Derby Trail Forums - Mother Jones admits Romney vid is not complete

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)

- The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Mother Jones admits Romney vid is not complete (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48414)

Mother Jones admits Romney vid is not complete

After releasing the full tape, then back tracking:

>>>Late Tuesday evening, Jacobson obtained the following comment from David Corn of Mother Jones:

According to the source, the recording device inadvertently turned off. The source noticed this quickly and turned it back one [sic]. The source estimates that one to two minutes, maybe less, of recording was missed.

Corn was forced to update his original post, which promised the "full" video, to reflect the fact that a key portion of the video is, in fact, missing.

There is no way to know, without the missing footage, exactly what Romney said. On Monday evening, Romney called for a complete video of his remarks to be released.<<<

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journal...or-Two-Minutes

After time to re-watch this, I'm finding what he said, especially in light of the attempted smear job, fairly innocuous.

My take is that he was referring to people not paying taxes that are benefiting for social reforms that provide said benefits.

And that's probably true for the most part.

He never said that retirees drawing off their SS benefits were freeloaders, he never said disabled vets were free loaders, and may well have clarified those remarks, we'll never know due to this hatchet job.

The remarks about Palestine and mid-east are also spot on, though admittedly blunt and not particularly well phrased.

I still don't think there is a chance in hell that I'll vote for him, but this is pretty shady journalism and for the MSM to run with it without verifying it's veracity seems par for the course.

Of course it was a verbal mistake. I understood what he was saying although he said it like a college freshman that just got out of PoliSci 101.

He's fair game. All politicians are.

At least he was being honest. A rare moment for his ilk.

People are probably upset because what he's saying has some truth to it. And that is very disconcerting for those of us unfortunate ones who are paying taxes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis (Post 890908)

You would think maybe Romney would mention that happened to him? That would have been an easy and plausible explanation. Not that hard to come up with that one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants (Post 890909)

Facts make people sad, no one likes to be confronted with reality. Especially during an election.

Unless that couple minutes gap, which is obvious both in the transcript and on watching the tape, in the middle of the talk, contains the words,

"Ha Ha Ha, I am just kidding about everything I have said before, and after this ! "

it has zero bearing on what Romney has clearly said in the tape.

Romney is an entitled plutocrat, that doesn't have a clue how most of America lives, and honestly believes the lie that 47% of non-taxpaying Americans are exactly how he disparagingly described them.

And you know, I've known a lot of well-off people, and no, they are not all cold idiots like Romney.

Romney already lost the election before Libya, Libya exposed him and sealed the coffin lid, this is just more nails n his coffin.

That the GOP let this guy get through to be their nominee is as recklessly appalling for the country as the Palin choice was.

What a coincidence that the video stops right after Romney says 47%! Of all the places for such an accident, what are the odds of that? So sad that The liberal media needs to alter videos in a desperate effort to reelect their dear leader.

Just so we are all clear Riot, you said the election turned on some comments that Romney said about Libya??? People put that the importance of that statement over the economy? It doesn't matter that Obama has failed us with both his domestic and foreign policy? People will give him four more years because of what Romney said about Libya?

Of course your statement is complete nonsense as Romney was only a point behind Obama in today's Gallup which means he has gained ground since that statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser (Post 891066)

What a coincidence that the video stops right after Romney says 47%!

Quote:

The Romney campaign was clearly implying the whole video was rubbish. But there's a slight problem. Politico's Dylan Byers, the source for the debunking charge, quickly noted that he had done no such thing. He wrote:

there is nothing in my report that "debunks" the video.

Just amazing, the rabid right doesn't even bother watch the video themselves before they grab a half-quote from here and a lie from there, and let loose the flying monkeys. Unbelievable. But why those sites have no respect as "journalism". And their blind adherents repeatedly end up looking like ignorant fools.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 891073)

:zz: It doesn't.

You haven't listened to it, have you? You haven't read the transcript, have you?

Hint: WND, Drudge, The Blaze, and Breitbart tend to lie to the gullible.

Romney Video Claim Debunked
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012...video-debunked

Mostly aggregation from other news sources. Oh - and the original transcript and tape links for Sockpuppet to read and watch.

