Ted Cruz often complains that President Obama “literally will not utter the words ‘radical Islamic terrorism.'” Today, we learned that if another leader utters those words, the White House will censor them.
The White House website has censored a video of French Pres. Francois Hollande saying that “Islamist terrorism” is at the “roots of terrorism.”
The White House briefly pulled video of a press event on terrorism with Pres. Obama, and when it reappeared on the WhiteHouse.gov website and YouTube, the audio of Hollande’s translator goes silent, beginning with the words “Islamist terrorism,” then begins again at the end of his sentence.
Even the audio of Hollande saying the words “Islamist terrorism” in French have, apparently, been edited from the video.
According to the official White House transcript of Hollande’s remarks, Hollande refers to “Islamist terrorism.” The audio of the bold text in brackets is missing from the video – the only point in the video were the audio is absent:
“We are also making sure that between Europe and the United States there can be a very high level coordination.
“But we’re also well aware that the roots of terrorism, [Islamist terrorism, is in Syria and in Iraq. We therefore have to act both in Syria and in Iraq, and this is what we’re doing within the framework of the coalition.] And we note that Daesh is losing ground thanks to the strikes we’ve been able to launch with the coalition.”
See for yourself:
The White House blames all this on a technical glitch.
.@WhiteHouse: "Technical issue" led to drop in audio when French president's translator said "Islamist terrorism" https://t.co/GwZhSsIO4x
DICKERSON: Let me ask you last about abortion. What would you do to further restrict women’s access to abortions as President?
TRUMP: Look, look, I just . . . I mean I know where you’re going, and I just want to say: a question was asked to me, and it was asked in a very hypothetical, and it was said, illegal, illegal. I’ve been told by some people that was a older line answer, and that was an answer that was given on a, you know, basis of an older line from years ago, very, on a very conservative basis. But —
DICKERSON: Your original answer, you mean.
TRUMP: My original. But it was —
DICKERSON: About punishing a woman.
TRUMP: — but I was asked as a hypothetical. Hypothetically. Hypothetically. The laws are set now on abortion. And, that’s the way they’re gonna remain, until they’re changed.
DICKERSON: ‘Cause you had said, you wanted, you told Bloomberg in January that you believed abortion should be banned at some point in pregnancy. Where would you do the ban?
TRUMP: Well I, first of all, I would have liked to have seen, you know, this be a states’ rights. I would’ve, I would’ve preferred states’ rights. I think it would’ve been better if it were up to the states. But right now, the laws are set, and that’s the way the laws are.
DICKERSON: But do you have a feeling how they should change? There are a lot of laws you want to change. You’ve talked about them on everything from libel to torture. Anything you’d want to change?
TRUMP: At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way.
DICKERSON: Do you think it’s murder? Abortion?
TRUMP: [Pause] Uh, I have my opinions on it, but I’d rather not comment on it.
DICKERSON: You said you were very pro-life. Pro-life means that it’s abortion. That abortion is murder.”
TRUMP: I mean, I do have my opinions on it. I’d rather, I just don’t think it’s an appropriate forum.
DICKERSON: But you don’t disagree with that proposition, that it’s murder?
TRUMP: What proposition?
DICKERSON: That abortion is murder.
TRUMP: No, I don’t disagree with it.
Aaaaaand . . . the walkback, accompanied by the claim that it is not a walkback:
Kevin M on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
Kevin M on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
Rip Murdock on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
lurker on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
DRJ on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
DRJ on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
DRJ on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
lurker on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
DRJ on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
Kevin M on Constitutional Vanguard: Questioning an "Advisory Opinion" About the Possible Stormy Daniels Trump Prosecution
SEARCH AMAZON USING THIS SEARCH BOX:
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Make the comments of annoying commenters disappear, with a simple comment script! Instructions here:
https://is.gd/CommentScript
Join the Constitutional Vanguard! We're a group devoted to promoting the principles of the Constitution, liberty, and the free market. Sign up here!
Check out Liberty Classroom, a site that teaches economics and history from a liberty perspective. I am a lifetime member. You should be a member too.
Help keep the site alive!
PayPal only (no credit cards):
Credit Card donations (PayPal takes a bite):
Subscribe for $9 per month:
About Patterico
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.