But be careful. I once thought I saw an earpiece in Obama's ear during a debate — and I posted my own screen shot here — but I was wrong.
You've got to look at different shots and angles. Why would she wear something visible? Unlike men, women can completely cover their ears, and an earpiece can be made invisible.
पोस्ट्स
१०० टिप्पण्या:
Watch the whole thing Althouse. And imagine Hillary answering while taking instructions in her ear. It would be an amazing performance it would certainly put paid to the concussion-effects stories. In fact, maybe some misguided pro-Clinton supporter is putting out this crazy story.
She shouldn't have worn earings. The earpiece is in contrast and easy to see. Without the earing it would blend in better.
It's way too hard to tell from the pictures.
But if I were forced to bet, I'd bet no. It'd be too much trouble and too confusing.
She doesn't have to be taking instruction while speaking.
Anchors do it all the time.
The only time an earpiece would come in handy would be for facts. For example, if you were asked about Aleppo, they could remind you quickly where and what that is and it's current relevance.
Or if they asked about something that was a statistic talking point, they could feed you exact numbers and it'd look like you knew these numbers off the top of your head.
At this point, what difference does it make? Point is to reinforce the belief that she is a lyin' cheat.
Game on.
Could it be some sort of earpiece used not to put words in her ear, but to keep her from falling over? (And I'm pretty much not kidding.)
No don't know if she did this or not, but the answer to "Why would she wear something that was visible" is obviously "Because she can."
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!
Obama doesn't want to make his ears look bigger.
The folks with the tinfoil hats said the same thing about Bush in 2004.
That photo is proof that Clinton is linked to her lizard people overlords.
I doubt she had an ear piece for the simple reason that she is known to prepare a lot and knew she'd have a friendly interviewer.
She was walking in to a position that was zero chance of losing. There's no reason to take a risk there.
How will she deny this? Ask an audience member to come up and look in her ear, the way Trump had someone grab his hair? She'd have to actually hold an event with an audience, first of all. And then the invasion of her privacy to look into her possibly-waxy ear canal is just too ridiculous. My schadenfreude at her predicament is off the charts.
there's a claim at a site called TruthPundit that NYPD confirmed this, but the link is bad (or my access is). On the other hand, there's a pic at reddit I saw earlier today which had a different angle in which the ear is empty (or it's the other ear, in a mirror-image view).
Alternatively, it's a hearing aid.
By the way, do you ever take the Captcha verification -- select all images with X or Y -- and worry as you're doing so that you'll fail the test?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDObFetwDis
Althouse loves her conspiracy theories. Did you ever find out why Hillary has a hole in her tongue?
My guess would be that it's her mystery Brain Doctor on the earpiece to soothe her with repeatable short phrases and easy words to use in resuming speaking after she lapses into another brain freeze.
Carl Bernstein said today that Hillary needs to release her medical records and undergo an hour of press questions on her health. That won't happen. But maybe "The Russians" can hack her medical records, if any still exist.
Bernstein says she has to do it to restore the people's trust.
If Bernstein says that, then the insiders know she is losing bigtime.
David said...
Did you ever find out why Hillary has a hole in her tongue?
It wasn't a hole. It was just that the prosthesis used to cover up the forked part had slid down a little, exposing the base of the fork.
Well it's all over the net and no denial from Team Hildabeast. She had one.
correction: TruePundit. But I still can't connect to this site.
Why would she need an earpiece? She just babbles endlessly and nothing she says is connected to reality. Her supporters are fucking idiots and will suck up any lie she puts forth.
Veteran: "If I did what you did I would be in prison."
Hillary: http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/08/veteran-confronts-hillary-if-i-did-what-you-did-id-be-in-prison/
No good person can support Hillary Clinton.
eric said...
The only time an earpiece would come in handy would be for facts. For example, if you were asked about Aleppo, they could remind you quickly where and what that is and it's current relevance.
Obviously, Gary Johnson wasn't wearing an earpiece when he talked to the MSNBC panel
Seems to be quite an increase in traffic in Hillary's orifices these days. Damned if I know what that is. Tiny copilot, maybe?
I think there is definitely something in her ear if the video capture hasn't been doctored. I would wager it is a hearing aid if I had to make a bet- old people don't often hear very well.
However, in honor of the day, I will propose it is a Ceti Eel.
I think there is definitely something in her ear if the video capture hasn't been doctored. I would wager it is a hearing aid if I had to make a bet- old people don't often hear very well.
Whether that particular screen grab has been doctored should be easy enough to check against other video sources, assuming their owners are curious.
But if it's a hearing aid, where has it been previously or since? A one night hearing aid raises questions.
