 Once again, we're here to discuss yet another deceptively edited video put out by a so-called news organization. In this case, we're discussing a clip from Meet the Press over the weekend where they showed a clip of an interview done with Attorney General Barr discussing his rationale for dropping the charges against Flynn. The clip from NBC and MSNBC is edited in such a way that it removes the context of what he said and makes it seem like he doesn't care about the rule of law. But in fact, the full clip shows that it was his entire central premise. So as I implied earlier, this is not the first time this has happened. NBC and MSNBC in particular have a long history of deceptively editing footage so that they can put forward a narrative that otherwise wouldn't be possible. Now, I'm going to go through a bunch of these examples, but right off the bat, you're going to notice a pattern that these so-called mistakes only happen one way. They only ever happen in service of making a Republican look bad. You're not going to find any sneaky edits like this being used against Democrats anywhere but maybe Fox News. Any other time when it's NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, or MSNBC, these edits are always done to make a Republican look bad. Sorry for the interruption, I know how much you all love ads, but just give me one minute to tell you about this special offer from my viewers, from this episode's sponsor, my patriot supply. Friends, we're living in a strange new world. Things are not normal now. But they probably won't return to normal anytime soon. Food shortages will be the next shoe to drop. Will you be prepared? Or will you panic like everyone else when the grocery stores near you are out of food? Don't let the coming reality turn you into a victim. Make survival your top priority by building an emergency food supply today. I personally trust and use my patriot supply. You can too. They're the go-to experts in emergency preparedness, and best of all, they have a guaranteed policy that will knock your socks off. Right now, you can save $100 off a full four-week supply of their delicious and nutritious food that lasts 25 years in storage. You do not want to be unprepared when the next emergency or disaster strikes. Go to preparewithdronetech.com right now. That's preparewithdronetech.com. Act now while supplies last. You brought up Bill Barr. Peggy Noonan. Take a listen to this Bill Barr answer to a question about what will history say about this. Why do you hear this answer? Take a listen. When history looks back on this decision, how do you think it will be written? Well, history is written by the winner, so it largely depends on who's writing the history. I was struck, Peggy, by the cynicism of the answer. It's a correct answer, but he's the attorney general. He didn't make the case that he was upholding the rule of law. He was almost admitting that, yeah, this is a political job. Are you kidding me? None of the so-called professionals saw any more of this interview outside that deceptively edited 10-second clip. This is infuriating on multiple levels. So for one, these are supposedly professional journalists, right? So how could they not know about the full clip? How could they think that what they showed was all there was to that interview? As I'll show you in a minute, it wasn't just Meet the Press that showed this edited clip. They did the same thing on MSNBC later in the day. Now, before we go any further, let me show you what they edited out and didn't want you to see. When history looks back on this decision, how do you think it will be written? Well, history is written by the winner, so it largely depends on who's writing the history. But I think a fair history would say it was a good decision because it appealed the rule of law. It appealed the standards of the Department of Justice and it undid what was an injustice. Remember what Chuck Todd said? He didn't make the case that he was upholding the rule of law. When you show the unedited video, A.G. Barr actually addresses that very point. And two, once again, look who we're dealing with. Chuck freaking Todd, the guy who gets millions of dollars from the DNC. Okay, well, maybe not Chuck Todd himself. His wife gets millions from the DNC. I mean, what the hell? Just look at this list of her clients in the Democrat Party. But they're married. That means it's his money too. He should have to disclose that and he never does. In regards to the joke that Barr told, I think it's pretty obvious he was referencing the fact that the media and the Democrat Party aren't at all happy with his decision. He's just saying that if Trump loses the next election, it's likely that history will be written by people in the Democrat Party and the media. As if it wasn't bad enough that they so obviously edited this clip deceptively, it went out on Twitter later to admit that they did it, but claimed that it was just an honest mistake. You're correct. Earlier today we inadvertently and inaccurately cut short a video clip of an interview with A.G. Barr before offering commentary and analysis. The remaining clip included important remarks from the Attorney General that we missed and we regret the error. They're supposed to be professional journalists. Even if you weren't a journalist at all, how do you miss the rest of that clip? The only way that happens is if you just cut it off right at that point and just don't bother to watch the rest. If you're a journalist doing analysis on national airwaves, why would you not watch that entire interview? Of course they did. They intentionally edited this clip. Like I hinted at earlier, NBC and MSNBC have a