Hot Mic – Reuters Intentionally Cuts Camera Feed During Positive Bishop Jackson Remarks To Trump i

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

She's quoting the words of the hymn, linked above.

Next?

Yeah, in the vocal equivalent of blackface.

I wonder what brand of "hot sauce" she carries?

You mean, because she quoted the words of a song correctly?

Or because she likes hot sauce?

(I've really never understood the ridiculous obsession you guys have with this ... it's even in her damned book!)

The other is that she’s been building an elaborate long con over hot sauce – because she’s been talking about it at least since 2008.

A New York Times piece got at Clinton’s love of hot peppers, based on a “60 Minutes” interview: “I eat a lot of hot peppers,” she told CBS News anchor Katie Couric, who had asked her how she maintains her stamina on the campaign trail. “I for some reason started doing that in 1992, and I swear by it. I think it keeps my metabolism revved up and keeps me healthy.”

Apparently she kept 100 bottles of hot sauce when she was in the White House. In 2012, she told Conde Nast Traveler about bringing red pepper and Tabasco on her trips as Secretary of State. And late last year, she and her staff talked about peppers and farm stands.

Salon

/yawn

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: ugmold

You downplay it's significance.

it's significant to me that the black church let him through the door, let alone speak...I am kind of surprised that he even went there after telling the entire nation that black neighborhoods are full of crime, drugs, and violence.

I'm surprised they invited a racist hitler bigot with a dash of mussolini, into their church.

Someone has something wrong, somewhere, ya think?

So it seems they don't believe the BS put out by the libs and think Trump has a grasp on the problems they face.

Not "they" ... the Bishop Jackson.

"They" seemed to have stayed away for the most part ... or they were outside protesting Mr. Trump's "first visit to a Black church."

BTW, what do you think was "cut" from the Reuters feed that was so important? Trump wearing a shawl?

I can't seem to get a cogent answer to that here; I'd love to hear your thoughts.

They don't like white people or what?

I have no idea what was cut or why but the reasons given here about it, seems to have pulled your trigger.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: UnBreakable

No, the worse kind of pandering is all of a sudden acquiring a black dialect while pandering to a black audience.

Hillary trying to emulate someone talking about Jesus/God... wow... The worst part is that the Hillary supporters would still adore her for doing this.

I'm surprised she also didn't appear in black face like Al Jolson. Or talk like Grady from Sanford & Son.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UnBreakable

Hillary is not the topic here.

Start another thread, perhaps?

The 18th or so today?

I know Hillary is not the topic. You said there wasn't a worse kind of pandering than what Trump did. So I brought in even a worse kind of pandering, for comparison sake. Sorry it had to be your girl, Hill.

a reply to: ugmold

The censorship is a big deal, no matter who it is.

This is not really "breaking news"

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UnBreakable

Hillary is not the topic here.

Start another thread, perhaps?

The 18th or so today?

I know Hillary is not the topic. You said there wasn't a worse kind of pandering than what Trump did. So I brought in even a worse kind of pandering, for comparison sake. Sorry it had to be your girl, Hill.

Quoting the words of a gospel song is pandering?

Doubling down on your irrationality I see?

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: ugmold

You downplay it's significance.

it's significant to me that the black church let him through the door, let alone speak...I am kind of surprised that he even went there after telling the entire nation that black neighborhoods are full of crime, drugs, and violence.

I'm surprised they invited a racist hitler bigot with a dash of mussolini, into their church.

Someone has something wrong, somewhere, ya think?

So it seems they don't believe the BS put out by the libs and think Trump has a grasp on the problems they face.

Not "they" ... the Bishop Jackson.

"They" seemed to have stayed away for the most part ... or they were outside protesting Mr. Trump's "first visit to a Black church."

BTW, what do you think was "cut" from the Reuters feed that was so important? Trump wearing a shawl?

I can't seem to get a cogent answer to that here; I'd love to hear your thoughts.

They don't like white people or what?

I have no idea what was cut or why but the reasons given here about it, seems to have pulled your trigger.

Right, you have no idea about what was cut, or why, (you know, aka the topic of the thread) but you just wanted to chime in, anyway.

Perfect. Thanks for your honesty.

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: UnBreakable

No, the worse kind of pandering is all of a sudden acquiring a black dialect while pandering to a black audience.

Hillary trying to emulate someone talking about Jesus/God... wow... The worst part is that the Hillary supporters would still adore her for doing this.

I'm surprised she also didn't appear in black face like Al Jolson. Or talk like Grady from Sanford & Son.

Imagine if Trump went into a southern accent.

lol!!

First of all, I don't think he could do one.

Secondly, the press would go berserk. lol!!!

Trumps Hot Sauce. lol!! At fine food stores near you!

Hey, that might be an idea. Back someone. Crowd sourced too.

There must be plenty people that make their own and would love a chance to go large. Jobs created too.

Less of a spectacle than Cuban's shark tank.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UnBreakable

Hillary is not the topic here.

Start another thread, perhaps?

The 18th or so today?

I know Hillary is not the topic. You said there wasn't a worse kind of pandering than what Trump did. So I brought in even a worse kind of pandering, for comparison sake. Sorry it had to be your girl, Hill.

Quoting the words of a gospel song is pandering?

Doubling down on your irrationality I see?

Oh yeah, she certainly did her homework!

No pandering there!

Did she think she had them eating out of her hand after that?

I still haven't figured out why they cut him off, oh wait, I did.

It was looking too good for him.

I am stunned at how hard the media works. Gryphon66 on the other hand, i am disappointed to see you dig such an intellectual hole for yourself on this matter. On occasion facts are just not going to agree with me as this is for you, but you are derailing future credibility for something anybody can tell you are mistaken. The people need to know the truth, there are Black groups/church organization and their members who love Donald and refuse to accept the (evil) rhetoric of the media.

ETA

No one wants to be "Baghdad Bob" do they?

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

What goes around, comes around. Trump getting a little of his own medicine.

I've never liked Trump, but the more I see the MSM working against him and the TPTB getting more and more brazen with their attempts to silence him the underdog effect is taking place.

Go Mr Underdog!
You will be one terrible POTUS, but you'll cause less damage than Hillary.
I can't believe I'm saying his.. But I think I want Trump to be the next POTUS.
Anyone but HRC...

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: ugmold

You downplay it's significance.

Can you explain? The importance being what, Trump with a Black man showing him favor? lol. I guess that might be a big thing to Trump Supporters.

Exactly. And the media/Dem narrative is they all hate Trump. Anyone seeing this will question that narrative, so they cut the feed to prevent that from happening.

a reply to: GreenGunther

Trump is certainly no victim. Sure, the liberal media is against him, but he has had Fox News as his personal Super PAC since February. Nobody is feeling sorry for Trump.

originally posted by: Justoneman
I am stunned at how hard the media works. Gryphon66 on the other hand, i am disappointed to see you dig such an intellectual hole for yourself on this matter. On occasion facts are just not going to agree with me as this is for you, but you are derailing future credibility for something anybody can tell you are mistaken. The people need to know the truth, there are Black groups/church organization and their members who love Donald and refuse to accept the (evil) rhetoric of the media.

ETA

No one wants to be "Baghdad Bob" do they?

Digging a hole in what way? Asking for the relevance that one media group cut their feed at a certain point, when there were multiple other media groups present? This thread is another example of the ridiculous, overblown, nonsensical responses that Trump supporters/sycophants have to everything that they deem in some way to be negative for their hero.

"Derailing future credibility" ... well, good thing I'm not in a popularity contest here, eh? I'm interested in the facts, and there are none here.

Every metric disagrees with your assessment that there are more than a handful of African Americans that "like" Trump. Most see him for the bloviating windbag that he has become.

The fact that you apply the term "evil" to the media, or at least, the media that doesn't suck up to your boy Trump ends any "credibility" you may have had with me, anyway.

Not sure why you're posturing in such a way in an open forum ... if you had concerns you wished to discuss with me, this *might* have been appropriate fodder for a PM. As it is, I can only assume you wanted to make this backward passive-agressive nonsense public.

Congratulations.

So, perhaps YOU can explain why Reuters cutting their feed made any difference to the four or five other media groups present? What great Trump accomplishment was hidden thereby?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: ugmold

You downplay it's significance.

Can you explain? The importance being what, Trump with a Black man showing him favor? lol. I guess that might be a big thing to Trump Supporters.

Exactly. And the media/Dem narrative is they all hate Trump. Anyone seeing this will question that narrative, so they cut the feed to prevent that from happening.

And when there were multiple other outlets there that "captured that moment"?

Logic; use some.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: GreenGunther

Trump is certainly no victim. Sure, the liberal media is against him, but he has had Fox News as his personal Super PAC since February. Nobody is feeling sorry for Trump.

Fox News? Perhaps.

Breitbart? Might as well call it the Trump Press Corps.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: GreenGunther

Trump is certainly no victim. Sure, the liberal media is against him, but he has had Fox News as his personal Super PAC since February. Nobody is feeling sorry for Trump.

Very true, I never even got into new media. Trumpbart, The Trump Report. He had the benefit of over $3 billion in free media just during the GOP primary process. He's not a victim.

Fox News? Perhaps.

Breitbart? Might as well call it the Trump Press Corps.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Justoneman
I am stunned at how hard the media works. Gryphon66 on the other hand, i am disappointed to see you dig such an intellectual hole for yourself on this matter. On occasion facts are just not going to agree with me as this is for you, but you are derailing future credibility for something anybody can tell you are mistaken. The people need to know the truth, there are Black groups/church organization and their members who love Donald and refuse to accept the (evil) rhetoric of the media.

ETA

No one wants to be "Baghdad Bob" do they?

Digging a hole in what way? Asking for the relevance that one media group cut their feed at a certain point, when there were multiple other media groups present? This thread is another example of the ridiculous, overblown, nonsensical responses that Trump supporters/sycophants have to everything that they deem in some way to be negative for their hero.

"Derailing future credibility" ... well, good thing I'm not in a popularity contest here, eh? I'm interested in the facts, and there are none here.

Every metric disagrees with your assessment that there are more than a handful of African Americans that "like" Trump. Most see him for the bloviating windbag that he has become.

The fact that you apply the term "evil" to the media, or at least, the media that doesn't suck up to your boy Trump ends any "credibility" you may have had with me, anyway.

Not sure why you're posturing in such a way in an open forum ... if you had concerns you wished to discuss with me, this *might* have been appropriate fodder for a PM. As it is, I can only assume you wanted to make this backward passive-agressive nonsense public.

Congratulations.

So, perhaps YOU can explain why Reuters cutting their feed made any difference to the four or five other media groups present? What great Trump accomplishment was hidden thereby?

Ah heck you are willful on this ignorance. You can admit it! We can see it in every post that you are spinning over this. Don't you think it would be best if you just come to grips with the facts concerning the media and their coverage of anybody who goes against the established criminal cabal. You can't keep obfuscating this fact unchallenged.