Project Veritas vid 3~ Clinton directly involved (ethic, accuses, school, income)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And if this was all creative editing (unfathomable considering the amount of material) than nothing would've happened. People would simple say it's fake. Much like the Russian angle, trying to discredit O'Keefe is just a way to avoid discussing such damning material. People will do all kinds of mental gymnastics to avoid confronting corruption.
Vera never engaged in child prostitution and sex trafficking. He was only made to appear to by O'Keefe's video. Vera contacted the police after O'Keefe left his office. Where does Vera go to get his reputation back?
Vera never engaged in child prostitution and sex trafficking. He was only made to appear to by O'Keefe's video. Vera contacted the police after O'Keefe left his office. Where does Vera go to get his reputation back?
So you don't want to address what's on this video? Think those forced to step down/fired will sue for losing their jobs for no reason?
So you don't want to address what's on this video? Think those forced to step down/fired will sue for losing their jobs for no reason?
Why should I? I even heard a Fox reporter claiming that the videos appeared to be edited. Again O'Keefe has a proven track record. He isn't a journalist; he is a propagandist. I wouldn't suspect the media to spend a lot of time on an Oliver Stone video at this point either.
Why should I? I even heard a Fox reporter claiming that the videos appeared to be edited. Again O'Keefe has a proven track record. He isn't a journalist; he is a propagandist. I wouldn't suspect the media to spend a lot of time on an Oliver Stone video at this point either.
Yawn - more attack the messenger. How exactly does he trick people in to saying those things for what amounts to 45+ minutes of video? Hypnosis? I'd like to attempt wrapping my head around that.
Man up and take responsibility like those stepping down and getting fired. You sound like Donna Brazile right now.
It's called deceptive editing. It is O'Keefe's stock in trade. He has never put out anything that wasn't deceptively edited to make it appear people are saying things they never said. He's been caught at it numerous times.
Go ahead and believe the little con artist because the deceptive editing gives you what you want. But accept the fact that no one outside of your echo chamber is ever, ever going to take James O'Keefe seriously again. Never, ever. Because he's a convicted fraud.
You can whine and whine and whine about it in thread after thread, but it won't change O'Keefe's lack of credibility. He is a laughing stock. And it's a reputation that is well deserved.
I keep hearing, they are heavily edited, but I haven't seen an example of heavy editing since the Planned Parenthood videos. Some people keep typing, it is edited, it is deceptive, etc HAVE YOU ACTUALLY WATCHED THE VIDEOS? Are these people NOT watching the videos and just repeating CNN? I really don't get it!!!! Twilight Zone moment!
I keep hearing, they are heavily edited, but I haven't seen an example of heavy editing since the Planned Parenthood videos. Some people keep typing, it is edited, it is deceptive, etc HAVE YOU ACTUALLY WATCHED THE VIDEOS? Are these people NOT watching the videos and just repeating CNN? I really don't get it!!!! Twilight Zone moment!
...
Nah, life is too short. O'Keefe is a serial & reliable liar - his pieces are creatively edited & who-knows-what-else done to them, to make them appear plausible.
1. It's too late in the election cycle - we won't know for sure what these artifacts are until after the election. O'Keefe is perfectly aware that there's insufficient time to do the forensics - he's counting on the clock running out & then no one caring about the results either way, once the election is over. That is his normal MO - if anything about it can be said to be normal. I assume he has some kind of calculation for optimum timing of his releases - long enough for maximum coverage of the (always-fabulous!) charges, not enough time to examine the underlying footage & find the seams.
2. O'Keefe & his crew have an extremely bad reputation - which they've earned by dint of prodigious effort - their reputation for mendacity, lying, suggesting, & so on is well-earned, they've worked hard to achieve that level of miasmic falsity, & they own it. It sticks to them individually, en masse, & to their product.
3. As I've mentioned before, if O'Keefe wants his productions to be taken seriously, he's free to put in 20 or 30 years of serious professional unbiased documentary work - or whatever factual kinds of presentation he wants to do. If he can actually produce unbiased, fair, hard-hitting & ethical news for that amount of time, I'll be willing to reconsider my opinion of his output. Not before then, & certainly not now.
Consider it the journalistic equivalent of crawling on his knees for hundreds of miles - a kind of ethical penance for his prior lapses.
Nah, life is too short. O'Keefe is a serial & reliable liar - his pieces are creatively edited & who-knows-what-else done to them, to make them appear plausible.
1. It's too late in the election cycle - we won't know for sure what these artifacts are until after the election. O'Keefe is perfectly aware that there's insufficient time to do the forensics - he's counting on the clock running out & then no one caring about the results either way, once the election is over. That is his normal MO - if anything about it can be said to be normal. I assume he has some kind of calculation for optimum timing of his releases - long enough for maximum coverage of the (always-fabulous!) charges, not enough time to examine the underlying footage & find the seams.
2. O'Keefe & his crew have an extremely bad reputation - which they've earned by dint of prodigious effort - their reputation for mendacity, lying, suggesting, & so on is well-earned, they've worked hard to achieve that level of miasmic falsity, & they own it. It sticks to them individually, en masse, & to their product.
3. As I've mentioned before, if O'Keefe wants his productions to be taken seriously, he's free to put in 20 or 30 years of serious professional unbiased documentary work - or whatever factual kinds of presentation he wants to do. If he can actually produce unbiased, fair, hard-hitting & ethical news for that amount of time, I'll be willing to reconsider my opinion of his output. Not before then, & certainly not now.
Consider it the journalistic equivalent of crawling on his knees for hundreds of miles - a kind of ethical penance for his prior lapses.
So are you saying that Creamer and Foval didn't say what we heard them say?
There were long segments without edits.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.