Cancel the Debate! CNN Caught Selectively-Editing Trump’s ‘Muslim’ Comments

[countryboy]

The editing was sneaky in that it dishonestly highlighted an obviously inflammatory answer, but I don't see how his position on a Muslim registry is changed, even without the edit.

Exactly! Editing only matters if it's videos of PP yucking it up about butchering human fetuses. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Boy, I'd feel bad about this post given Trump's most recent statements on banning Muslims from entering the US.

I don't feel bad about anything anyone says anymore. They edited the video. From what I have seen from the left editing is a BAD thing. A lie is a lie and Hillary isn't much better than Trump. Can't get any worse than Obama. Those three all pretty much are over the edge. Obama can't seem to get his story straight. ISISI is contained but they aren't. We have had a strategy for dealing with the situation in Syria, but we didn't, until three weeks ago. There are no viable threats in the US as far as terrorism goes, until less than a week later when the Cali thing happened. The DOJ says we should trust DHS and the State Department when it comes to vetting refugees accept they don't have any data to vet the refugees with. They told us they do and then they were proven liars. All they can do in the vetting process is interviews. I guess the answer is to just let Obama, who doesn't have a clue, do whatever wants to do and blame it on Bush when it goes south. IF that doesn't work then they can use the DOJ to cover it up and just keep piping smoke up our ass. Sounds like a plan.

 

[Hatuey]

I don't feel bad about anything anyone says anymore. They edited the video. From what I have seen from the left editing is a BAD thing. A lie is a lie and Hillary isn't much better than Trump. Can't get any worse than Obama. Those three all pretty much are over the edge. Obama can't seem to get his story straight. ISISI is contained but they aren't. We have had a strategy for dealing with the situation in Syria, but we didn't, until three weeks ago. There are no viable threats in the US as far as terrorism goes, until less than a week later when the Cali thing happened. The DOJ says we should trust DHS and the State Department when it comes to vetting refugees accept they don't have any data to vet the refugees with. They told us they do and then they were proven liars. All they can do in the vetting process is interviews. I guess the answer is to just let Obama, who doesn't have a clue, do whatever wants to do and blame it on Bush when it goes south. IF that doesn't work then they can use the DOJ to cover it up and just keep piping smoke up our ass. Sounds like a plan.

Trump turned out to be in favor of exactly what he said in the "edited" video though. So is it really a lie? Or you not wanting to accept that Trump's shades of authoritarianism came through in a video most likely edited for time and without any obvious malice? It seems that the latter is most likely. Trump said something, it was edited for time, it ended up sounding exactly like what Trump is now supporting. I mean, it seems to me like whether the video is edited or not, we're left with Trump espousing the same exact opinion: He supports a registry specifically for Muslim refugees coming from Syria, and has even advocated banning them from entering the US.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Trump turned out to be in favor of exactly what he said in the "edited" video though. So is it really a lie? Or you not wanting to accept that Trump's shades of authoritarianism came through in a video most likely edited for time and without any obvious malice?

The video was edited. You want to play arm chair quarter back or else you want a double standard when if comes to how videos are presented.

 

[iguanaman]

CNN deceptively edited the video... It's obvious to those on both the left and right.

But Trump has never said he would not implement the Muslim database did he? I sure did not hear it, did you?

 

[NonoBadDog]

Trump turned out to be in favor of exactly what he said in the "edited" video though. So is it really a lie? Or you not wanting to accept that Trump's shades of authoritarianism came through in a video most likely edited for time and without any obvious malice? It seems that the latter is most likely. Trump said something, it was edited for time, it ended up sounding exactly like what Trump is now supporting. I mean, it seems to me like whether the video is edited or not, we're left with Trump espousing the same exact opinion: He supports a registry specifically for Muslim refugees coming from Syria, and has even advocated banning them from entering the US.

It is funny how some people claimed the PP video was edited for time and that wasn't acceptable.

 

[iguanaman]

The video was edited. You want to play arm chair quarter back or else you want a double standard when if comes to how videos are presented.

Maybe if the edit changed the meaning what he said I would care but it did not.

 

[humbolt]

It is funny how some people claimed the PP video was edited for time and that wasn't acceptable.

Trump just wants to edit Muslims. Should be okay with the left. It all just depends on how you think of it.

