Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:45:35 PM · by Snuph · 23 replies
Breitbart ^ | 17 Oct 2012 | WILLIAM BIGELOW
Posted on 10/18/2012 7:54:19 AM PDT by opentalk
Watch again the exchange between Mitt Romney and Obama during the last debate when the issue of Benghazigate came up.
Listen to how Obama tells Candy Crowley to ‘get the transcript’ after Romney asks Obama if he called the Benghazi terrorist attack an ‘act of terror’ in the rose garden before he popped off the Las Vegas for a fund raiser.
Like a good lapdog, Crowley retrieves the transcript to ‘correct’ Romney and protect Obama.
She later appeared on the CNN post debate recap to admit Mitt Romney was in fact right that Obama never referred to the actual terrorist attack in Bengahzi as an ‘act of terror.’
But this begs the question. Why did Candy Crowley have the transcript with her in the first place, and how did Obama know she had it on her? Something very fishy went on here.
BTW, speaking of ‘fact-checking’ why didn’t Crowley ‘fact-check’ Obama when he falsely claimed that Planned Parenthood provides mammograms to women? No transcript provided there Candy?
Is there a reason this is not being discussed more, even in the conservative and non-mainstream media?
This was the most chilling and telling event of the debate, and blatant. And yet this is the first I’ve heard someone point it out.
Crickets. Why?
You are so right. On the camera angles, often when Romney was talking it went to a split screen, with Obummer looking attentive and leaning forward. When Obummer spoke you just saw a hazy image of Romney seated behind him. This debate was so staged and set up that I am sure a lot of “undecideds” will go Romney because they feel their intelligence has been insulted.
What I was suggesting is that Crowley was a pawn in a planned, meticulously produced charade. This was orchestrated down to the smallest detail—including the cutaway of Mooshell clapping. Even the camera angles were designed to place Obama in commanding positions relative to Romney. Crowley is a bit player in al of this.
More proof of media collusion....
'Independent' Audience Asks Twice As Many Anti-Romney Questions
Big Government ^ | 10/16/12 | Ben Shapiro
Posted on Wednesday, October 17, 2012 8:52:59 AM by DFG
In addition to this, we also have - in both debates - a time advantage for Obama for what? 6 minutes? Seven?
He was talking to Candy. Prompting the prearrange fraud with the moderator.
And... I love how that old Crow told Romeny to sit down and STFU. (basically)
I wonder if Crowley had a transcript of every word obama has spoken since the killings. If not,...why not? How did she put her hands on THAT transcript so quickly. Was it a set up?
Not only did she have the transcript, but it must have had the sentence on terrorism highlighted for her to find it that fast in a couple of pages of transcript.
The nonverbals were all constructed to deminimize Romney and to magnify THE ONE. I have never witnessed collusion of this magnitude before. It may well have been criminal.
It's called NLP - Neuro Linguistic Programming.
Anyone can learn it. It is a very powerful communication tool. It can be used for good or evil - just like any other tool.
As much as I despise Obummer, I give him credit for taking the time and making the effort to learn NLP.
It was more of a script than a transcript.
Candy provided Obama extra minutes of time while telling Romney to stop in the middle of issues, he would get time later...never did
I imagine that if obama's numbers are low enough by the next debate, the media will break out the John Madden video pen and start drawing horns, black eyes and such on Romney when he's speaking :)
Re the “how are you not like Bush” lady. — Susan Katz was on NBC. She said she voted for Obama in 08, thinks he’s done a wonderful job and will definitely vote for him in ‘12.
One problem. During the debate, she was lumped into the group of questioners labeled as ‘Undecided.’
Exactly. This was not amateur hour. The whole thing was designed to make Romney stutter and look bewildered. And what do you think the followup ppieces in the WAPO and Slimes are saying? Exactly what was planted by this charade.
I am sure they already thought about it.
I, too, noticed the shuffling of the papers. But like Romney, I was caught off guard. It’s only now I’m realizing there must have been collusion.
Romney’s supporters need to pursue this.
Stupidly, except for a few brilliant freepers, most of us thought CNN would not stoop that low.
I think he actually meant to tell her to “get the butter”.
Bump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.