The bbc, again.

[Wisbech Eagle]

They obviously weren't. They were misrepresenting what he said which was:

We're going to walk down to the Capitol, and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women."

The Panorama Version
"We're going to walk down to the Capitol... and I'll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell."

How are those even remotely similar and the absurdity is in thinking it's alright just because it's Trump.

I can only conclude you are deliberately missing the point, which I have now made many times.

This was NOT a verbatim, unedited transcript of the whole speech. You can find that on Truth Social, Fox or whatever other Trump propaganda platform you choose. If that is what you want.

This was a report. It was telling a story. Putting things in context. Drawing on a variety of sources. The question is therefore not whether the speech was edited to tell that story. It was. It is whether the story is an accurate summary of the whole event. Not just a few seconds of it.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Meanwhile, Biden probably didn’t even know he was the President…

Perhaps, although clearly unstable on his feet and never at his best on a lectern, he always had a trustworthy and experienced team around him.

The world would be a much less chaotic place if Biden, or Mickey Mouse, was in charge.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

I can only conclude you are deliberately missing the point, which I have now made many times.

This was NOT a verbatim, unedited transcript of the whole speech. You can find that on Truth Social, Fox or whatever other Trump propaganda platform you choose. If that is what you want.

This was a report. It was telling a story. Putting things in context. Drawing on a variety of sources. The question is therefore not whether the speech was edited to tell that story. It was. It is whether the story is an accurate summary of the whole event. Not just a few seconds of it.

I can only conclude that your antipathy towards Trump allows you to accept misinformation. How can it be accurate when parts of a speech are taken out of context and put together to create a different story.

 

[Common Sense Club]

Perhaps, although clearly unstable on his feet and never at his best on a lectern, he always had a trustworthy and experienced team around him.

The world would be a much less chaotic place if Biden, or Mickey Mouse, was in charge.

Was his experienced team in situ to prevent him from sniffing the hair of young girls?

 

[HKOwen]

Auto pen scandal

 

[Common Sense Club]

I can only conclude you are deliberately missing the point, which I have now made many times.

This was NOT a verbatim, unedited transcript of the whole speech. You can find that on Truth Social, Fox or whatever other Trump propaganda platform you choose. If that is what you want.

This was a report. It was telling a story. Putting things in context. Drawing on a variety of sources. The question is therefore not whether the speech was edited to tell that story. It was. It is whether the story is an accurate summary of the whole event. Not just a few seconds of it.

Let me try and make it simple for you. It is standard practice in the television world to put a pause or a fade of some kind to indicate that the two adjacent pieces are separate and from different points in the same speech. The BBC did not; was it deliberate or did they entrust that weeks job experience chap to do it?

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Perhaps, although clearly unstable on his feet and never at his best on a lectern, he always had a trustworthy and experienced team around him.

The world would be a much less chaotic place if Biden, or Mickey Mouse, was in charge.

Since Mickey Mouse is 97 he'd be even more doddery than Let's Go Brandon.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

I can only conclude that your antipathy towards Trump allows you to accept misinformation. How can it be accurate when parts of a speech are taken out of context and put together to create a different story.

That’s the whole point!

It wasn’t a different story. It was the story.

The bits removed were just blather.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

That’s the whole point!

It wasn’t a different story. It was the story.

The bits removed were just blather.

Only if the story presented fits with your preconceptions which is the case here.
The blather was in all the talk of objectivity.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Let me try and make it simple for you. It is standard practice in the television world to put a pause or a fade of some kind to indicate that the two adjacent pieces are separate and from different points in the same speech. The BBC did not; was it deliberate or did they entrust that weeks job experience chap to do it?

It may well be the standard practice.

Standard practice applies to standard situations involving standard people.

Trump is unique and so was this situation.

It may well be that Ofcom give the programme maker, and indirectly the BBC, a reminder of good practice. Time will tell, but cutting the statements together in this way painted an accurate picture of Trump’s attitude over this. To suggest he was defending the representatives is laughable. He had been pleading with Pence to not sign and berating him for refusing to obey him.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

It may well be the standard practice.

Standard practice applies to standard situations involving standard people.

Trump is unique and so was this situation.

