Incorrect. I posted a LINK to the original transcrip. I posted, in SINGLE QUOTES so as to NOT connotate a direct quotation, my opinion of her quote at the link, to re-interpret the slanted media bias of adding a comma where she intendeded, by pause in her speech pattern, to end the statement, usually denoted in text with a period.
>> Incorrect. I posted a LINK to the original transcrip.
You posted a link to a transcript which incontrovertably contradicted your disingenuous characterization of her statement.
>> I posted, in SINGLE QUOTES so as to NOT connotate a direct quotation, my opinion of her quote at the link, to re-interpret the slanted media bias of adding a comma where she intendeded, by pause in her speech pattern, to end the statement, usually denoted in text with a period.
Single quotes are not a universal indication of a doctored paraphrase. Quotes connote a quotation ... and, in your case, connoted a quotation that was never made.
You wrote “I don’t”, and then intentionally eliminated “I don’t have all of the evidence there, Glenn” from directly thereafter to make it appear that “I don’t” was disconnected from the next sentence. Your paraphrase is misleading, at best, and a lie at worst.
I heard the interview — Beck’s transcript is accurate; yours is not.
How could she answer the question “I don’t”, and immediately follow that with “I don’t have enough evidence”? You cannot express an opinion, and then immediately express that you lack the evidence to form an opinion. Your “interpreted” paraphrase doesn’t make any sense.
SnakeDoc