long history of deceptively editing these clips and then claiming it was all an accident. Rachel Maddow once admitted that they used an edited video to smear John McCain, a person who they now act like is some national hero that they always loved. That's the footage that was aired by Channel 3 in Phoenix. Obviously there was an edit between the end of the woman's question and the part where John McCain sneers the straight talk line at her. So maybe that edit was cut in a way that's not fair to John McCain. Or how about when they edited audio of a 911 tape from George Zimmerman to make him sound like he was a racist, by removing the context of the 911 operator asking him questions. Now I'm no fan of Mitt Romney, but how about the time that NBC was trying to make him look out of touch, suggesting that he was amazed at the existence of a convenience store and the electronic touchscreen ordering of sandwiches? When in reality he was making a specific point about the efficiency of private sector innovation. And maybe this was Mitt Romney's supermarket scanner moment, but I get the feeling, take a look at this, that Mitt Romney has not been in too many, too many Wauwas along the roadside in Pennsylvania. By the way, where do you, where do you get your hoagies here? Do you get them at Wauwas? Is that what you get them? No. You get them at Sheets? Where do you get them? Sheets. A&M. Nassio. Turkey Herald. Yeah! The delis. You get them at the delis. That what you say? Well, I went to a place today called Wauwas. You ever been to Wauwas? Anybody been there? Some people don't know. I'm sorry. I know it's a very big state divided, but we went to, we went to Wauwas and it was instructed to me because I saw the difference between the private sector and the governmental sector. Look, people who work in government are good people and I respect what they do, but you see the challenge with government is it doesn't have competition. That's how government works. Then I, I was at Wauwas. I wanted to order a sandwich. You press a little touch tone keypad, all right? You just touch that and you know the sandwich comes in, you touch this, touch this, touch this. Go pay the cashier. There's your sandwich. It's amazing. It's amazing. How completely blatant and misleading are those edits? And once again, they're doing it in service of scoring political points for the Democrat party. Or how about the time that MSNBC edited footage of a GOP congressman to make it look like he was attacking welfare recipients when, in fact, his entire point was to keep welfare out of the hands of criminals so that there would be more for people who actually needed it. Well, you got to listen to how they're selling this because I want to play for everybody while Republican Congress when Pete Sessions had, had said and the comments, they pretty much speak for themselves. Take a look. Sure. What we're trying to accomplish is to end eligibility of food stamps that compete against those families, those needy families that we talked about for rapists, pedophiles and murderers, whether rapists, pedophiles or murderers will be eligible. But it's pedophiles, murderers, rapists, those who have, should have enough money. What's your response to that, Goldie? I think it is a systemic or institutionalized demonization of our nation's poor. One and a half percent. It is a nightmare for people. So I do understand that we have those in our midst who are in trouble. I don't think this bill is ever aimed at and we shouldn't try and say that it would be aimed at the disabled, mothers with children. That's not what we're trying to accomplish here. What we're trying to accomplish is to end eligibility of food stamps that compete against those families, those needy families that we talked about for rapists, pedophiles and murderers. That's why you see members of the Democratic Party coming down here today. And they're saying we're going to take it away from other people. No, rapist, pedophiles, murderers, the amendment ends eligibility of food stamps for those convicted who are rapists, pedophiles and murderers. So the gentleman woman and every member of this body today will have a chance to say on record that's okay if you're a rapist, if you're a convicted rapist or pedophile or murderer that that's okay for you to be eligible for food stamps. In a program that does compete against mothers and children who in these difficult times you're seeing the Agriculture Committee try and set priorities about who should receive this government assistance. So while this congressman is actually going to bat for welfare recipients so they get everything that they need, MSNBC edits that footage that makes it seem like he's actually attacking them. Another pattern that you're probably noticing by now is that all these mistaken edits only cut one way against Republicans. I take that back actually. There are a couple examples of the media editing footage of Democrats. However, when they edit footage of Democrats, it's to cover for them or otherwise deflect negative criticism. Surprisingly in this case it's actually CNN who covers the incident accurately. As you probably guessed I could go on and on with this. There are countless examples of the media editing footage out of context to attack Republicans. I can't go over all of them but I will leave a link of my Google search in the description so you can see for yourself. That's all for this episode. Please hit that like button, share and subscribe. If you want to support this channel you can do so on one of these platforms and you can find all the links for those in the description or pinned comment. Thanks for watching. Keep coming back.