It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Hillary Cheating Again?

page: 4
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Care to point out in the picture where her microphone wire was then?


If it was worn properly, it wouldn't be visible. That is why they wear them that way. Think...

Yeah, hence why it is clipped on her back and not her front side. Funny how that works right?




posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Blah blah it's still her mic .

That's an awful lot of words to defend a position that doesn't make sense.
edit on 9282016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Care to point out in the picture where her microphone wire was then?


If it was worn properly, it wouldn't be visible. That is why they wear them that way. Think...

Yeah, hence why it is clipped on her back and not her front side. Funny how that works right?


That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Why don't you address the points I made rather than ask for pictures that cant exist? If it was worn correctly it would not be visible. That is WHY people wear them that way. This wire was clearly visible all the way up the MIDDLE of her back to her neck line. Then, according to you, went around her neck and down to her chest without being visible at her neck line or on her shoulder. A properly worn Lavalier mic would have had the wire go around her waist, where garments are typically looser, then up to her chest, again where garments are looser especially on women where the natural contours allow for easy concealment of the wire.
edit on 28-9-2016 by Vroomfondel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Blah blah it's still her mic .

That's an awful lot of words to defend a position that doesn't make sense.


What doesn't make sense is that she wore the mic incorrectly, and that the wire so clearly visible on her back was not visible at her neck or on her shoulder.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Care to point out in the picture where her microphone wire was then?


If it was worn properly, it wouldn't be visible. That is why they wear them that way. Think...

Yeah, hence why it is clipped on her back and not her front side. Funny how that works right?


That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

It doesn't make sense to clip the mic on her back and run it up her back side so it isn't visible to view? I see you've never done any public speaking before.


Why don't you address the points I made rather than ask for pictures that cant exist? If it was worn correctly it would not be visible. That is WHY they people wear them that way. This wire was clearly visible all the way up the MIDDLE of her back to her neck line. Then, according to you, went around her neck and down to her chest without being visible at her neck line or on her shoulder. A properly worn Lavalier mic would have had the wire go around her waist, where garments are typically looser, then up to her chest, again where garments are looser especially on women where the natural contours allow for easy concealment of the wire.

This is opposed to your brain dead theory that a woman who wants to cheat will use a device to do so that can be easily captured with photographic equipment through her clothes in an age where every police precinct in the country has wires with MUCH smaller visibility under clothes. Yea. TOTALLY makes sense guy.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   


OMG... It's the broadcast transmitter for her wireless microphone! Come on... get a grip folks.


As some have already said, this is a microphone pack for the lapel mic they BOTH used. Just better hidden under a man's suit.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Hilary most likely cheated by knowing the questions beforehand, not by having someone dictate directions to a little earpiece. Her canned responses were well-rehearsed.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Care to point out in the picture where her microphone wire was then?


If it was worn properly, it wouldn't be visible. That is why they wear them that way. Think...

Yeah, hence why it is clipped on her back and not her front side. Funny how that works right?


That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

It doesn't make sense to clip the mic on her back and run it up her back side so it isn't visible to view? I see you've never done any public speaking before.


Why don't you address the points I made rather than ask for pictures that cant exist? If it was worn correctly it would not be visible. That is WHY they people wear them that way. This wire was clearly visible all the way up the MIDDLE of her back to her neck line. Then, according to you, went around her neck and down to her chest without being visible at her neck line or on her shoulder. A properly worn Lavalier mic would have had the wire go around her waist, where garments are typically looser, then up to her chest, again where garments are looser especially on women where the natural contours allow for easy concealment of the wire.

This is opposed to your brain dead theory that a woman who wants to cheat will use a device to do so that can be easily captured with photographic equipment through her clothes in an age where every police precinct in the country has wires with MUCH smaller visibility under clothes. Yea. TOTALLY makes sense guy.


You are guessing and making statements not grounded in fact again.

Yes, I have worn wireless units before. And I have put a great many of them on other people as well.

The wire clearly is visible. All the way up the middle of her back to the neck line of her garment. That is NOT how a Lavalier mic is worn. Period. Unless it was put on by someone who had no idea what they were doing. I know this is cnn we are talking about here so that is definitely a possibility, but still. It makes no sense that the mic wire would run straight up the middle of her back all the way to her neck, then have to turn and follow the contour of her garment to avoid being visible, than down the FRONT of her garment to her chest. That is NOT how a Lavalier mic is worn.

