Updated Wednesday at 9:50 a.m. with O'Rourke comments last week condemning flag-burning, and Cruz camp reiterating stance that their video is fair and accurate.

WASHINGTON — Sen. Ted Cruz's latest effort to inflame conservatives — a video in which Rep. Beto O'Rourke appears to express enthusiasm for flag burning — hinges on heavy splicing and a creative interpretation of a long-winded comment.

O'Rourke did not say he's "grateful" for flag burning. Nor did he say that flag burning is "inherently American."

But that's how the Cruz campaign portrays O'Rourke's remarks from an El Paso town hall on Friday, in a 25-second video posted on the senator's campaign page and shared through social media.

The challenger's camp called it a sign that Cruz is so worried about his re-election prospects, he is willing to twist facts. The Cruz side disputes that.

This was one of several attacks launched against O'Rourke on Tuesday, as Cruz backers rush to his rescue.

Texans Are, a pro-Cruz group run by a former Cruz strategist, hit O'Rourke with an ad calling him "reckless" on immigration and asserting that he's been "rolling out the red carpet for illegal immigrants."

And a super PAC linked to Club for Growth, a conservative group, unleashed an ad denouncing "Beto the bully," accusing him of trying to use his El Paso City Council seat to help his father-in-law with a real estate project that would have entailed displacing poor residents.

Cruz's own ad was part of an effort to harp on cultural hot buttons such as the controversy over NFL players kneeling during the national anthem.

In context, it's clear that was what O'Rourke was defending — the peaceful protest of football players seeking to call attention to police brutality by taking a knee during the national anthem. Video of him making that case went viral two weeks ago.

"I’m grateful there are people willing to do that" WATCH: “Congressman O’Rourke not only called burning the U.S. flag ‘inherently American’ but also said he was ‘grateful’ for those willing to commit such an act,” said Cruz campaign spokesperson Catherine Frazier. “His position is an appalling display of disregard to those who have put their lives on the line to preserve the very freedoms the American flag represents. Texans certainly do not share such views which have no place in the Lone Star State.” Posted by Ted Cruz on Tuesday, September 4, 2018

The Cruz ad opens cold, with the voice of a man off camera. His words appear on screen:

"I guess the reason I ask this question is, as a voter I don't know how I would feel to have my own elected representative being open to kneeling on the Senate floor or encouraging and supporting acts that desecrate our American flag."

The video cuts to a photo of the congressman, with these words on screen: "Beto O'Rourke was asked his views on burning or desecrating the American flag. This was his answer."

Next comes footage of O'Rourke saying, "I think that there is something inherently American about that. And so I - I — I'm grateful there are people willing to do that."

But the question wasn't just about flag burning. It was also about the NFL protests and O'Rourke focused on that part, likening it to civil rights-era protests.

The full Q&A is here.

Cruz spokesperson Catherine Frazier said the man who asked the question was not affiliated with the campaign in any way.

And she defended the inference that O'Rourke promotes flag burning.

"Congressman O'Rourke not only called burning the U.S. flag 'inherently American' but also said he was 'grateful' for those willing to commit such an act," she said. "His position is an appalling display of disregard to those who have put their lives on the line to preserve the very freedoms the American flag represents. Texans certainly do not share such views."

The Q&A ran nearly five minutes. The Cruz ad focuses on 43 of 143 words from the question, and 24 of 615 words from the answer.

"He never once talked about burning flags," said O'Rourke spokesman Chris Evans. "He wasn't talking about that."

He called the distortion "pretty troubling, especially this early on. ... They can read polls. They can see what's happening in front of them. It's the old political playbook to unleash negative attack ads and try to stop someone's momentum."

Polls released in the last month show anything from a statistical dead heat to a 6 percentage point lead for Cruz. O'Rourke has taken the lead in fund-raising, much to the surprise of many Republicans. And Cruz, like other GOP candidates around the country, faces headwinds due to strong negative public views about President Donald Trump, who will stump with him next month.

The video wasn't the first time Cruz has insinuated that his opponent embraces flag burning. Stumping Aug. 27 in The Colony, Cruz likened kneeling during the national anthem to protesters burning the flag.

"In Texas we believe in being respectful to the flag," he said. "The Supreme Court says you have the right to burn the flag. I don't know if Beto O'Rourke thinks burning the flag is as American as anything he can think of."

That same day, O'Rourke explicitly condemned flag burning, according to a Corpus Christi Caller Times report posted Tuesday, after the Cruz attack video went online.

"I don't think anyone should burn an American flag," O'Rourke said after an Aug. 27 rally in Austin. "I also don't think this is about flags. It's about people's lives. It's about civil rights. It's about making sure that everyone has an opportunity to succeed and that there is justice and accountability for everyone in this country."

On Wednesday, Frazier insisted again that the video was a fair representation of O'Rourke's comments.

"It wasn't a snippet. We posted the full video and Beto never pivoted. He just kept talking about protesting and then said that at the end. It's a very fair critique and if Beto misspoke then it should be on him to say so, not a paper to accuse us of a falsehood," she said by email.

Here's the transcript of the exchange at issue. Only the words in bold are in the Cruz ad.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: "My question is with regards to your remark that there is nothing more patriotic than for NFL players, when discussing NFL players kneeling during the national anthem. And I'm curious as to know if you hold the landmark Texas Supreme Court case — well the Supreme Court case -- Texas versus Johnson, to that same standard, where a man was charged for burning and desecrating an American flag on the state Capitol. And do you disagree with the dissenting opinion that the American flag is a unifying symbol that should be respected and revered, as it plays no politics. And I guess the reason I ask this question is, as a voter I don't know how I would feel to have my own elected representative being open to kneeling on the Senate floor or encouraging and supporting acts that desecrate our American flag."

O'ROURKE: "My comments about there being nothing more American were about being — there's nothing more American than standing up for, or in this case kneeling for, your rights under the Constitution. When the women and men who are serving in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Syria tonight, the gentleman who served in Vietnam — when they serve this country, they're not serving a president, they're not serving a political party. They swear their allegiance to the Constitution. This idea that we are a country of laws and that no woman and man is above or below those laws. When some people are treated differently because of their race — and we're reminded of the fact that it is not just in the distant past. For someone born in 1972 such as I, that might be the Freedom Riders in the 1960s who rode those Greyhound buses through Mississippi and Alabama and Georgia, and in so doing as African-American women and men, took their lives into their hands, put them on the line. And in many cases those who stood up for civil rights lose their lives in the process. Many were beaten to within an inch of their lives to ensure better civil rights for every single American. They got us a lot closer than we were before. Witness the Voting Rights Act from 53 years, the civil rights act from 54 years ago. Those would not have been signed into law by LBJ if people had not protested, if Rosa Parks had not moved from the back of the bus to the front of the bus. If our young fellow Americans of different colors did not have the audacity and the boldness and the courage to sit at lunch counters, knowing that they would be humiliated, knowing that they would be spat upon, knowing that they would be dragged out in front of their fellow human beings. They did all of that to stand up for the equal treatment under law of everyone. Now, part of the genius of this country, and I think no one expresses it more brilliantly than MLK Jr., is that in the face of injustice, in the face sometimes of violence, in the face of the very real possibility that you will lose your life in the process, people have been willing to non-violently and peacefully protest to seek political solutions to otherwise intractable problems. When you have unarmed black men in this country all too often being killed, and sometimes being killed by members of law enforcement — and those members of law enforcement — as I see a former chief of police for the El Paso Police Department, a former county commissioner, someone who exemplifies the best in public service — those are among the very toughest jobs that anyone in any community can hold. Those are also people who put their lives on the line, securing and protecting their fellow citizens in these communities. But when there is use of force, when there is a life taken and there is not accountability, there is not justice done, there's not the ability to prevent that from continuing to happen in the future, and someone is willing — is willing — to call attention to that, to try to awaken our conscience, to force us to do the right thing, in the face of that injustice and violence and to do so peacefully and non-violently — I think that there is something inherently American about that. And so I — I — I'm grateful there are people willing to do that. I understand that people can come down to a different conclusion on this issue and I respect that, as well. That's American, as well."

Frazier insisted that O'Rourke's comments weren't taken out of context.

"The question he was asked was regarding Texas vs. Johnson, a case specifically about flag burning. The questioner referenced it specifically too. We listed the Congressman's exact words and in context, and posted the full video along with the relevant excerpt. If he didn't mean that, then he should explain what he did mean, because the question was clear," she said.

The flag burning didn't actually take place at the state Capitol but outside the Dallas convention center during the 1984 Republican National Convention. Gregory Lee Johnson was protesting the policies of President Ronald Reagan, and he was convicted of violating a state law barring the desecration of the flag or other venerated object.

In a landmark 1989 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Johnson 5-4 that symbolic speech is protected under the First Amendment, even if it is offensive to some.

The question posed to O'Rourke included a fairly accurate paraphrase of Chief Justice William Rehnquist's dissenting opinion.

Rehnquist noted that Congress and all but two states had made it a crime to burn the flag in public, because "millions of Americans regard it with an almost mystical reverence, regardless of what sort of social, political or philosophical beliefs they may have."