Hillary's best response: she doesn't need hearing aids and of course there was nothing in her ear that vast right ring conspiracists didn't place there in their fever dreams. Then pray that only one, deniable shot of the device ever surfaces.
I seem to recall that when Hilary Clinton ran for the Senate, she appeared on the David Letterman show where he asked her a “pop quiz” about New York (since she never lived there before running for the Senate). Later it turned out that she was alerted to the quiz (and possibly given the answers or questions in advance) before she appeared on the show.
So the idea that she might have worn an earpiece and been fed information or that she’s wearing a hearing aid and has tried to conceal the fact doesn’t seem beyond the realm of possibility. However, I’d want someone more credible than Info Wars before I’d start speculating about this.
From that photo alone, I'd say no--it looks like the shine on the inside of her ear. If it is an earpiece, it's a very small one and I guess maybe they have very small earpieces these days but I'd have to see a different angle to be sure.
I don't think she'd need to use one--she's probably drilled down her talking points and knowing she has friendly moderators there's not much need to stray from them. But if Republicans are really afraid of this, insist on some sort of pre-debate check to make sure no one is bringing in any such device. Seems reasonable enough.
"I seem to recall that when Hilary Clinton ran for the Senate, she appeared on the David Letterman show where he asked her a “pop quiz” about New York (since she never lived there before running for the Senate). Later it turned out that she was alerted to the quiz (and possibly given the answers or questions in advance) before she appeared on the show."
Yeah, more likely she'd go in with some inside knowledge of the questions (although frankly in these debates, it'd be political malpractice to not know basically what sort of questions are going to be asked, and which scripted point to stick to).
Hillary doesn't need an earpiece. She does need to remember all of her lies to keep her story "straight". Or maybe not since she was lying so openly and brazenly to Matt Lauer and to the audience last night.
Hillary is too much of a doddering old fool for an earpiece to work effectively.
From that photo alone, I'd say no--it looks like the shine on the inside of her ear.
If that were the case - and I'm not claiming it's not - then the inside of Hillary's ear is radically convex - it bulges almost spherically, reflecting from the foremost spot - not concave like that of most people.
How do you know who won?
"You can tell when a candidate knows they got creamed from the conspiracy theories they invent."
so what about his bobby pins? is that okay?
I'm thinking it's the top bulb of a retracted "My Favorite Martian" antennae, since we're on 1960s TV.
"If that were the case - and I'm not claiming it's not - then the inside of Hillary's ear is radically convex - it bulges almost spherically, reflecting from the foremost spot - not concave like that of most people."
Hmm--I can see that, but thought the part behind it was shadow.
According to Truepundit, “NYPD sources involved with the NBC forum’s security detail confirm Clinton was wearing an ‘inductive earpiece,” the same technology employed by almost all lead Broadway actors to receive forgotten lines and stealth off-stage cues from directors. The flesh-colored earbud is easily concealed. There are no wires running directly to the ear like you see with the units employed by Secret Service protection detail personnel.”
FWIW, Huma also asked Hill if she had her earpeace in an email.
Trouble is, the earpiece e-mail was in 2009, so not terribly meaningful for 2016. And I haven't seen any other source for the claim that NYPD confirmed the earpiece.
I will propose it is a Ceti Eel.
Given that Ceti eels transform you into a zombie in thrall to Evil Powers, and that HRC is already an Evil Power, the Ceti eel hypothesis is unlikely.
If its a prompter of the type routinely used a stage actors, the transmissions should be easy to detect and capture with a Bluetooth scanner.
Pay attention to the Hildabeest's do at the next debate (or forum, or whatever charade the MSM can contrive to lead support to Hillary and damage Trump) I predict the hair will be down over her ears.
She was wearing an earpiece in case she had a Parkinson's event. Getting them to repeat a phrase helps reboot the brain.
Oops! If it's a prompter...
My bad.
In a normal world, the people putting on the debate would check both candidates' ears for earpieces at the start of the next event. If Hill wants to claim it's a hearing aid, she can file the doctor's report in advance.
She was wearing an earpiece in case she had a Parkinson's event.
What I know about PD could be jotted down on a Postit. Please elaborate.
...and bobby pins can be used as radio antennas.
America is great now!
In a normal world...
The MSM live in ClintonWorld, a realm something like Wonderland except all the inhabitants are Queens of Hearts or minions of same, so there's no chance of civilized rules being either proposed or enforced.
Perhaps for the debate she can wear a Gen III Helmet Mounted Display System.
My guess would be that it's her mystery Brain Doctor on the earpiece to soothe her with repeatable short phrases and easy words to use in resuming speaking after she lapses into another brain freeze.
