The viral videos of Hillary lying are very popular on Youtube and here on Kos. They deserve more close inspection, both on content and authors. Here are some details you might not know about the Youtube video “Thirteen Minutes of Lying.

Michael Armstrong, a director who’s video “Cosmic Giggles” tells us reality can be changed by the energy surrounding the message, ‘uploaded the 13 Minutes of Lying’ video.

His only other political video likes are:

“The Obama Deception HQ Full Length version” It was posted on March 12, 2009 two months after Obama’s innauguration.

“{Obama has} Martial Law coming (uploaded May 29, 2010)

The editing of these videos is uniquely similar to the editing of the Hillary Lying video he posted January 29, 2016.

The January timing is interesting. On January 29, 30 and 31, the Conservative SuperPac “FUTURE45” who’s stated purpose is to oppose Clinton spent over $500,000 on phone calls and flyers in Iowa. During those same two days, Bernie Sanders numbers went up significantly.

Future45 $534,617 spent current cash on hand $1,258,908

Whether the SuperPAC money paid for this video is unknown. But there is a significant link within the content that may give a hint. There are numbers of errors and implied contradictions in the video. Here are the main topics and the real statements Hillary Clinton made with actual dates.

Gay marriage

The video says she suddenly changed her mind from a 2002 stance of no Gay marriage to Pro Gay marriage in 2013 because of the presidential race.

Fact - 1999 to a group of Gay contributors she stated she did not feel ‘don’t ask, don’t tell has worked and she supported gay domestic partnership benefits.

Fact - January 2000 she stated she believed the historic, religious and moral content back to the bigining of time and she thought a marriage is and always has been between a man and a woman. She did not however vote for the Defense of Marriage act in 1996 as she supported partnership benefits.

Fact - In 2006 she stated to a group of her constituents she defended the Defense of Marriage act only as a strategic decision that helped prevent a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. That was a very real possibility at the time. At the same time she said she would not oppose legalizing gay marriage in New York. In 2007 she called for repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.

She continued to state she was pro civil union for gays, but not on marriage. She also said it is an evolving issue. It is important to note that she was standing against the majority opinion of the time. In 2010 only 44% of Americans thought gay marriage should be legal. In 1996 that number was only 27%.

Fact - In 2011 she hailed the historic vote in New York to legalize same sex marriage. Her statement said “I’ve always believed that we would make progress because we were on the right side of equality and justice.

Fact - In 2011 she gave a speech where she stated “gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights.” About 53% of the country was for gay marriage by then.

H.R.2523, the Respect for Marriage Act, was introduced in the House on June 26, 2013. By March 2014, 59% supported gay marriage. The legislators aligned with the people’s will in this case and it passed June 26, 2015.

None of this could have been done as a ploy for Hillary Clintons 2016 bid for the presidency, announced on April 12, 2015. It represents the honest exchange of ideas over the years and the evolving understanding of human rights at the end of the 20th century and start of the 21st. Opinions evolve in Washington in response to evolving opinions of the American people. Good legislators listen to their voters. Ms. Clinton’s response was timely, and ahead of the mainstream curve.

Is she Moderate or Progressive

This is a silly argument like is she female or a woman. But it’s kicked out there so it needs to be addressed. Here is the actual position of Hillary Clinton in the legislature by her voting and sponsorhip record. It is provided by Govtrac.com www.govtrack.us/...

Hillary Clinton Left Center Progressive Democrat

She is shown as the purple triangle on the blue progressive (democrats and independents) side of the graph. She is slightly left of center on the progressive side, at the near top of the leadership score. The magority of Democrats are more conservative than she is so in context of the legislature, yes she is a Liberal Progressive. Yes she is a slightly liberal, moderate Progressive if you are looking only at the left. This is why she has 467 + endorsements from the people she works with in the legislature and state governors. She works with all of them.

Bernie Sanders ideology score - see the far left triangle below, on the outer edge of all positions. That’s Bernie. That may be why he has only 2 endorsements from his colleagues.

Source www.govtrack.us/...

Bernie Sanders Far Left Progressive Independent

Emails

The source of this portion of the video mades it abundantly clear who is behind its publication. Senator Clinton endured 11 hours of hounding by Gowdy’s Benghazi committee. She came out untarnished and substantially boosted in her trustworthiness score by anyone who bothered to watch it. But video editing is an amazing thing. It can be clipped and snipped to say anything. These emails still have nothing of substance, but this set of video snippets shows the Benghazi emails front and center. This has been so thoroughly debunked by KOS readers I am completely amazed it is being used here as anti Hillary campaign material. Only the right would haul this out. Using the Bengazi videos for a presentation on dishonesty puts the rubber stamp of the five million dollar GOP smear on the entire effort.

Wall Street Backing

One quote that was allowed in this part, surprisingly, is that Hillary Clinton was the Senator from New York, and as such represented Wall Street. She was also senator of New York when the 9/11 attacks occurred. For some reason she is not allowed to state the clear facts. These were her constituents who were attacked. Apparently it is a bad thing she represents New York.

This devolves into general complaints about the housing crisis. In this extremely heavily edited clip she is shown blaming the homowners who should have known about the second rate mortgages because of the high fees. Sounds really bad. Unfortunately for the video editor, it doesn’t match anything she said in her most prominent speeches on the subject.

In her 2007 speech on the housing crises she said:

“So the mortgage companies came with a really seductive offer. They started offering more high-risk mortgages for people strapped for cash: products like interest-only and no-money-down mortgages. Unscrupulous brokers who get paid based on the size of the mortgages they sell lured many families into buying more expensive homes than they could actually afford. And many families were not told, were not counseled, were not warned, and did not understand the implications of signing on the dotted line.”…

“Now, there are those who will tell you -- they tell me this -- "Well, that's just the way the market works, Hillary. Nothing we can do about it." Or they'll say, "Buyer beware. People just need to be more careful." Well, now, that's easy to say when it's not your home being taken away.

And I don't think unscrupulous mortgage brokers should be part of how our markets work. I don't think families should be lured into buying homes they can't afford so brokers and mortgage companies can make a bigger profit. I don't think people should have to be on the lookout for unfair clauses buried on page 700 of the fine print. And I don't think it's right that so many hard-working, responsible families across this country are losing their most precious possession and their most valuable asset.”

Any creative editor can make an out of context comment into something it is not. That has been done endlessly in politics, and certainly has been inflicted on Hillary Clinton over the decades of her service. What is surprising is the lack of investigation on these. We seem to have been overwhelmed by the onslaught of negativity toward her. I know I have been. Sucker punch aside, I’ve decided to stand up and shake it off. As a group of liberals, we need to stand up for the quality, qualified representatives we have working for us in US and state governments. Both Hillary and Bernie deserve our respect and support.

I only have a single wish in all this. That every person who reads or watches one of these “indictments” on someone would take the time to look up their record, their background, and what they really said, so we don’t have an election dictated by viral internet bullying tactics. There are more attacks in this video. Hopefully someone can look up the facts.