe on some secret hand signal.....she then made a concerted effort to get/grab that mic. She did actually get hold of it and drag down vertically, extending her elbow where some bloke's hand was. It was made to appear that he had gone ballistic with a Bruce Lee karate chop.....nah, she dragged down on the mic, he held it and she went back into crouching tiger mode. He is innocent of any unlawful assault. It remains to be determined whether the White House tried to stitch him up, and that sure is the way it seems to me.

 

Not partisan innocent clarity.

Ok.

 

So where is Nancy Pelosi's 'speedy' teen-molestation investigation of Rep. Tony Cardenas?

A big case of Democratic Party hypocrisy over an actual child-molestation case in their own ranks.