Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

a different portion of the response.

The portion of her answer on 60 Minutes was more succinct,

So the people saying it was edited to make her look less incoherent and flailing were completely right :marseyemojilaugh:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's not deceitful if you're fooling viewers in good faith.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Really releasing the unedited footage would be deceitful because it would be trying to convince people that she's not competent, which we know she is.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

On one hand, I get the desire to have highlights - watching a 25-minute segment about the interview is long enough, having to watch the whole 1-2 hour thing would be much longer.

But they should still release the full thing. Put a link to the highlights if you want, but let people watch it.

Ah heck we all know why they won't lmao.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

When we do deceitful editing, it's in good faith and wholesome. When Project Veritas does it, it's in bad faith and they are stinky heads :!marseyindignant:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.