CNN's latest, doubling down on defending their portrayal of Phillips as the protagonist in this story - it's too long to cut and paste, but he's significantly changed his story again:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/21/us/nathan-phillips-maga-teens-interview/index.html
and again, his description of the events is easy to disprove by the video evidence - but now he's portraying himself as having been in some mystical state, that he didn't really know what he was doing, and that all the hate and racism he felt coming from the boys was real :dizzy:
phillips: "I was witnessing as it escalated from just two small groups, then the other one just went back and got more people, went back and got more people, went back and got more people until there were over 100 people, maybe 200 young men there facing down what? Four individuals? Why did they need 200 people there other than it's hate and racism? They had their target. They had their prey. "
not 200 people :doh:
a good interviewer would know that
more from Phillips: "this young fellow put himself in front of me"
:doh: why wouldn't a good interviewer have called him on this? Why wouldn't the interviewer point out that the video shows that statement to be a lie, that Sandmann never moved, that Phillips walked up to the stationary boy and banged a drum inches from his face?
more: "It looked like
these young men were going to attack these guys.
They were going to hurt them. They were going to hurt them because they didn't like the color of their skin. They didn't like their religious views. They were just here in front of the Lincoln -- Lincoln is not my hero, but at the same time, there was this understanding that he brought the (Emancipation Proclamation) or freed the slaves, and here are American youth who are ready to, look like, lynch these guys. To be honest,
they looked like they were going to lynch them."
again, the video evidence shows something very different
and again, the interviewer fails to point that out