I can't remember any time in the past when politics was such an entertaining show of idiocy on all fronts as it is now. It's like Laurel and Hardy gone wild with the media caught wondering which end is up.

 

[Hatuey]

The video was edited. You want to play arm chair quarter back or else you want a double standard when if comes to how videos are presented. Trump has never said he wanted people to wear identification (a badge), as the article said. The article is still a lie.

Yes, videos on television are often edited. Welcome to the magical world of media. Your claim was that it was done for some sinister purpose and the CNN debate should be canceled. However, whatever was edited from the video couldn't possibly be said to change things all that much given clearly supports the much worse position of banning Muslims from entering the US.

In short, what we're left with is that Trump's recent position on banning Muslims has corroborated the video you claim was edited. I'm no sure what to make of that? Yeah, they edited the video... and then Trump gave a much worse opinion that makes a Syrian Muslim registry seem like the well thought out option?

 

[Hatuey]

It is funny how some people claimed the PP video was edited for time and that wasn't acceptable.

The criticisms towards the PP videos was because they presented PP as doing something no investigation has yet been able to prove in multiple states. Can you show a tangible difference between Trump's position on a Muslim registry, and banning Muslims from entering the US? I mean, how does the second one work without the first one to make sure you know how many Muslims live and where they live in the US? It's cute that you changed your post but this is a much worse argument than the first one.

 

[Mr Person]

I don't feel bad about anything anyone says anymore. They edited the video..

Then why don't you tell me why I'm wrong about how the English language works?

I certainly don't think they should be editing anything out of the statement, but I also don't reach the same conclusion. Blue commentary is mine.





From OP:

The left-wing liars at CNN have intentionally edited the video to make it look as though Trump said “absolutely” to a Muslim registry. What CNN edited out is in bold:

Reporter: Should there be a database system that tracks Muslims who are in this country?

Trump: There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases. We should have a lot of systems, and today you can do it. But right now we need to have a border, we have to have strength, we have to have a wall, and we cannot let what’s happening to this country happen any longer.

[Assuming that he intended his words to have their ordinary meaning in English, this response means he (1) agrees that there should be databases to track all muslims in the country, (2) he thinks there should be "a lot of systems, beyond databases" in addition, (3) wants strength, and (4) wants a wall. If you edit out the bolded, it makes it look like he said the ONLY thing he wanted was a database + systems beyond a database. That's inaccurate, but not inaccurate in the way that OP wants it to be. He wants databases + systems beyond databases + strength + a wall. ]

Reporter: Is that something your White House would like to implement?

Donald Trump: I would certainly implement that. Absolutely.

Again, here the editing makes it look like the only thing he would implement was databases of muslims and lots of systems beyond those databases. That is inaccurate. As discussed above, what he was actually agreeing should be implemented was databases + systems beyond databases + strength + a wall. That's just how English works.

Trump’s “absolutely” is clearly in reference to strengthening the border. Look at the whole transcript. When the NBC News reporter asks, “Is that something your White House would like to implement?,” Trump has just talked about fortifying the border and obviously believes that is what the NBC reporter is referring to.
CNN edited that out!

No. Where neither the reporter nor Trump identify one of the four things he said we should be doing, the pronoun "that" is taken to refer to the list of things he said we should be doing. Not simply the last of the things he said we should be doing.

Bob: I want a pepperoni pizza, a beer, and a napkin

Joe: Is that something you'd like in one hour?

Bob: Yes, I would.



Bob has obviously just said that in one hour, he wants a pepperoni pizza, a beer, and a napkin. Nobody would interpret this exchange as an expression of desire for a napkin and just a napkin.

Why are you insisting that Bob was specifying that he only wanted a napkin?

 

[NonoBadDog]

Yes, videos on television are often edited. Welcome to the magical world of media. Your claim was that it was done for some sinister purpose and the CNN debate should be canceled. However, whatever was edited from the video couldn't possibly be said to change things all that much given clearly supports the much worse position of banning Muslims from entering the US.

In short, what we're left with is that Trump's recent position on banning Muslims has corroborated the video you claim was edited. I'm no sure what to make of that? Yeah, they edited the video... and then Trump gave a much worse opinion that makes a Syrian Muslim registry seem like the well thought out option?

