[reformedliberal]

DH & I were discussing this. He has the ultra-logical lawyer gene and said nope! No way they could ever legally promulgate child abuse across public platforms, especially the EBS. Huge can of worms.

Then: if there actually was undetectable video spoofing that put anyone at all into compromising situations, wouldn’t they have already done that to POTUS?

Also, we’ve seen discussion of this video tech and there apparently is some flicker in the insertions that is evident. I’ve seen some attempts where there is an outline around inserted figures, quite evident if you look for it.

So: I conclude that any attempt to claim fraudulent video can be disproved quickly by anyone with the PhotoShop applications needed to dissect videos. Not even that expensive or technical, if I understand the process correctly.

[xone]

ph

[bagster]

And remember. These videos were found on ANTHONY WEINER'S AND HUMA'S computer. Why would Weiner have possession of fake videos of Hillary on his computer under file name "insurance policy?"

I think the origin of the videos would be relevant. Neh?

[Steven W.]

I think a telling thing is the description:

The nail in many coffins [liberal undo]. [Impossible to defend]. [Toxic to those connected].

I think that means it's something deeply incriminating in one or a number of ways that undermines liberal precepts, beyond the participants themselves - and that also would exclude practically anything, near everything, blatantly exhibited by and historically excused for the Clintons. Proof of corruption +/- sedition and/or something inherently damaging ala election fraud. Certainly anything involving sex of any kind or manor is probably excused by most Dem's - no matter how gross or evil - but those things will eventually leak, too. HRC shall fret, there are so many possibilities it's impossible to guess ;)

[defconw]

I have a question for your husband. Would they be able to run the audio only?