Shows how untrustworthy the BBC are

[pete01]

Only joking I love you all really

 

[carmanmemoranda]

The trump sycophants on here just can't help themselves

 

[noseall]

There is no argument to make. It's simple. But you just want the beeb to be bashed.

They apologised for the mistake, and refused to pay compensation. I wonder why that was the case,

Correct.

Mislead my arse.

 

[Deleted member 325366]

In panorama yes.

Not in the news reports at the time. Check the world wide media from the same time.

2 different issues

You clearly don’t understand it. Ground hog day anyone ?

 

[Andydevon]

Don't point it out you will spoil all the fun.

 

[Brigadier]

Very good at this swerve lark aren't you.

If MBK was any good at it, you wouldn't have recognised it.

"Slippery" and "devious" (and devoid of straight responses, coz they'd show him up) are better descriptions

 

[Koolpc]

In panorama yes.

Not in the news reports at the time. Check the world wide media from the same time.

2 different issues

Again, left wing media spouting twisted reports and lies...stop being so gullible

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Again, left wing media spouting twisted reports and lies...stop being so gullible

Compare the BBC reports at the time, to most other outlets world wide at the same time, before you accuse others of being gullible.

The attempted defence of Trump in here is unbelievable, especially when those same people purport to support law and order.

 

[Odds]

I see the good and the bad, but in this case I ignore his "track record" and look at the facts

I look at both.
It gives me a clearer picture of his intent leading up to the actions taken on the day in question.
Good job your not in t'Po-lice.

 

[blup]

If Donald's speech was truly intended to cause violence why did the beeb need to doctor it?

It was intended to overturn the election result, his henchmen were more than motivated to use violence. The beeb used only his words

 

[Notch7]

and now you are saying you never said you disagree that it give "the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.”
So one can only assume you agree that the edit gave "the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.”

You seem to have no argument left to make.

the BBC are saying their edit gave the impression Trump had made a direct call for violent action..............it doesnt mean the speech overall did not make a direct call to action

as usual you are using a logical fallacy

 

[Notch7]

I see the good and the bad, but in this case I ignore his "track record" and look at the facts

the facts are that the speech was a direct call to action and insurrection

congress voted a majority that Trump had committed insurrection, judges stated as such.

It was insurrection

 

[Notch7]

View attachment 399677

Only joking I love you all really

Petes shoes:

 

[pete01]

Petes shoes:

They look too small

 

[noseall]

They look too small

Take them out of your mouth.