Blatant blackout of Ron Paul on CSPAN

page: 1
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+41 more 
posted on May, 13 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Can't find the title of this video with the search function. Sorry if mis-searched

CSPAN anchor misreads a text message "by accident".



It's so grotesque and dishonest.

Peace

edit: not quite sure it's the appropriate forum
edit on 13-5-2012 by CityFarmer because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 13 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
It's amazing that anyone knows who Ron Paul is.

I LOLed at his reading ability.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Did you ever consider the 'possibility' that the clip has been edited to intentionally include the 'misspeak' (?)
?
?

gotta love the smell of bias, agenda and opinion in the morning
:shk:

edit on 5/13/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
How could you misread something like that? As soon as he said mitt Romney he should have stopped dead in his tracks because he said doesn't flip flop in the same sentence!


+16 more 
posted on May, 13 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
Did you ever consider the 'possibility' that the clip has been edited to intentionally include the 'misspeak' (?)
?
?

gotta love the smell of bias, agenda and opinion in the morning
:shk:

edit on 5/13/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)


We can only comment on what's there, how are we being biased if there's no evidence to suggest the clip has been edited? To me it would be more biased to say the clip has been edited only because you disagree with it.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by CityFarmer
 


Wow even in the YouTube comments people are saying its a blatant edit and whatnot, instead of just checking the guys twitter for themselves. Twitter
I hope this was an honest mistake from the reporter, but it doesnt look like an honest mistake from the reporter..
edit on 13-5-2012 by fairguy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by 12m8keall2c
 


Of course. It's always a matter of possibilities. But it wouldn't surprise me if it actually happened. Plus the inlaying of the text message seems to fit the captions and logo.

Your thoughts?



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by CityFarmer
 


Read the dudes twitter page, the original comment is right there along with a lot of complaints about them changing it.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   
This is his twitter and he's also saying they said Romney instead of Paul

twitter
edit on 5/13/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Well the twitter screen isn't edited. However, the reporter isn't shown while saying Romney so it could be voice over. If this is real, it is so ridiculous I don't even have words to describe it. Whether you support Paul or not, his treatment is beyond unfair.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by 12m8keall2c
 


Did you ever "think" to check the man's twitter it wasn't a edit, obviously somebody else has an agenda and is bias.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by 12m8keall2c
 


Umm, yeah, sure anything in this world is possible but watching & listening to that video it's clear it is NOT edited & the reporter DID say Mitt Romney instead of Ron Paul. The poor sound quality actually helps determine it is not an edit.


Originally posted by bl4ke360
This is his twitter and he's also saying they said Romney instead of Paul

twitter
edit on 5/13/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)


And to further prove it wasn't edited ^
edit on 13-5-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Ok so when Dr Ron Paul becomes the next President of the United States, this reporter will still accidentally call him mitt romney... Did this reporter not get the latest memo? Ron Paul is still running...



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by bl4ke360

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
Did you ever consider the 'possibility' that the clip has been edited to intentionally include the 'misspeak' (?)
?
?

gotta love the smell of bias, agenda and opinion in the morning
:shk:

edit on 5/13/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)


To me it would be more biased to say the clip has been edited only because you disagree with it.


Agreed, provide evidence first that it IS edited before you speak of people being biased.


+11 more 
posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I'm looking at C-SPAN's video library here www.c-spanvideo.org... and interestingly, that video segment is missing. If you look at the top right corner of the segment, it occurs at 7:21 am on May 13, which is supposed to occur in this video: www.c-spanvideo.org...

But notice at the 2:47 mark in the video, the time goes from 6:45 to 9:45, skipping over this video segment which occured at 7:21.
Looks like C-Span intentionally left this portion out, so I think it's safe to say beyond a doubt the video has not been edited.

Edited: Disregard what I just said, the time difference was because of the time zones. However I did find the video segment on C-SPAN's own website, right here: www.c-spanvideo.org... Go to 21:14 and clearly he says Mitt Romney and not Ron Paul.
edit on 5/14/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
I shouldn't have to repeat this, but RP is being ignored on a lot of other networks...There is blatant blackouts against RP regardless. Why is that?



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by fairguy
 


Jim Hines® ‏ @HinesJimmy
Hey America if you want a candidate with viable plans who does not flip flop you will support and vote for @RonPaul @cspanwj
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by jacobe001
 


Thats the one, definitely not edited.



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
holster your pistols, hombres.

I hold no political affiliations whatsoever

hell ... i'm as beige as ... well ... Beige


He can say whatever he wants on his twitter and what have you .... but to claim that 'audio clip' isn't edited with and for overall intent and or purpose ... is B.S.


sometimes the obvious is just ... obvious.

* i've been wrong before

edit on 5/13/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
holster your pistols, hombres.

I hold no political affiliations whatsoever

hell ... i'm as beige as ... well ... Beige


He can say whatever he wants on his twitter and what have you .... but to claim that 'audio clip' isn't edited with and for overall intent and or purpose ... is B.S.


sometimes the obvious is just ... obvious.

* i've been wrong before

edit on 5/13/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)


The burden of proof isn't on someone to prove a negative, it's to prove a positive, which means if you're suggesting the video has been edited, you have to show evidence to suggest that.
So since the burden of proof is always on the claim that X exists rather than on the claim that X does not exist, simply saying the video has been edited does nothing to support your position.
edit on 5/13/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum