I would like to respectfully dissagree with tgeffeney
Here's why I think it is biased.
1-A republican makes a fool out of himself all the time on these shows and it never makes the news.
2-Even if you may think it is obvious that Wexler is pretending and the full edit doesn't change your mind (I agree by the way) that doesn't mean the everyone would have the same view. There are plenty of people who would think differently depending on what edit they saw, and as scary as it is, those people get to vote just like the rest of us.
3-If Fox "News" thought it was going to be obvious to everyone that it was in jest, why would they run it at all. It wouldn't be any more newsworthy than Leno's monologue.

I also think it's worth mentioning that Fox "News" isn't the only network that went with this edit. That's the scariest part as far as I'm concerned, that the other networks follow Fox's lead.

It does look very fishy indeed. The fact that towers 1 & 2 collapsed perfectly is very fishy. Although, every time I see one of these things I have to remind myself to objectively consider the source. It is obvious that the purpose of this clip is to convince the viewer that building 7 was taken down with explosives. So my next two questions are: Who made this video? Was this a conclusion that was reached through an objective process or did the creator set out to find evidence that supported his predetermined conclusion.

I bought the moon conspiracy hook-line-and-sinker when I first saw it. Then someone showed me some very rational explanations to some (not all) of the conspiracy's points. So now I just don't know. I would love to see the counter points to this.