CLASH POLL: Does The Dems’ Doctored Impeachment Video Break Their Own Ethics Rules?

Written by Wes Walker on February 10, 2021

Become a Clash Insider!

Big Tech is clamping down on conservative media big time. Don’t let Big Tech pre-chew your news. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we’ll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Follow Doug on Parler @TheGilesWay.

Long before they ever assembled in the Senate, we all knew exactly what to expect from the impeachment circus. A lot of partisan showboating, leading to an acquittal.

If they know this strategy cannot possibly hope to result in the formal conviction they so desperately long for, the best they can hope for is to smear him so badly that he becomes so politically radioactive that it leaves him politically neutered.

Have they gotten out over their skis from the very first day? That will depend on how their intended audience receives it.

Their goal is to convince the public that Trump was, personally, the lit fuse that caused the events that followed his speech. But to do that, they need to overcome some obvious facts flying in the face of their allegations. For example:

  • Trump’s offered DC security decision-makers the use of 10,000 National Guard personnel he had authorized, prepared, and were standing ready if called upon.
  • Charging documents brought against riot participants show rioters had fundraised and organized for this event through venues like Facebook days or weeks in advance of the event itself.
  • The two pipe bombs were set in place the evening of January 5th, long before Trump’s speech the following day.
  • The rioting began while Trump was still giving his speech, and it is something like a 30-minute walk between the 2 locations.
  • Those who rioted arrived prepared with specialized equipment suitable for rioting and climbing that are not seen at any normal peaceful protest march, nor were they present at any prior Trump rally one could cite.

Their plan seems to be the strategic use of heavily-edited video in a naked attempt to re-shape public opinion. For all their hysterical denunciation of ‘misinformation’, it must be nice to know none of their Trump-hating allies will call them on an extravagant lie.

They are in the process of creating an implied connection between cherry-picked selections from Trump’s speech merged into one clip with other video clips featuring the violence, or zero-context comments by attendees to relocate to the Capitol, where Trump had just encouraged them to march and let their voices be heard ‘patriotically and peacefully‘.

Here is the video they offered with a lot of arbitrary cuts that intentionally juxapose Trump’s speech and crowd activity, without demonstrating any connection between the two.

These clips lack the necessary context from which they were lifted, and are stitched together with the partisan narrator’s text to put forward a maximally hostile explanation of events. They accuse, without addressing the fundamental question of how they expect us to believe that ‘a’ was caused by ‘b’.

Expect them to spend a lot of time and energy skirting that very question in the coming days.

Remember, for the ‘incitement’ claim to succeed, the jury must believe TRUMP set these events in motion.

But which jury?

The defense team is addressing the smaller jury — the Senate. The prosecution is addressing a different jury — 330 million Americans, or, at least their carrier-pigeons in the media who will dutifully deliver whichever talking points the left’s inner circle agree upon for a given day.

Rules of evidence don’t matter to the general public nearly as much as emotional sensationalism. Especially when the talking points will be amplified by the crowd who told us with staight faces that Hunter Biden’s laptop and his business associate were part of some sophisticated Russian psyop… at least until the election day was safely behind them.

This tactic raises an ethics problem:

And if Democrats say that claims of ‘deceptive video’ aren’t enough to discredit the evidence, that throws them onto the proverbial ‘horns of a dilemma’. They will have to choose between two conflicting narratives, because they can’t have it both ways.

Remember that hidden camera video exposing the sale of Aborted Baby Parts?

“David Daleiden became the first journalist ever to be criminally prosecuted under California’s recording law, not because of the method of video recording he utilized in his investigation—which is common in investigative journalism in this state—but because his investigation revealed and he published ‘shock[ing]’ content that California’s Attorney General and the private party coconspirators wanted to cover up,” said the lawsuit.

…Ms. Harris launched the investigation into the center’s videos while serving as California attorney general prior to her November 2016 Senate victory. She was succeeded by Mr. Becerra in January 2017. –WashintonExaminer

If the left is willing to defend ‘deceptively edited’ material so long as it’s used in an attempt to convict Trump, where does that leave their attempt to discredit the Baby Parts video? (A role in which Kamala Harris herself featured a prominent role.)

David Dalieden, project lead for the undercover video that caught a Planned Parenthood abortionist talking about selling aborted babies’ body parts, has fired back at the organization’s claims that the investigative report was “heavily edited” and “falsely portrays” its “mission.”

Eric Fererro, Planned Parenthood’s vice president of communications, argued Tuesday that California-based Center for Medical Progress, a group dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics and advances, is: “A well funded group established for the purpose of damaging Planned Parenthood’s mission and services [that] has promoted a heavily edited, secretly recorded videotape that falsely portrays Planned Parenthood’s participation in tissue donation programs …”

In the video titled “Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth Abortions to Sell Baby Parts,” Deborah Nucatola, a Planned Parenthood abortionist, said she plans her weekly abortion procuedures with the intent to extract and sell organs. “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver … I’m not gonna crush that part,” says Nucatola. “I’m going to basically crush below, I’m not gonna crush above, and I am gonna see if I can get it all intact.” —ChristianPost

(Note: 3 Fifth-Circuit appeals judges handed down a ruling on the authenticity of Dalieden’s videos Hey CNN: Judges Rule Those Damning Abortion Videos Were NOT ‘Deceptively Edited’… Is That ‘News’?)