Also, it does make sense when you take two things in to consideration. 1) Her belief that she can do anything and get away with it. 2) People like you who will make excuses for her and ignore the obvious in preference of their political desires.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
You are guessing and making statements not grounded in fact again.

Lol. Your entire "theory" is a guess.


Also, it does make sense when you take two things in to consideration. 1) Her belief that she can do anything and get away with it. 2) People like you who will make excuses for her and ignore the obvious in preference of their political desires.

This is how you are proving your guess? Lol! Too funny! And it's even funnier because you are 100% serious and not trolling too.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
You are guessing and making statements not grounded in fact again.

Lol. Your entire "theory" is a guess.


Also, it does make sense when you take two things in to consideration. 1) Her belief that she can do anything and get away with it. 2) People like you who will make excuses for her and ignore the obvious in preference of their political desires.

This is how you are proving your guess? Lol! Too funny! And it's even funnier because you are 100% serious and not trolling too.


And once again, instead of answering you deflect and try to turn it back on me.

Its not a guess, its an assessment of the visible conditions. Why don't you defend your braindead opinion by explaining how a 1.5mm wire can make such a large and visible line on her back but disappear on her shoulder and her neck...

Why don't you explain why she wore the mic incorrectly for the most important debate of her life...
edit on 28-9-2016 by Vroomfondel because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-9-2016 by Vroomfondel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel
No, it's a guess based on you looking at ONE photograph and then letting your political biases build the rest of the narrative. It's beyond obvious.

Also, it doesn't look like you understand that shirts and jackets tend to get taunt when people lean over (which is what Hillary is doing in that photo).


Why don't you explain why she wore the mic incorrectly for the most important debate of her life...

Why don't you explain why someone who wants to cheat would use a wire that is so easily visible? I noticed you skipped that part of my reasoning, but don't worry I won't let you side step it. It's fun making you look silly with your super biased craziness here.
edit on 28-9-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   


Hilary most likely cheated by knowing the questions beforehand, not by having someone dictate directions to a little earpiece. Her canned responses were well-rehearsed.


Bingo.

I still can't believe folks are arguing about a microphone after 4 pages.

Look, I'll even buy into the double after the 911 ceremony. Why? Because I analyzed it myself, and the differences are not exactly difficult to spot, especially as a photo-realistic portrait artist...(it was, as far as I can tell, the only time they used her...after that, was the real Hillary at speeches, etc.). But I DO NOT see a conspiracy here with a mic cord and pack.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Vroomfondel
No, it's a guess based on you looking at ONE photograph and then letting your political biases build the rest of the narrative. It's beyond obvious.


Why don't you explain why she wore the mic incorrectly for the most important debate of her life...

Why don't you explain why someone who wants to cheat would use a wire that is so easily visible. I noticed you skipped that part of my reasoning, but don't worry I won't let you side step it. It's fun making you look silly with your super biased craziness here.


The political bias is all yours. And you can have it.

One photo is all it takes to see the wire on her back is obviously too big to be the wire for a Lavalier mic set. You won't address that because you cant.

I didn't skip your so-called reasoning. I addressed it directly. She believes she can do anything and get away with it, and, people like you go out of your way to justify her actions regardless of how obvious they are. But I am the one with political bias. Uh huh...

How does a 1.5mm wire (less than a 1/16" of an inch) make such a large mound on her back and be completely invisible on her shoulder and neck?

Why would any professional put the mic on her incorrectly?

NO ONE wears a Lavalier mic with the wire coming up over their shoulder. When the wire goes around the waist there is little chance of anything pulling it or disconnecting it. It is also more easily concealed around the waist. That is why they are worn that way. They are NOT work with the wire running straight up the middle of the back all the way to the neck line of the garment, then routed around the neck over the shoulder and down to the chest. That is one of the most ridiculous things I have heard in a long time. It just doesn't work that way.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

You are making something out of nothing.

1st, take a look at this google search result. There are many lav mics that use two separated gauges of wires. A thicker line that eventually leads to a smaller gauge as it connects to the mic, or have a thicker gauge altogether.

2nd, Hillary is bending down and reaching out, which would put pressure on her jacket and force it against her back. That is why you can see it so well.
edit on 28-9-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gazrok



Hilary most likely cheated by knowing the questions beforehand, not by having someone dictate directions to a little earpiece. Her canned responses were well-rehearsed.


Bingo.

