Hillary Needed Help During The CIC Forum, Had Ear Piece

And this is why trump and is followers cant get any love, they make more stuff up, and then accuse people of being shills.

So we had does hillary wear diapers, does she do cokaine, she is dying in front of our eyes.

Great topics kids, i know i know i am a paid shill, there's no way that donald wont win yuge.

Why is wearing an earpiece a big deal? This is absurd.

Here. Here it is. Because heaven forbid I start a thread so that the effort I put into posting isn't buried on page nobody-cares-or-will-ever-see-again.

It's not exactly remarkable for an election to be lousy with fact-free rhetoric from lying politicians, editorial bias and media sensationalism. It's also no great secret that the two clowns nominated by our two dominate parties are both unabashedly dishonest.

What's changed over the last few elections is the role that political news blogs, alternative media and social media have played in promulgating disinformation. Say what you will about the mainstream media but they do have at least some minimal concern for their reputations and perhaps more importantly, there is the threat of being sued for libel.

However, these concerns aren't shared by the purveyors of clickbait who have no standards and not one iota journalist integrity — because nobody hold's them accountable and as Fox News's Sean Hannity said, "I never claimed to be a journalist." Most often the primary goal is simply to publish content that grabs the attention of consumers, goes viral and generates ad revenue (clickbait). I won't even sully the work of serious researchers by referring to this garbage as "conspiracy theories."

In reality they are hoaxes for profit and propaganda.

Just as with the mainstream media we have an obligation to be informed consumers of information coming from the host of new sources we are presented with. In fact, well-springs of disinformation that they are, I'd say anyone whose skepticism doesn't increase proportionally is at best a gullible fool and likely worse, an unwitting useful idiot parroting disinformation to everyone they know.

With that spiel out of the way, I'd like to address one such example that exploded on the Internet today.

The "allegation?" That Hillary Clinton wore some sort of earpiece in last night's NBC Commander-In-Chief Forum to receive coaching.

The source? A clickbait site called True Pundit who can't be bothered to update their SSL cert but claim to have an "anonymous NYPD source" who in turn claimed to know that Hillary was wearing an "invisible earpiece" to receiving coaching.

The proof? Aside from the dubious tipster, they have a grainy zoomed image and an "enhanced video" which has been making the rounds on Twitter with the hashtag #hillarysearpiece. I won't send them traffic. If you haven't seen the image and you'd like to, it's posted in this ATS thread.

These folks hit a grand slam when non-journalist, fabricator of "evidence," unabashed propagandist and trawler of garbage from YouTube, Paul Joseph Watson picked up on the story from James Woods's Twitter feed and posted about it on InfoWars.

The Drudge picked up the story from InfoWars and put it front and center. The InfoWars link was also reposted by Donald Trump Jr on Twitter and Trump advisor AJ Delgado who apparently thought better of it deleted the tweet.

Now this hoax has made it all the way to Fox News.

Call me sentimental but I miss the old days when the feeder network republished from Fox instead of Fox picking up garbage from the bottom. It's a smart strategy though because this way they can publish utterly indefensible, libelous clickbait garbage content without having to be responsible for whether or not it contains even a shred of truth.

By this point hundreds of news blogs have picked up and repeated the story and of course, if it's not there already, it will soon be on the front of our own beloved ATS, promoted by the wishful thinking and dare I say, incomprehensible willful ignorance of some of our pro-Trump posters.

How do we know it's really bulls#?

Start with the fact that the Clinton campaign denied it to Fox News:

Two senior campaign aides, though, told Fox News the report is absolutely not true.

In both cases, the candidates had to contend with suspicious-looking photographs. True Pundit published a zoomed-in image of Clinton’s left ear showing a shiny reflection purported to be a stealth communications device.

But Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said what is seen in the photo is merely a reflection of the TV lights or a flash.

It only makes sense that the campaign would lie. It's what campaigns do. However, I bring you a variety of different shots of Hillary's left ear from a variety of sources, right and left-leaning (because the new claim is that every picture anyone uploads that doesn't show an earpiece was photoshopped by Hillary supporters).

NewsMax


Fox News Insider / Hannity


NBC News/MSNBC


NBC News/MSNBC


AP via Breitbart


Twitchy

a reply to: dukeofjive696969

And this is why trump and is followers cant get any love, they make more stuff up, and then accuse people of being shills.

I have no horse in the race, but you are just tossing an ad hominem attack at people here. Pure ignorance. If its this easy to make people look stupid, why wouldn't I just "pretend" to be a 'Trump supporter' when in fact I support Hillary?

Is our nation and our peoples judged on this level of stupidity? Where is the proper debunking anyway. So far I saw a dupe thread posted, claiming "clear evidence" which was basically HRC's camp denying she wore an earpiece, and a half dozen shots of a single side of her.

The only proper debunking is HD Video footage showing both sides of her face (ears) a few seconds apart in continuity, anything less than that is pseudo-debunking, and as the OP of the other thread liked to accuse people of "intellectually dishonest".