This actually was the first thing I thought of, too.
...the same technology employed by almost all lead Broadway actors to receive forgotten lines and stealth off-stage cues from directors.
It pains me to know this just as actors needing microphones to reach the folks in the balcony pains me.
Thanks for the link, Darrell.
If Hillary did have an earpiece, can you imagine the clusterf##k in the nearby room where the microphone is located? You'd have her policy advisor, her pollster, Sid Blumenthal and of course her lawyers, all competing to give her advice. Meanwhile, poor Hillary is trying to remember where she is and why she's hearing voices.
As an aside; I was out last night and occasionally caught soundless glimpses of a TV showing this during the Hillary portion. I was initially impressed that Hillary looked better than she had in ages. A few minutes later, however, I noticed that she was rocking back and forth and bobbing up and down and realized that she was likely high as a kite.
As for the earpiece, someone should bring a scanner next time. That's what exposed the Popoffs.
A high resolution image can be constructed by combining many frames.
If it was, wouldn't she have styled her hair to cover her ears then? Or would that have caused interference with an earpiece?
A few minutes later, however, I noticed that she was rocking back and forth and bobbing up and down
Another sign of Parkinsons. See link above.
Anyone else fantasizing about Trump bringing a jammer with him to the debate?
Jamming her earpiece? The Press would jump on the heartwarming story of Hillary's battle with Parkinsons and Trump threatening her life as if he squeezed her oxygen line or hacked her pacemaker.
Interesting video, Darrell.
Wouldn't a headset earpiece these days be invisible? Or hidden in a hearing aid?
Hillary is sick though. Not sure why she is running at all.
Couldn't be a hearing aid, could it? Because only a paranoid control freak would try to hide the fact that she wore a hearing aid at age 68.
What I hear.
levadopa induced dyskensia!
After ten years on the med.
Has there been any kind of official statement from NBC, something identifying measures they take to ensure neither candidate is cheating?
NBC doesn't care if Hillary cheats. All Lefties expect her to cheat.
Wow! He looks so young in that picture!
"Darrell said...
NBC doesn't care if Hillary cheats. All Lefties expect her to cheat."
I wouldn't be surprised they knew about it or even assisted.
"Has there been any kind of official statement from NBC, something identifying measures they take to ensure neither candidate is cheating?"
-- Was it actually against the rules? I kind of imagine most of the "rules" are more polite agreements rather than anything written down. I'm probably wrong, though.
If you think she was wearing an earpiece it says more about you and your tendency to believe conspiracy theories than anything else. Linking to InfoWars? Good grief.
Blogger Freeman Hunt said...
Wow! He looks so young in that picture!
--
Yep..maybe 17..
Linking to InfoWars?
Sorry asswipe! Wrong again. What does that say about you? My link is to Vizette--to a medical doctor of 35 years experience. I see other links to Salon, The Blaze, and Reddit.
Reuters was operating the pool camera for Trump's Black church service and now we hear the stories of how the Reuters bigwigs were going out of their minds telling the cameraman to cut the feed when the people were giving a standing ovation to Trump and cheering him wildly at the end. He did cut the feed--after they threatened his job.
Darrel,
That vidzette guy is really working too hard at times in that clip.
Takes motions out of context, slows them to an unnatural crawl and repeats them that way. The worst was the example at the convention singling out her response to the balloon drop as if she was in reality misfiring due to whatever Bill was pointing at. She was exhibiting overacting, that's for sure. But..c'mon.
I'm no fan of her and she may indeed be covering up her health issues.
But going overboard with slip-shod analysis (under the qualified guise of medical expertise) undermines the argument.
Clips like that are useful for a quick explanation that should lead tou to investigate further elsewhere. The internet is the best thing ever created for that. That balloon drop is a perfect example of the Parkinson's reaction. Even better when you see the full clip. Even William Shatner wouldn't "overact" like that. Bill tried to cover it up by reacting the same way. But even he gave up after a couple seconds.
Darrell at 1233 Although the youtube was made by an opponent of Clinton it is pretty convincing that she suffers from Parkinson's. For those who didn't cut and paste here's the link. Worth watching!
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-secret-earpiece/
Apparently not. Sure looked like it. Funny.
The left-side photograph included in the Snopes post would be a fine model for Hillary's head on Mt. Rushmore.
Is Snopes suspected as a left-wing front organization? I never thought so, but when the controversy arose over the big black guy who seems to be a kind of a Body Man for Hillary, and I posted the Snopes link that debunked the rumor that the guy was carrying some kind of drug-injector for her (it was a flashlight), somebody in Althouse comments attacked me, suggesting that Snopes was not reliable.