I still can't believe folks are arguing about a microphone after 4 pages.

Look, I'll even buy into the double after the 911 ceremony. Why? Because I analyzed it myself, and the differences are not exactly difficult to spot, especially as a photo-realistic portrait artist...(it was, as far as I can tell, the only time they used her...after that, was the real Hillary at speeches, etc.). But I DO NOT see a conspiracy here with a mic cord and pack.


I made a few observations and asked a few questions that no one has answered yet. Can you offer any explanation? I would be interested in hearing it.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel


NO ONE wears a Lavalier mic with the wire coming up over their shoulder. When the wire goes around the waist there is little chance of anything pulling it or disconnecting it. It is also more easily concealed around the waist. That is why they are worn that way. They are NOT work with the wire running straight up the middle of the back all the way to the neck line of the garment, then routed around the neck over the shoulder and down to the chest. That is one of the most ridiculous things I have heard in a long time. It just doesn't work that way.

You heard it here first folks! Vroomfondel doesn't approve of the way Hillary wears her microphone, therefore she is cheating!



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Vroomfondel

You are making something out of nothing.

1st, take a look at this google search result. There are many lav mics that use two separated gauges of wires. A thicker line that eventually leads to a smaller gauge as it connects to the mic, or have a thicker gauge altogether.

2nd, Hillary is bending down and reaching out, which would put pressure on her jacket and force it against her back. That is why you can see it so well.

Hey! Don't you know? Logic and sound reasoning is liberal bias. Hillary is a cheater because Vroomfondel says she wants to get away with anything, Hillary supporters will defend anything, and he doesn't approve of the way she wears her microphone. That is all the evidence that should be needed to factually confirm her being a cheater. Duh!
edit on 28-9-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Vroomfondel

You are making something out of nothing.

1st, take a look at this google search result. There are many lav mics that use two separated gauges of wires. A thicker line that eventually leads to a smaller gauge as it connects to the mic.

2nd, Hillary is bending down and reaching out, which would put pressure on her jacket and force it against her back. That is why you can see it so well.


No. The wire from the battery pack to the wireless is larger. The wire from the wireless to the mic is not. That is the wire visible running up her back to her neck. Please explain how a 1.5mm wire can make a mound that large. Not how it might be visible, but how it can somehow become so much larger. Second, explaining why it is visible in that pic does not explain why it is not visible coming over her shoulder or around her neck. If the garment was stretched tight as she leaned over and reached to shake hands it would have more clearly shown a 1.5mm wire, not the large mass seen in the photo. If the wire was that visible on her back it would have to be visible on her neck and shoulder also, but it isnt.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Vroomfondel

You are making something out of nothing.

1st, take a look at this google search result. There are many lav mics that use two separated gauges of wires. A thicker line that eventually leads to a smaller gauge as it connects to the mic, or have a thicker gauge altogether.

2nd, Hillary is bending down and reaching out, which would put pressure on her jacket and force it against her back. That is why you can see it so well.

Hey! Don't you know? Logic and sound reasoning is liberal bias? Hillary is a cheater because Vroomfondel says she wants to get away with anything, Hillary supporters will defend anything, and he doesn't approve of the way she wears her microphone. That is all the evidence that should be needed to factually confirm her being a cheater. Duh!


It could also appear to be a bigger wire if the person that placed the mic on Hillary used gaffer's tape to hold it in place. That is quite common.



posted on Sep, 28 2016 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Vroomfondel

You are making something out of nothing.

1st, take a look at this google search result. There are many lav mics that use two separated gauges of wires. A thicker line that eventually leads to a smaller gauge as it connects to the mic, or have a thicker gauge altogether.

2nd, Hillary is bending down and reaching out, which would put pressure on her jacket and force it against her back. That is why you can see it so well.

Hey! Don't you know? Logic and sound reasoning is liberal bias? Hillary is a cheater because Vroomfondel says she wants to get away with anything, Hillary supporters will defend anything, and he doesn't approve of the way she wears her microphone. That is all the evidence that should be needed to factually confirm her being a cheater. Duh!


It could also appear to be a bigger wire if the person that placed the mic on Hillary used gaffer's tape to hold it in place. That is quite common.


I'm sorry but that is incorrect. If a mic wire is taped in place it is done with a 1" long 1/4" wide piece of tape similar to a small bandaid, not gaffers tape all the way up a persons back. Again, it simply isn't done like that.




top topics



 
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join