How long will it be before this becomes the latest “scandal” to be loudly proclaimed by FoxNews? Somehow, it will be Hillary Clinton’s fault - we know that for sure. Better than focusing on any of those wildly unfair charges about Trump’s continuing frauds.
With the deep, unconscious sigh which not even the nearness of the telescreen could prevent him from uttering when his day’s work started, Winston pulled the speakwrite towards him, blew the dust from its mouthpiece, and put on his spectacles. Then he unrolled and clipped together four small cylinders of paper which had already flopped out of the pneumatic tube on the right-hand side of his desk.
In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages, to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and in the side wall, within easy reach of Winston’s arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.
Just a series of tubes…
Tempest in a micro-cuvette.
I love it when collective nouns admit to individual behavior…
Much to do about nothing.
Too late.
In the deleted portion of the video, Psaki addressed a question about when the administration truly began the Iran deal negotiations and suggested that the U.S. entered into secret talks before publicly acknowledging the intention to do so.
You might be asking yourself how they knew what was in the deleted portion of the 2013 video. They knew because the transcript still existed. I wonder why the transcript wasn’t sufficient for James Rosen? What were they looking for in a three year old archived video?
Copies of the video itself probably still exist, just not on the State Dept website.
So whoever decided to delete this from the State Dept. website must have been exceedingly stupid, unless their real purpose was to draw more attention to the contents of the deleted footage.
Psaki addressed a question about when the administration truly began the Iran deal negotiations and suggested that the U.S. entered into secret talks before publicly acknowledging the intention to do so.
Anyone shocked by that “revelation” doesn’t have a clue about how diplomacy works. Of course there are private, unannounced talks between diplomats first, that’s how they determine there is any chance of successful negotiation, at which point it makes sense to go public.
I am sure that it will be blamed on Hillary and/or Obama although there was a new sheriff in town at the time. I’m SURE of it.
It’s my understanding the video wasn’t deleted but rather edited which requires a bit more effort and they noticed it when reviewing a youtube version. I doubt James Rosen’s main interest was government transparency.
Edit to add:
However, Fox News later discovered the Psaki exchange was missing from the department’s official website and its YouTube channel. Eight minutes from the briefing, including the comments on the Iran deal, were edited out and replaced with a white-flash effect.
So what?
Thanks for the clarification. Same basic point applies – obviously other copies of the full exchange exist, or at the very least the transcripts do, so whoever edited the “controversial” exchange out of the video ran a stupidly obvious risk of actually drawing more attention to the exchange. Which, of course, is what has now happened.
Of course maybe Fox and the right wing would have tried to make a big deal of the “secret talks with Iran” angle anyway, but having some unknown person at State edit this exchange out of the video plays right into the hands of the right-wing narrative-makers by lending credence to the idea that there was something there worth hiding. Which there isn’t.