Here we go with the double standard again. They edited the video. When there was discussion about the PP video I was against the release of the edited version of that also. CNN had no idea that Trump would say this more than a month later so it was dishonest. Their intent was dishonest. The edited out this whole sentence and it saved maybe 5 seconds of time. It changed the flavor of his statement. Did CNN know Trump was going to say this? Did they have a crystal ball that told them he was going to say this? Nope. It was a lie.

But right now we need to have a border, we have to have strength, we have to have a wall, and we cannot let what’s happening to this country happen any longer.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Then why don't you tell me why I'm wrong about how the English language works?

Why are you insisting that Bob was specifying that he only wanted a napkin?

Do think that we should let refugees in the country without vetting them?

 

[Hatuey]

Here we go with the double standard again. They edited the video.

Yes, and I asked you did it change at all what Trump eventually ended up supporting anyways? As far as I understand it, Trump does support a Muslims registry. He also supports banning Muslims from entering the US. How does the editing of the video change those stances? There is no double standard. The PP videos were criticized for giving an impression that PP was trading in baby parts. No such thing has been proven to have occurred. Trump has proven to in fact support everything he supported in the edited video.

 

[NonoBadDog]

The criticisms towards the PP videos was because they presented PP as doing something no investigation has yet been able to prove in multiple states. Can you show a tangible difference between Trump's position on a Muslim registry, and banning Muslims from entering the US? I mean, how does the second one work without the first one to make sure you know how many Muslims live and where they live in the US? It's cute that you changed your post but this is a much worse argument than the first one.

I think we need to vet and track EVERY immigrant and refugee that comes into this country, regardless of their country of origin, religion or favorite movie. I don't think we need to chase down every Muslim however. If they are here on a visa we should know where they are. If we don't know where they are then they didn't update their visa and we should find anyone that hasn't updated their visa, give them one warning and then deport them if they fail to update their address for the visa after that. If they are a citizen tracking them down would be as wrong as tracking anyone else down for no reason.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Yes, and I asked you did it change at all what Trump eventually ended up supporting anyways? As far as I understand it, Trump does support a Muslims registry. He also supports banning Muslims from entering the US. How does the editing of the video change those stances? There is no double standard. The PP videos were criticized for giving an impression that PP was trading in baby parts. No such thing has been proven to have occurred. Trump has proven to in fact support everything he supported in the edited video.

And I said that it didn't matter what he said now compared to what he said then. CNN had no way of knowing that he was going to say. It didn't happen yet. This sounds like "Future Crimes".

 

[Hatuey]

I think we need to vet and track EVERY immigrant and refugee that comes into this country, regardless of their country of origin, religion or favorite movie. I don't think we need to chase down every Muslim however. If they are here on a visa we should know where they are. If we don't know where they are then they didn't update their visa and we should find anyone that hasn't updated their visa, give them one warning and then deport them if they fail to update their address for the visa after that. If they are a citizen tracking them down would be as wrong as tracking anyone else down for no reason.

Okay, I didn't really ask you what you thought should be done. I asked you if there was a distinct difference between what Trump said in the edited video, and what he has come out in support of anyways? As terrible as it sounds, Trumps comments were better when we thought he only wanted Muslim registry. Now his statement is about keeping Muslims out and monitor the ones insie.. So it's really all up to you how you want to see it.

Okay, fine we dismiss the video because Trump doesn't just want a Muslim registry. He also wants to ban Muslims from the country. I mean, that's what it seems like you're suggesting. That we should cancel a debate because a report cut for time did correctly describe how disgusting the ramifications of Donald Trump's arguments really are.

Either way you choose to see it, that's not a loss for CNN. In one case, their editing ends up being a lucky guess, in the other, what Trump ultimately espouses is far more sinister than what CNN presented.

 

[Hatuey]

And I said that it didn't matter what he said now compared to what he said then. CNN had no way of knowing that he was going to say. It didn't happen yet. This sounds like "Future Crimes".

Or as I said, it could simply be edited for time, and it ended up sounding exactly like what Trump was trying to get at in the best case scenario, and in the worst case scenario, it actually seems tamer than what he had in mind at the time.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Okay, I didn't really ask you what you thought should be done. I asked you if there was a distinct difference between what Trump said in the edited video, and what he has come out in support of anyways? As terrible as it sounds, Trumps comments were better when he was advocating what would need a Muslim registry, to keep the Muslims out and remove the ones coming in. So it's really all up to you how you want to see it.

