Acosta's white house pass removed ..

[Sparko]

I haven't had time to do the video comparisons yet (I have to do some actual video work here first) but in my effort to be fair, I noticed that there are a lot of different versions of the "original video " out there. So I decided to make sure I got the one directly from c-cpan. I found it here:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?454223...mplete-victory

I downloaded it and will use it as my "original" - but no guarantee that is what the inforwars guy used. It looks like it to me though.

I did notice something about the original video on this page though. People have been saying that the infowars video duplicates frames then removes to make it look like acosta stops and chops at the intern's arm. Well if you watch this video at 29:00 minutes in, you will see the very same stop and chop motion. You can even slow it down. Click on the gear and go to the speed setting.

I am still not saying it was an "assault" it looks like an entirely reflexive motion to me, like he was just blocking her reaching from him. My concern is that the MSM is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill by claiming the white house used a doctored video to make it look worse than it was.

[Sparko]

OK I did the comparison.

It does appear to have a frame duplicated twice right when Acosta's hand touches the interns arm for the first time. I found no deleted frames. I found nothing speeded up. Acosta's hand seems to stay on her arm a bit too long.

Also I found that the original C-span video I found was also 29.97 frames per second like the infowars one. The 24 frame per second one I was using last week that I got off youtube must have been the one that was converted. Since I got this video from c-span and it matches the frame rate of the infowars video, the whole thing about frame rate conversions is moot. It doesn't matter unless the infowars guy started with a different frame rate video. But I don't think he did.

So here is a frame by frame video of me scrubbing through the videos side by side. Notice when Acostas arm first touches her arm. The original is on the left, infowars on the right. The video on the left continue for two more frames while the infowars one does not. Then the infowars video starts up and is two frames behind the other from that point on.


At full speed I can't really see the difference. 1/15th of a second is not that much time. If the infowars guy did that on purpose I don't see the purpose. It is so subtle that you literally have to look at it in stop motion to notice the difference. I didn't even notice it when I was playing with it last week. It still can be a glitch in the conversion depending on what the guy started with. OR it could be deliberate. I can't make that judgement. But I did want to give a fair assessment of what the differences in the videos actually were. There is a single frame that is duplicated two times to create a three frame freeze of Acosta's hand hitting the interns arm.

Also I don't think Huckabee can be blamed for using this particular video. There is no way she would have known it was any different than the original. It was probably just a convenient video link she used because someone else had shared it with her or she found online.

[Roy]

No, the intern's job is to move the microphone, she was hunkered down...

No, she was standing up.

... and not rudely trying to "back him down" or get in his face, there was no aggression on her part. She was just trying to get the microphone from him ...

That's an act of (mild) aggression.

...per Trump's moving on to another reporter. That happens done many, MANY times in a press conference.

No, it doesn't. Usually the microphone is passed over voluntarily. She reached across him to take it (and may well have touched him in the process).

Acosta's retention of the microphone was unwarranted - but she invaded his space, not the other way around.

[Littlejoe]

No, she was standing up.

Yes, you're correct but she was not "in his face".

That's an act of (mild) aggression.

Totally disagree when that's part of her job.

No, it doesn't. Usually the microphone is passed over voluntarily. She reached across him to take it (and may well have touched him in the process).

Acosta's retention of the microphone was unwarranted - but she invaded his space, not the other way around.

Sorry, again, disagree totally. It's a part of her job is to facilitate mic movement. It's not just "usually passed over voluntarily", the room is too big and has too many people for that to be true. It might occur on occasion but citing it as the norm is just silly. She's not invading his space when that's part of the job.

[Cow Poke]

Sorry, again, disagree totally. It's a part of her job is to facilitate mic movement. It's not just "usually passed over voluntarily", the room is too big and has too many people for that to be true. It might occur on occasion but citing it as the norm is just silly. She's not invading his space when that's part of the job.

Particularly when you have somebody like Acosta who apparently thinks he's God's special gift to journalism.

[Cow Poke]

Usually the microphone is passed over voluntarily.

Just like one toy is voluntarily shared equally among all toddlers in a day care.

[Mountain Man]

Just like one toy is voluntarily shared equally among all toddlers in a day care.

That's seriously what the press conference reminded me of, Trump like a daycare worker trying to gain control of a roomful of unruly toddlers.

[NorrinRadd]

I will concede that the intern was "aggressive" if those who claim it is the job of the media to be "aggressive" in questioning/confronting POTUS will concede that "aggression" is a normal and acceptable part of the intern's job.

[oxmixmudd]

I will concede that the intern was "aggressive" if those who claim it is the job of the media to be "aggressive" in questioning/confronting POTUS will concede that "aggression" is a normal and acceptable part of the intern's job.

I never thought either the intern or Accosta were aggressive. That's all a bunch of over the top hooey created by the Trump crowd. My concern was and is Trump's attempts to restrict the free press through tactics common to autocrats.


Jim

[rogue06]

I never thought either the intern or Accosta were aggressive. That's all a bunch of over the top hooey created by the Trump crowd.

Actually a lot of it was in response to the left jumping in and accusing the intern of being the aggressor and guilty of assault. For instance, on The View, co-host Sunny Hostin, who is also the Senior Legal Correspondent and Analyst for ABC News, was proclaiming that the intern was guilty of assault and battery. Such claims are bound to lead to corrections.

[Roy]

No, the intern's job is to move the microphone, she was hunkered down...

No, she was standing up.

Yes, you're correct ...

Then why did you say she was "hunkered down"?

That's an act of (mild) aggression.

Totally disagree when that's part of her job.

Bollocks. Aggression doesn't stop being aggression if you get paid for it.

She's not invading his space when that's part of the job.

Bollocks. Invading some-one's space doesn't stop being invading some-one's space just because it's "part of the job".

Using your 'logic' hit-men aren't murderers because it's "part of the job".

[Sparko]

so last friday I was getting a lot of guff about the videos. I posted my results yesterday and nobody said a word. Not even Charles who was accusing me of not being honest.

[Roy]

I will concede that the intern was "aggressive" if...

...you grow the cojones to accept reality without trying to force concessions from others.

[Roy]

so last friday I was getting a lot of guff about the videos. I posted my results yesterday and nobody said a word. Not even Charles who was accusing me of not being honest.

Not much to say - you confirmed the Independent's analysis.

[Sparko]

Not much to say - you confirmed the Independent's analysis.

I would expect Chuck to give me an apology for impugning my honesty.