Has Snopes ever gotten it wrong? Has a Snopes-debunking ever been debunked? I'm not aware of it; I'd find it interesting if it had.
@Jane the Actuary: see if this link from True Pundit works.
http://truepundit.com/nypd-hillary-clinton-was-wearing-invisible-earpiece-to-receive-stealth-coaching-during-live-nbc-tv-town-hall/
@Kansas City: I don't trust Snopes.
It's just the tail of the alien that lives inside of her. And actually, it explains a lot.
I don't know that much about Snopes, but I generally find they don't go out on a limb one way of another. Here, they have some good photos that show no piece and a decent explanation for what the other photo shows.
My biggest past criticism was that Snopes used unsubstantiated as the equivalence of false.
The central issue of this election and why we should all do what we have to to keep hillary out of the White House: A blatant unrepentant criminal of the highest order simply cannot be elected by this exceptional nation.
http://observer.com/2016/09/dont-let-comey-put-a-criminal-in-the-white-house/
Can you imagine if Rick Perry had a earpiece and some assistant could have told him "Energy Department -- It's the Energy Department you want to close!" Or if Romney had one in the debate with Candy Crawley and Obama, and someone had whispered to him "Tell the bitch to shut up. Obama's running for president not her."
History could have been changed!
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-secret-earpiece/
Apparently not. Sure looked like it. Funny.
Two things I noticed.
First, the pearlescent object in Clinton's ear is strikingly apparent in the original Brendan Smialowski photo even without enlargement.
Second, the Snopes photos from other angles show Clinton's left ear half covered with hair. In several of the photos the angle is from behind the opening to the ear canal. In the second to last Snopes photo, looking directly into the ear canal, in the center there is a luminescent spot. Finally, all of the Snopes photos are of much lesser resolution than the Brendan Smialowski photo and its enlargement.
I feel fairly certain that photos taken from the right side of Clinton's head would show no such alleged object at all, regardless of resolution.
No doubt Clinton was wearing an electronic earpiece and receiving coaching from others during the forum.
Since Clinton's team denied it, it is most likely is true. She ALWAYS lies.
Snopes bends into pretzels to always support the Left's position. It's a husband and wife team and they wouldn't have access to any special information more than anyone else. What? Did they call Hillary's campaign people and ask them? People have to collect evidence if there's going to be evidence to examine.
Some people have said that the big guy that stands by her side is Papa Motumbo--a Gris Gris Hoodoo priest who re-animated her dead body and is employed by George Soros. Snope has never commented on this.
Furthermore, light does not behave the way Snopes seems to think it does.
Convex objects when illuminated are brightest at the point closest to illumination and perceiver and dimmer at points progressively further away. Concave spaces like the opening to the ear canal present just the opposite: brightest on the nearest rim surfaces and less bright at points progressively further away.
Bright press conference illumination would only enhance these respective natural optical phenomena.
And, finally, the apparent object need not be an earpiece to exist. Conversely, disbelief in earpieces does not magically whisk everyday optical phenomena out of existence.
No Secrets!
Lieutenant Uhura knew how to rock an earpiece.
Reuters was operating the pool camera for Trump's Black church service and now we hear the stories of how the Reuters bigwigs were going out of their minds telling the cameraman to cut the feed when the people were giving a standing ovation to Trump and cheering him wildly at the end. He did cut the feed--after they threatened his job.
Trump is outreaching to Hispanics and blacks and asking for their votes.
Narration #1: Trump is not reaching out to minorities. Not really. What Trump is reallytrying to do is convince liberal middle-class white women that he can be nice to blacks or something.
Narration #2: Every word, every expression, every tic, wink, blink, shift in posture, in fact even just Trump’s physical presence at these black churches in front of black audiences is evidence of Trump’s condescension, Trump’s unfitness, Trump’s trickery and PROVES Trump is a stone-cold racist.
Narration #3: Trump is playing those nice black preachers and congregations for fools. Because everyone KNOWS that Trump has no intention whatsoever of helping blacks and Latinos. After all, Trump IS a well-known racist, just like the rest of the GOP, even the NeverTrumpers, who they temporarily like and put on the air as much as possible, most of who will be re-consigned to MSM hell once the election is over.
Narration #4: Trump needs to appear before “valid” black audiences. Campaign advice from the enemy.
What they cannot stand, what inflames them to sputtering outrage is that Trump is appearing before polite, respectful black congregations in black churches – and there is no way around it – they HAVE to show video of this offense against humanity occurring, otherwise they have no story at all and FoxNews will get the ratings.
