Why CBS Is Not Publishing The 4th Part Of The Democratic Debate

UPDATE: Curiously, CBS has published the 4th part of the Democratic Debate today after much discussion and speculation. The article below was written before they finally posted it.

John Dickerson hosted the second Democratic National Debate on November 14, in Iowa, where the candidates talked about numerous issues, starting with the recent Paris attack and ending with crises management.

That’s not what’s interesting, though. What is interesting is that CBS has chosen to publish every part of the debate on their Youtube page except part 4.

Why is that you ask? Well, this was the part that dealt with Wall Street, but more importantly, featured Sanders finally going on the offensive (that’s actually over exaggerating it). Sanders questioned why Wall Street would donate to Clinton’s campaign if they didn’t intend to get something out of it. Clinton had to fumble for a response, talking about she did have a lot of small campaign contributions and that she helped New York after 9/11.

Of course, none of those had anything to do with Sanders comment and were obvious deflections, but the fact that CBS refused to publish this on their main Youtube page is telling about the bias they have towards Hillary and against Sanders.

Luckily Twitter followers and several major political players like Ezra Klein and Glenn Greenwald caught her and have publicized the event on their own major social media followings.



Big liberal and gamer.


42 thoughts on “Why CBS Is Not Publishing The 4th Part Of The Democratic Debate

  1. Joe Shon Gunn

    There is definitely something fishy here. I just checked the view count for all the other parts and they reach into the thousands…part 4 has less than 100. They may have seen your article and decided to post it. Very strange indeed. I took a screen shot of it it you want it.

    1. Bjorn

      Dude?

      They got called out. When they were caught and embarrassed they put it up.

      Success doesn’t discredit “our” movement.

  2. Alan E. Mason

    Good article, though now dated, but I have to put my English teacher hat on here and point out that while “over exaggerating” is considered proper grammar by some, it doesn’t really work well in this case.

      1. thepyat

        Oh my God, I thought I was on one of those big media “professional” journals. So sorry for my snarkiness. Actually, you write lands better than they do. You wouldn’t believe how sloppy their prose is. Great job!

  3. Violet

    Since it’s up now, please delete this post, youngprogressivevoices.com – it doesn’t help us or Bernie at all to make accusations that aren’t accurate. There are enough accurate ones that we really need to have taken seriously. Is there an editor watching comments who can pull this asap, please?

  4. Bernie fan

    Bernie Sanders for president his super Pac is the working class people of this country who are sick and tired of politicians who are bought and paid for by big corporations and wall street with social media all the facts are right in front of us anyone who doesn’t see this is just lazy and has corporate media on thier tv at d ‘ll blast don’t be lazy research and vote for the guy who votes for the middle class …Always

  5. Angelina A

    I tell you this is Hillary and that woman Dianne making sure people dont see Hillary for what she is ………it is up to us to spread it, because otherwise they wont allow it.. in fact Hillary claims she won the nomination , the presidency and her campaing is saying that young people wont go to vote, that all young people will post and use internet but wont actually go to the polls.. they are in for a surprise.. yet again.. bc people will go and vote for Bernie

  6. Larry Walczak

    More nonsense. It was published and Clinton’s “connection” to Wall St. is available to google anytime. Most of the 22 million the Clintons received from “Wall St.” in 2014 were for speaking appearances and most earmarked for the Clinton Foundation that created & oversees over 300 programs from health care to farming in Africa and South America. The Clintons biggest “connection” I suppose could simply be that their son-in-law work for Morgan Lehman brokerage firm.

    1. Red Stewart Post author

      You need to do more research. And why did she get so defensive and evoke 9/11 if it was a harmless thing?

  7. A-CatylistB4TheNight

    It’s a matter of how many people have donated to Hillary’s campaign, and they don’t want to be embaressed.
    Why wall street is financing her campaign? According to her it’s because “she was there for New York when 9/11 happened”
    I’m choosing not to cuss and say how stupid that answer is. She’s playing the Donald Trump card of “people like what they hear and recognize instead of what they don’t like that still happens”

    1. Red Stewart Post author

      Sanders comment was said more in passing than as a direct attack on Clinton. It’s part of his campaign effort to focus on the issues over the other candidates, which I think is a mistake if he wants to have any chance at beating Hillary.

  8. Paul K

    CBS’s parent company contributes a hug amount of money to Hillary’s campaign. Of course they will leave out the part that clearly illustrates her avoiding answering questions by using deflection/redirection tactics and using subjects that invoke emotions/pride in viewers to get them to looks past what she was doing.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: