[Raebie]

I’m leaning towards photoshop. Here’s another pic...you can still make it out, but not like the one Drudge linked too.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161024150130-clinton-t1-10-24-large-169.jpg

And another from yesterday:

http://blog.4president.org/.a/6a00d83451721569e201bb0886cb06970d-pi

[LouieFisk]

“I’m leaning towards photoshop. Here’s another pic”
==
It’s actually much more likely that the professional pics you linked to, e.g. Getty, have been photoshopped as a matter of routine.

[Covenantor]

If they are "photoshopped" or video edited they are being done by the media.

Compare

This was a single frame from a downloaded news video. Notice the complete lack of any facial lines whatsoever. Tipoff is the blur of hair above her left ear in contrast to the crisp detail of her jackey. Video edits of this sort can be done on the fly at the producers console as they monitor the raw feed.

This is the second photo, taken yesterday, of your link with html coded zoom. The contrast between the two is startling. One shows a nearly plastic surface while the second showes the topography of a time ravaged face.

Not hard to find evidence of media "airbrushed" touch ups of Hillary, just flip through the image search thumbnails.

Flat out FU, in your face deceit at national and local media points.

[sheana]

Looks like she fell on something round.