Replies

...it was explained that the NAACP changed tapes during her speech.

Tapes? They still use tapes? With all of the government assistance they receive, they can't afford to go to DVR.

Anyway, I thought the Breitbart recording was not from that source. If so, it should have recorded the missing piece. Regardless, she did continue speaking and therefore it was NOT the 'whole speech'.

Tapes? They still use tapes? With all of the government assistance they receive, they can't afford to go to DVR.

Who knows. But it was a plausible excuse for the gap. At least they think so.

Anyway, I thought the Breitbart recording was not from that source. If so, it should have recorded the missing piece.

Breitbart wasn't sent the whole thing. Only the 2 pieces that he posted.

Anyway, I thought the Breitbart recording was not from that source. If so, it should have recorded the missing piece. Regardless, she did continue speaking and therefore it was NOT the 'whole speech'.

As someone has been trying to explain to us,

"Someone" (at NAACP?) sent Breitbart a chunk of tape, but not the whole thing, of Sherrod's 43-minute NAACP speech.
Breitbart posted what he had, while saying that that was all he had, under press of news cycles.
The NAACP was sliming the Tea Party people as racists and putting their brawlers on e.g. Wolf Blitzer's CNN show the Friday before (part of which I saw) to attack Tea Party guests to their faces as racists and demand that the Tea Party "purge" itself of its "racist elements", which was all political horse-apples. Their clowns were alley-jumping Tea Party ingenues and having a good time doing it.
Breitbart's purpose was to show racist responses by the NAACP audience/membership to Sherrod's description of her long-ago racist actions.
The additional tape added context but did not exonerate the NAACP of the charge Breitbart wanted to lodge against them, viz., that their own organization is loaded with black racists.
The NAACP then changed the subject and made it "all about Sherrod" -- and the Administration instantly jumped on their cue and fired Sherrod.

That's it in a nutshell. Breitbart made his case, but then Patrick Duffy and Dana Priest (of WaPo) went on Gwen Ifill's PBS show Washington Week in Review and lied like a rug, making it all about Breitbart "editing" the tape to make poor Sherrod look bad, poor baby. Which was a substantive, constructed political lie. Or, another typical newsday on PBS.