Seriously, the damn woman has dozens of emails indicating flat out, total deceit, lying her ass off with the natural inclination she has doing it.

So....

a reply to: theantediluvian


Thank-you for finally putting this earpiece rumor to rest, TheAntEdiluvian. Hillary probably liked how it distracted away from the REAL issues dealing with her health, lying, etc..

Come to think of it, Hillary probably learned from this non-existent earpiece incident that a good distraction can be to her advantage. I wonder what kind of "false flag" she'll implement to distract the sharks, between now and election day?

It is bad enough that the MSM is bought and paid for and control the national agenda, but nowadays there are countless clickbait "journalism" and blogs that have nothing but sensationalized headlines. I see these on facebook all the time, from both the right and the left. Sad thing is, people actually believe what these sources post and spread it around as fact. I have had conversations with people who still wouldn't believe me after fact checking with (more) reliable sources. The truth doesn't matter in politics, only perception and opinion. I find it disgusting that someone would willingly remain ignorant and believe a falsehood just because it supports their opinion.

Nope. No earpiece. Hoax origins, retouched images.

originally posted by: reldra
Nope. No earpiece. Hoax origins, retouched images.

Source?

a reply to: thesaneone

Read this thread,for starters

It's not that hard,is it?

a reply to: thesaneone

www.snopes.com...

originally posted by: theantediluvian

How do we know it's really bulls#?

Start with the fact that the Clinton campaign denied it to Fox News:

Two senior campaign aides, though, told Fox News the report is absolutely not true.

This is the conclusive "evidence" you have? That's damn funny. Your source for the evidence has far less credibility than the ALT-right boogeyman they've created to distract from the stinking pile of corruption known as the Clinton campaign.

Seriously, your proof is the Clinton campaign denied it??? LOL

It only makes sense that the campaign would lie. It's what campaigns do. However, I bring you a variety of different shots of Hillary's left ear from a variety of sources, right and left-leaning (because the new claim is that every picture anyone uploads that doesn't show an earpiece was photoshopped by Hillary supporters).

Then why bother posting the "proof" if you're even calling your "proof" bullsh*t?

originally posted by: 4003fireglo
Why is wearing an earpiece a big deal? This is absurd.

She is being told what to say from the man behind the curtain. Nothing more than a manikin with moving lips.

As opposed to someone speaking from their own mind, with the courage to be alone on a stage when responding to questions.

a reply to: theantediluvian


From the photos you posted, definitely looks like it could be an earpiece in there:

originally posted by: reldra
Nope. No earpiece. Hoax origins, retouched images.

Well since you say so, it must be true.

a reply to: boncho

Why keep putting her entire face on the posts? I have a weak stomach! Hillary may just have greasy, shiny ears, from all the hair spray.

I see what could be construed as an earpiece in one or two photos, yet it is seemingly absent in other photos and the videos. Not only that, but there are far more subtle earpieces available for purchase, that hiding it from the most ravenous of people wouldn't even be a problem. There is no proof of any earpiece.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: thesaneone

www.snopes.com...

SNOPES should be renamed 'Nopes' for denying everything that the establishment orders them to. Not credible in the least. No better or worse than the "crazy right wing conspiracy theorists" they accuse of fabricating evidence all the time (though I started to develop an affinity for "crazy conspiracy theorists analysts" because at least they are challenging some kind of establishment thinking (they just falter when it returns to conservative criticism.)

So from the photo "sNopes" is using, from Hillary's own Flikr account, you can tell its been heavily edited in photoshop.



Link



Would not surprise me in the least if they photoshopped it out of their own pics and turned it into a game of 'he said she said'.

EDIT: Im trying to find a higher resolution photo in the Flickr source code (this site doesn't allow direct DLs??) and the best rez I can find is the following:



Bizarre. And absolutely there could've been an object there which was touched up later during their photoshop session. Why anyone would trust "leaders" when they're constantly lying, and then provide sources like Snopes (no better than the proven media influence displayed in HRC's own leaked emails, e.g. friends writing articles for her and approving them before print....is beyond me.

IF they published raw photos from both angles taken seconds apart (continuity), totally untouched, high resolution, sure, I can see absolutely defending this and claiming its a hoax. As of now Im not sure why people are so gullible or emotional about a very plausible lie coming from someone who spews lies consistently. And this isn't meant as a plug for Trump, Im not a fan of either of them, or the system in general.


....but how stupid do we look when, "x was doing ____", "No I wasn't --here, look at this heavily photoshopped picture & this official denial, & this article in a media source that defends me no matter what"

originally posted by: boncho
a reply to: theantediluvian


From the photos you posted, definitely looks like it could be an earpiece in there:

Definitely a wire like object going into her ear, either that or one of the alien host's tentacles wrapping around that is attached to the base of her skull.
Going with communication device.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: 4003fireglo
Why is wearing an earpiece a big deal? This is absurd.

She is being told what to say from the man behind the curtain. Nothing more than a manikin with moving lips.

As opposed to someone speaking from their own mind, with the courage to be alone on a stage when responding to questions.

Who's the man behind the curtain?