Wrong, you can’t even admit the video was altered.
If your posts held any water you wouldn’t need an altered video to support your argument. The fact that the video was altered is all the proof we need.
1 Like
Tthe live feed from the WH video shows that Acosta’s arm was already moving downward in a gesture toward Trump when the intern reaches across his body for the mic. He was not shoving her arm away-he was gesturing downward with his left arm when she reached across. It couldn’t be more clear.
What SHS’s edited video clip shows is a fast gesture downward from Acosta’s arm as if he is chopping her, to give the impression he attacked her to get her arm out of the way.
There is a VERY clear difference in the video SHS shared, and the actual video from the live feed, and it was a deliberate attempt to propagate propaganda. The video I linked shows this, very clearly.
I did? Where? Because what I see this morning is you calling everyone who disagrees with you sheeple. The same boring personal attacks.
See THAT is an actual personal attack. I’d knock that ■■■■ off if I were you.
Her job is to transport the mic. They are not supposed to assault the reporter and attempt to wrestle it away if it is not freely given. If anyone is guilty of assault it is her, she should be fired for her behavior.
Of course it’s the same motion.
But editing makes all the difference…in real time playback it makes what Acosta did seem more premeditated and more violent than it actually was.
Yes…a three frame edit has this effect. It’s obvious to anyone who’s not trying to make more of what Acosta did than he actually did
1 Like
Why are you defending Acosta?
He should have turned over the mic to her upon request.
End of story.
1 Like
Because Acosta should have turned the mic over to find young lady so she can hand it off to next reporter…and Acosta can continue write/report his experience.
Say it with us. There was no assault. SHS shared an edited propaganda version of the incident. Just admit it and eat those propaganda peas.
Trump shouldn’t have interrupted Acosta as soon as Acosta started talking. Why doesn’t that bother you? Why is Trump allowed to be an asshat but not Acosta?
By the legal definition…yes there was.
You appear to be arguing the battery defense.
1 in the law of tort, an assault is an act that causes another person to apprehend the infliction of immediate unlawful force on his person; a battery is the actual infliction of unlawful force on another person. There can be assault without battery, as where the wrongdoer is restrained, but if a battery is immediately impossible then there is not assault, as where a man behind bars threatens violence. There is a conflict of authority concerning the degree to which there must be an actual gesture rather than simple words.
Someone is really trying to seek my attention.
2 Likes
It is the President’s conference to conduct, not CNN’s.
I understand CNN is filing a suit. I encourage them to double down on stupid.
Don’t flatter yourself. It is total attention deficit seeking (TADS for short)…any engagement will suffice to fuel the compulsive defiant rage that exists. http://tads.dcri.org
If what she did was an assault, Acosta’s actions were worse. I didn’t consider it assault on his part but applying your standards, he should be arrested.
He turned over the mic. The fact that he didn’t do it fast enough for you is irrelevant.
By the legal definition. You don’t appear to know the actual definition of “assault” and appear to be just making one up.
No, I’m arguing the “there was no intent to harm” defense because the intern stuck her arm in the path of Acosta’s arm that was already moving.
The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but is generally defined as intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Physical injury is not required.
If anything, the intern assaulting Acosta as SHE intentionally put her arm in the way of his moving arm. The contact between them was initiated by the intern’s reaching across his body. She created the situation.
You made a claim, so I’m asking you to back it up. It is a simple request-show your work and back your assertion or admit you’re just making things up.
In what way am I defending Acosta other than from a ridiculous assertion that he assaulted (laid hands on) the White House intern?
The elements of argument requires more than regurgitating the opposite of what is put forth.
Acosta is still OUT and that is as how it should be.