Okay, fine we dismiss the video because Trump doesn't just want a Muslim registry. He also wants to ban Muslims from the country. I mean, that's what it seems like you're suggesting. That we should cancel a debate because a report cut for time did correctly describe how disgusting the ramifications of Donald Trump's arguments really are.

That's not a loss for CNN.

Dude, seriously. I am not a Trump fan. Am also not a fan of edited videos, no matter who edited them. If you want to talk about immigration or refugees we can do that. Trump is over the top. I am glad he says stuff like this and I hope he keeps doing it. He needs to do so much damage to himself that he loses the primaries. I have not read the latest statement from him about Muslims. I pretty much ignore Trump and his craziness. I am not going to take your word that he said he wants to ban all Muslims. He might have said the he wanted to stop letting Muslims in the country, which would be different from the first statement. I suppose you will want me to go read what his statement was.

 

[Hatuey]

Dude, seriously. I am not a Trump fan. Am also not a fan of edited videos, no matter who edited them. If you want to talk about immigration or refugees we can do that. Trump is over the top. I am glad he says stuff like this and I hope he keeps doing it. He needs to do so much damage to himself that he loses the primaries. I have not read the latest statement from him about Muslims. I pretty much ignore Trump and his craziness. I am not going to take your word that he said he wants to ban all Muslims. He might have said the he wanted to stop letting Muslims in the country, which would be different from the first statement. I suppose you will want me to go read what his statement was.

Okay, let's simplify this: Does the video edit substantially change the meaning of what Trump has supported? What about the other way? Do the statements by Trump since the ones from the videos change anything? Apparently, not. You can complain about thought crime all you want. For that matter, you can complain about "editing". I think you missed the point. The very act of starting to shoot a video, an stopping is editing. The problem was that the editing did not represent what really happened.

Nobody went into Trump's mind. Nobody accused him of a crime. Nobody pressured him into revealing anything. A quote was understood to mean X, Donald Trump ended up supporting this interpretation through later statements.

Seriously, for you to compare this to PP is ridiculous. PP WAS accused of trafficking baby parts. An abhorrent crime by pro-choice sensibilities. PP has yet to be proven guilty of it. There is no comparison to be made here at all. It's an attempt to not discuss the fact that we now have a presidential candidate supporting ideas usually reserved for Nazi Germany documentaries or Soviet Russia articles.

 

[Mr Person]

Do think that we should let refugees in the country without vetting them?

Didn't think you could tell me why I'm wrong about how the English language works.

Any time you want to show your other thoughts are worth listening to, you can always find the points you are running away from on the top of this page or back on p6.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Didn't think you could tell me why I'm wrong about how the English language works.

Any time you want to show your other thoughts are worth listening to, you can always find the points you are running away from on the top of this page or back on p6.

I just asked you a simple question so I could get some context as to where you were coming from. If you want to do the white flag thing then go for it.

 

[Cardinal]

It is funny how some people claimed the PP video was edited for time and that wasn't acceptable.

The only people arguing that the PP video was edited "for time" was the pro life side.

And what you're still left with is that
1)The first edit of Trump's words, while falsely editing his comments for dramatic effect, were not changed even after the edits were removed, and
2)Trump's position was verified by his own, very real words on preventing Muslims from entering the country

 

[NonoBadDog]

The only people arguing that the PP video was edited "for time" was the pro life side.

And what you're still left with is that
1)The first edit of Trump's words, while falsely editing his comments for dramatic effect, were not changed even after the edits were removed, and
2)Trump's position was verified by his own, very real words on preventing Muslims from entering the country

My point was that Hatuey said the video that CNN put out might have been edited for time. It strikes me as ironic that it is the same argument that the pro-lifers used but it was not a valid argument at that time.

 

[Cardinal]

My point was that Hatuey said the video that CNN put out might have been edited for time. It strikes me as ironic that it is the same argument that the pro-lifers used but it was not a valid argument at that time.

With one important difference: the message from one video after the edits are removed remains unchanged, whereas the message from another without the edits becomes something remarkably less sinister.

You can't compare the two.