For example: What the entire "it's been selectively edited" claim is based upon:

Just amazing, the rabid right doesn't even bother watch the video themselves before they grab a half-quote from here and a lie from there, and let loose the flying monkeys. Unbelievable. But why those sites have no respect as "journalism". And their blind adherents repeatedly end up looking like ignorant fools.

Nice try Riot, Mother Jones has admitted some key parts are missing, only the really gullible believe their line about it being an accident.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser (Post 891080)

Nice try Riot, Mother Jones has admitted some key parts are missing, only the really gullible believe their line about it being an accident.

Um, no.

You're way behind the news, Sockpuppet

I'll post it here for you, so you can read about the Romney campaign walk back today of their bogus claim, based upon non-Mother Jones journalists pointing out the Romney campaign is wrong.

Is there anything the Romney campaign has said in the past two months that has not been walked back? Doesn't seem so.

Quote:

Romney's Video-Debunking Claim Is…Debunked
—By David Corn
Wed Sep. 19, 2012 4:00 PM PDT

This is getting ridiculous.

After Mother Jones posted video of Mitt Romney sharing remarks with millionaire donors that he would never express to voters—noting that nearly half of the American electorate are moochers and that Romney doesn't believe a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is feasible—Romney did not deny he said what he said.

As the cliché goes, he doubled down, saying his remarks were inelegant but a reflection of his views about the rapid growth of entitlement programs in the United States.

(Actually, this was a bait-and-switch operation. Romney was not talking policy when he disdainfully described half of the citizenry as parasites and victims.)

On Wednesday afternoon, he went further, with his campaign claiming that the video had been "debunked."

In lashing out at the Obama campaign, Romney's crew issued this email:

Quote:

Today, The Obama Campaign Leveled False Attacks Against Mitt Romney Based On A Debunked And Selectively Edited Video:

Today, Obama Campaign Spokesperson Ben LaBolt Attacked Mitt Romney Based On A Debunked Mother Jones Tape. OBAMA CAMPAIGN SPOKESMAN BEN LABOLT: "You heard on the tapes released this week that it's Mitt Romney who would walk away from the peace process." (MSNBC, 9/19/12)

But This Morning, Politico Reported That The Mother Jones Video Was Selectively Edited To Give A False Impression About Mitt Romney’s Views On The Middle East Peace Process.

"But the clip initially provided by Mother Jones does not include that part of his remarks, and therefore was not reported by the aforementioned news outlets.

Romney's complete remarks about the Mideast peace process were included in the complete video Mother Jones published Tuesday afternoon, less than 24 hours after it released clips from the fundraiser. But the clip posted to the Mother Jones website, which was cited by the national media, cuts out the excerpt in which Romney says that 'American strength, American resolve' will cause the Palestinians to 'some day reach the point where they want peace more than we're trying to force peace on them.'"

(Dylan Byers, "Technically, Romney Said Peace Was Possible," Politico, 9/19/12)

The Romney campaign was clearly implying the whole video was rubbish. But there's a slight problem.

Politico's Dylan Byers, the source for the Romney debunking charge, quickly noted that he had done no such thing. He wrote:

Quote:

there is nothing in my report that "debunks" the video.

In his article, posted earlier in the day, Byers had noted how some folks were complaining that we had edited a long clip of Romney talking about the Middle East selectively.

In that clip—watch it here—Romney trashed the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, said the Palestinians (whom he lumped into one mindset) did not want peace and only sought the destruction of Israel, that he would not actively pursue the peace process and would instead seek to "kick the ball down the field," and that he had paid no real attention when a former secretary of state had told him that peace might be possible in the Middle East.

That is a total diss of the peace process—and would represent a radical break with US policy, which has supported a two-state solution since the Clinton years.

Yet Romney went on to say—and this clip did not include this—that if the United States showed "resolve….the Palestinians will some day reach the point where they want peace more than we're trying to force peace on them." Thus, peace might be theoretically possible at some point in the distance.

This was not a case of selective editing. The point was to show what was newsworthy: Romney breaking with current policy and stating views that he has not stated publicly. (In an interview this summer, he said he supported a two-state solution.)

Nevertheless, some Romney backers have cried foul and managed to turn this into a dispute they can use to raise questions about the secret Romney tape.

But don't take my word. Here's more from Byers:

Quote:

More mysterious still, is why the Romney campaign wants to debunk a video containing remarks that the candidate doubled-down on in a follow-up press conference.

Slate's Dave Weigel has weighed in as well:

Quote:

By calling the whole tape "debunked" and "selectively edited," the campaign's hewing closer to the Breitbart.com argument -- the real story is liberal media-Obama collusion. And the result is a sort of paradox, in which Romney stands by what he said in a video that you can't trust.

It was bizarre. After Byers and Weigel had debunked the Romney camp's debunking, Byers heard from a Romney aide who said that the campaign only takes issue with the clip regarding Romney's view on the Mideast, not the entire video.

In other words, the Romney campaign walked back the push-back.

It's not challenging the "47 percent" material or anything else; only the Mideast remarks.

But, as I've said a few thousand times on television these past few days, the wonderful thing about this story is that people can view for themselves.

Watch Romney talking about the Mideast, and it's clear he has contempt for the peace process as it has been conceived for years; does not believe it can work; and would chart a radically different course.

The few sentences not included in that clip—but which were included in the full transcript and complete tape we released—do not a debunking make.

This maneuver smacks of desperation from a campaign hurt by the undeniable words of its candidate.

Riot do you ever have a thought of your own? All you do is cut and paste propaganda from liberal websites.

It is very simple , either something is missing from the tape or it isn't. Since Mother Jones already admitted something is missing, that is not up for debate. We are supposed to trust that a far-left website that will do anything to get their dear leader reelected is telling the truth that it was an accident and that nothing is important is missing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser (Post 891085)

Riot do you ever have a thought of your own?

Yeah, Sockie - I watched the tape myself.

You might try it. Then maybe you don't continue to embarrass yourself posting your crazy, disproven Breitbart nonsense here.

Now run along ... there a conspiracy theory about a Muslim Kenyan Failed Imaginary Cpmmunist Marxist President that needs to use your brain cells.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot (Post 891087)

Ohhhh Riot watched the tape herself, how big of you. So then you must know that Romney was clearly only referring to worrying about their votes correct?

Again you fail to even address my point and resort to name calling which just shows that you are a tool of your liberal masters. Go along Riot, go to their websites so that they can tell you how to think and how to defend their indefensible failures. You are the perfect definition of a useful idiot.

By the way Carter's loser grandson admitted his motivation was revenge for Romney's truthful trashing of his incompetent grandfather. I really trust him when he says the lost footage was accident.

Come on Riot run to your masters so that you can cut and paste their words as you have already proven to everyone here that you can't put an intelligent sentence together. I pity the poor animals that are under your care.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser (Post 891114)

You can be certain she won't be strapping any of those animals on the roof of her car.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 891119)

You can be certain she won't be strapping any of those animals on the roof of her car.

Is that suppose to imply something? I have never fired a gun in my life and don't intend on it. Are you assuming that I ascribe to every policy of the Republican party because I point out how incompetent Obama is? Pretty bad assumption, I am not even a Republican.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser (Post 891122)

And Riot states that she is a registered Republican.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 891124)

And Riot states that she is a registered Republican.

Riot is a liar, nobody goes from being a registered Republican to Obama's lapdog, especially someone her age. I am Libertarian, which when you read my views makes sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser (Post 891125)

Riot is a liar, nobody goes from being a registered Republican to Obama's lapdog, especially someone her age. I am Libertarian, which when you read my views makes sense.

LOL. It seems like every Republipuke I have met loved Ron Paul and claims to be a Libertarian. Shouldn't he have won the nomination in a hand ride? Face it your views are Tea-Baggerish but you are embarassed to embrace it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser (Post 891114)

You'd think after your whole act was exposed for what it was...you would have a little bit of humility. Guess not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 891130)

You'd think after your whole act was exposed for what it was...you would have a little bit of humility. Guess not.

what act are you referring to Dahoss? I am here to discuss politics, Riot is a rude, nasty piece of garbage who resorts to personal insults because she can't form an intelligent opinion on her own. As for everyone else, I would like to keep it civil, which seems to be a problem for you. Up to you, if you want to keep it civil great, if you personally insult me like that idiot Riot, then our posts will get very nasty.