It may well be that Ofcom give the programme maker, and indirectly the BBC, a reminder of good practice. Time will tell, but cutting the statements together in this way painted an accurate picture of Trump’s attitude over this. To suggest he was defending the representatives is laughable. He had been pleading with Pence to not sign and berating him for refusing to obey him.

Must be why the BBC are defending the decision to "edit" the story.

BBC to 'apologise' following claims 'doctored' Panorama footage of Donald Trump misled viewers | LBC

The corporation is under pressure after the internal memo was leaked

www.lbc.co.uk

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Only if the story presented fits with your preconceptions which is the case here.
The blather was in all the talk of objectivity.

Blather is what 90% of everything Trump says. Removing it is a service. Almost a duty and certainly necessary to ensure the audience maintains interest.

Have you ever tried to listen to an entire Trump speech? They can last hours and contain frequent diversions, incoherence and repetition.

 

[eaglesdare]

BBC WILL apologise for doctoring Donald Trump’s January 6 speech as pressure piles on Tim Davie

The BBC's Chairman will write to MPs

www.gbnews.com

Absolutely scared to death they will get sued 🤣 must be one of the fastest ever apologies they had to make.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Blather is what 90% of everything Trump says. Removing it is a service. Almost a duty and certainly necessary to ensure the audience maintains interest.

Have you ever tried to listen to an entire Trump speech? They can last hours and contain frequent diversions, incoherence and repetition.

In which case excise the non-relevant parts but do not splice parts together out of context to create a different narrative. It's not hard to understand.

 

[Runningman]

BBC WILL apologise for doctoring Donald Trump’s January 6 speech as pressure piles on Tim Davie

The BBC's Chairman will write to MPs

www.gbnews.com

Absolutely scared to death they will get sued 🤣 must be one of the fastest ever apologies they had to make.

Let’s hope they get sued into oblivion.

 

[Badger11]

BBC WILL apologise for doctoring Donald Trump’s January 6 speech as pressure piles on Tim Davie

The BBC's Chairman will write to MPs

www.gbnews.com

Absolutely scared to death they will get sued 🤣 must be one of the fastest ever apologies they had to make.

But only after sitting on the report for months on end.

What's the apology "Sorry we got caught and then covered it up?"

Once the report hit his desk it should have taken Davies no longer than 2 weeks to confirm or reject the allegations. All he had to do was watch the show and speak to the producers.

It's the cover up always the cover up.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Must be why the BBC are defending the decision to "edit" the story.

BBC to 'apologise' following claims 'doctored' Panorama footage of Donald Trump misled viewers | LBC

The corporation is under pressure after the internal memo was leaked

www.lbc.co.uk

That’s just another broadcaster joining in the BBC hatefest. Rumour plus repeats of the claims by Trump and the leaked internal document.

They may well apologise. It would be the quickest way to stop the nonsense from getting out of hand. Exactly what they apologise for is another question though.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

But only after sitting on the report for months on end.

What's the apology "Sorry we got caught and then covered it up?"

Once the report hit his desk it should have taken Davies no longer than 2 weeks to confirm or reject the allegations. All he had to do was watch the show and speak to the producers.

It's the cover up always the cover up.

It wasn’t a “report”! This was one man’s dissenting view.

Maybe he decided to respect the majority decision of the BBC committee who cleared it?

Committees, elections, and juries work on majority opinions. Not outliers.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

In which case excise the non-relevant parts but do not splice parts together out of context to create a different narrative. It's not hard to understand.

What if the narrative, in their opinion, was accurate?

Don’t forget he did say those words. Words he later scrambled to try to suggest they didn’t actually mean you should fight.

You, and all the other critics, are doing what Trump wants you to do. Which to look at the words of that particular speech in isolation from everything else he had said and done before and afterwards. Especially his behaviour whilst the attack was in progress. He wasn’t shocked or trying to stop it. He just stood back and watched until members of his family told him it was hopeless and he should tell them enough, go home.

That’s the narrative.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

BBC WILL apologise for doctoring Donald Trump’s January 6 speech as pressure piles on Tim Davie

The BBC's Chairman will write to MPs

www.gbnews.com

Absolutely scared to death they will get sued 🤣 must be one of the fastest ever apologies they had to make.

Let’s hope they do get sued.

It would keep this appalling event in the forefront of the voters minds during the run up to the mid terms in the USA.

They haven’t apologised, yet! But may have to under government pressure.