What they want so bad they can taste it is Trump being booed by black audiences. Now, THERE’S a segment worthy of running. If only Trump would try to speak to BlackLivesMutter groups – perhaps the teachers union in Chicago - or even the NAACP – where he is sure to be booed off the stage. Now, THAT spectacle would surely be run on a loop on the Rachel Maddow Show.
Lastly, I’ve heard several pundits go after Lauer because Lauer did not “fact-check” Trump during the forum, like Candy Crowley famously did with Romney. What idiots! Trump, unlike Romney, never bends over for them so they can get a better angle to screw him. Trump would get a LOT of mileage in the polls if any moderator tries. Better save it for later, for on air “analysis” where you can claim anything you want without any pesky candidate making you out to be a fool.
grackle: If you're right -- and maybe I am presuming too much in thinking that you are predicting a big improvement in blacks voting for a Republican for president this year -- we'll see it in numbers from precincts in Detroit, Flint, Chicago, Philadelphia, Cleveland and Milwaukee.
Let's both of us make a note to revisit in November.
… maybe I am presuming too much …
Not at all. I think Trump will probably set records for a GOP candidate getting minority votes. Keep in mind that even a moderate reduction in the minority voting bloc means big trouble for the Clintons and their MSM enablers. This is why they are outraged at Trump’s outreach. Trump is inviting the minorities to leave the Progressive plantation. That’s heresy. And dangerous.
strategery-do
Ruh-roh, this story just became important!
Because Donald Trump Junior just jumped onto the Infowars bandwagon:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/294970-donald-trump-jr-promotes-infowars-conspiracy-on-clintons
Just when they get Senior's Twitter account under control, Junior falls into the deep end...
Chuck said...
"Is Snopes suspected as a left-wing front organization?"
Snopes has been observed to have a strong "liberal" tilt. Not really full-scale SFG (Soros Front Group) like "Occupy Wall Street" or "Black Lives Matter", but definitely Commie-symps. But that's a little beside the point this time, because if you look at the item in question, you will see that Snopes shows an author for this piece. It was written by one Dan Evon. After the text proper, we have the following biographical details;
"Dan Evon is a Chicago-based writer and longtime truth enthusiast. His work has appeared somewhere, and he earned a degree at the University of His Choosing. His exploration of Internet truth has been supported by grants from the Facebook Drug Task Force."
So, there you go. It doesn't get much truer than that.
Chuck said...
"Just when they get Senior's Twitter account under control, Junior falls into the deep end..."
Chuck, on the other hand, may well be an SFG.
My husband fell and suffered a concussion last Nov. It severely damaged his hearing on one side.. He has a hearing aid but the nerve damage causes him to sometimes have things repeated so his brain will process them. He says it sometimes sounds like a radio that is not quite tuned in. A pre-digital radio, of course.
Well, Jupiter, who do you think has a better record for truth-telling; Snopes, or Alex Jones' InfoWars?
Didn't I ask earlier for an example of Snopes getting a story wrong? Anybody got one?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/8/1/1555413/-Snopes-defended-Jill-Stein-they-both-are-wrong-about-vaccines
One article.
Video @Darrell's link is worth watching. She did that same unusual hand configuration at this morning's press gaggle that the doc pointed out in his video -- but only once and very briefly (she generally kept her hands on the podium, which obscured them from view when she wasn't gesturing). And a few other things occurred that were quite consistent w/Darrell's doctor vid. The "Do you suffer from decision-making fatigue?" article mentioned in the doc's video (and an HRC emaiil) was -- if memory serves, and these days it increasingly does not -- a link Althouse posted a few years ago. And (again, if memory serves) she didn't link to it in the context of Parkinsons. It is a useful article to have in your pocket, though, if you're trying to fend off suppositions that you may have Parkinsons. But it's not terribly useful, obviously, if you're trying to explain a gaping memory hole, or a terribly important and bad decision you made, while holding high office.
In any event, her medical problems are definitely trickling down to my fellow "man-on-the-streeters." The A/C man (a black fellow in his early to mid-30's) today said he'd heard rumors about her medical infirmities, too, but he chalked them up to her age and the fact she's flown a gazillion miles -- so of course she is tired and gets confused. However, he also said he was staying out of presidential politics this year altogether and would not be going to the polls. Several paces out the door, just as I was about to close it, he turned around and said he'd survived two tornados, that another one is coming, and his best advice to anyone is "just get yourself to a safe place and stay there."
The Wiki-leakers or some such organization should work to identify the earpiece and either jam it or hack it and stream really stupid things for her to say. Do you think they could make her head explode?
Let me get this right, "we are wondering if a liar is lying".
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा