Hillary to wear an ear mic during the debate?

[TheGreatGatsby]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

 

[TheOldSchool]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Gatsby, I couldn't get your link to work. I looked up the link and this is important information I believe. Please note that they have changed the link title to a story about a DHS intel worker but the content of the story is about the ear microphone. I'm wondering how that happened.

Thank you for thread.

Express check-in? DHS intel worker arrested for bringing loaded handgun to the office – World Tribune: Window on the Real World

The presidential debate moderators will not be allowed to wear earpieces, according to published reports.

But what about the presidential candidates themselves?

A voter in Maryland wrote Federal Elections Commissioner Matthew Petersen on Sept. 8 seeking a "clear response" to that question.

"I read reports that during the televised event questioning each of the candidates on their qualifications to serve as Commander in Chief, that Secretary Clinton had a microphone in her ear to receive prompting and guidance from advisers off stage," wrote Laurence B of Columbia, Md.

[A check of his name and address at the Maryland State Board of Elections Internet site verified the writer's identity as a registered voter.]

"Surely this is a more serious violation of competition than the doping which the Olympics have had to clean up. ... Can you please confirm that your commission will take conclusive steps to ensure that no such cheating takes place during the debates?" the letter concluded.

When he received no response to his letter, he wrote again on Sept. 21: "I've got to say I'm really discouraged not to have received a confirmation from you or from your office that your policy will be to disallow the two candidates to wear ear microphones. Am I to interpret your lack of a response to mean that such behavior will, indeed be accepted?"

That correspondence got an immediate and lengthy response in "legalese" from an attorney with the FEC:

"Good afternoon, my name is Ruth Heilizer and I am an attorney with the Federal Election Commission (“FEC” or “Commission”). I have been asked to respond to your email to FEC Chairman Petersen regarding your suggestion that presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump be prohibited from wearing ear microphones during the upcoming presidential debates.
The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (“Act”) and Commission regulations require that the contents of a complaint meet certain specific requirements. In particular, a complaint be in writing, sworn to and signed in the presence of a notary public and notarized. Unfortunately, your email did not meet these requirements.

If you wish to file a formal complaint with the Commission, you must follow the requirements set forth in the Act at 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(1) and Commission regulations. Requirements of this section of the law, and Commission regulations at 11 C.F.R. § 111.4, which are a prerequisite to Commission action, are detailed below: ..."

Persistent citizen Laurence B. gave it one more try:

"As a lawyer, I'm sure you can differentiate between a complaint, and a request for a clear statement of rules. My email is seeking the latter. ... I would be very grateful if you could let me know whether or not there is a clear rule prohibiting candidates from wearing ear mics and if so, whether or not it is your intention to enforce that rule.

He has yet to receive a response.

Carlos Greer, the Commission on Presidential Debates sent out a message to news organizations on Sept. 9 banning devices that would allow presidential debate moderators get directions from their news teams.

NBC's "Today" anchor Matt Lauer wore an earpiece Sept. 7 when he conducted interviews with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump at the "Commander-in-Chief Forum which was severely criticized by liberal media commentators.
___________
They clearly dodged the question not once but twice. Something is not right.

Hillary Clinton should not be permitted to wear an ear microphone during a debate. She won't have one when that 3 a.m. phone call comes in and this is a matter that should be publicly addressed and resolved at once.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Hillary Clinton Campaign Responds to Firestorm About Earpiece She Wore at Military Forum
Image Credit: Screenshot/NBC News
There is definitely something there. The shiny earpiece captured the attention of social media, and many speculated that it was a remote device for "coaching" her on her answers.

A blog TruePundit claimed the NYPD weighed in on the "inductive earpiece," but sources are unnamed.

Now, the Clinton campaign has responded. Via Fox News:

While Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump each generated headlines about comments made Wednesday night at a candidates’ forum, the buzz Thursday morning was more about a report claiming Clinton relied on a “micro” earbud as she fielded questions about national security — a claim her campaign vigorously denied.

 

[TheOldSchool]

 

[TheOldSchool]

Giant booger?!

 

[CowboyTed]

Debunked long time ago...

 

[mudwhistle]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

Somebody erased the link. It has been removed.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

Somebody erased the link. It has been removed.

Jeri posted the riveting, smoking gun of an article in its entirety

 

[Clementine]

Of course, she has to wear an earpiece. When she freezes up, someone has to tell her to keep talking.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Debunked long time ago...

By Snopes? Did you actually read the story?

FALSE: Hillary Clinton Wore 'Secret Earpiece' During Commander-in-Chief Forum

Although this photograph was frequently shared as a "high-res" image showing Clinton wearing an earpiece, it's actually a cropped version of an image taken by news photographer Brendan Smialowski:

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton speaks during a veterans forum aboard the aircraft carrier USS Intrepid September 7, 2016 in New York, New York

Smialowski's image has been cropped to show only Clinton's face (and then blown up back to size), revealing what looks like a small light inside Clinton's ear.
____________

They don't deny a news photographer captured the photo of the ear piece (Snopes describes it as a "small light") and fail to explain how she is wearing the exact same clothing / jewelry. You'll have to understand that I just do not accept Snopes as a "reliable source." I'd like to hear from the photographer, Mr. Smialowski, who took the photograph. Surely he knows what he saw.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Debunked long time ago...

Lol they don't care

 

[mudwhistle]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

Somebody erased the link. It has been removed.

Jeri posted the riveting, smoking gun of an article in its entirety

Well, right now, nothing was at that link.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

Somebody erased the link. It has been removed.

Jeri posted the riveting, smoking gun of an article in its entirety

Well, right now, nothing was at that link.

Don't worry about it. You're not missing anything interesting.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

Somebody erased the link. It has been removed.

Jeri posted the riveting, smoking gun of an article in its entirety

You're working quite hard for something you dismissed so easily early on, OS.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

Somebody erased the link. It has been removed.

Jeri posted the riveting, smoking gun of an article in its entirety

You're working quite hard for something you dismissed so easily early on, OS.

You're right I've been working myself too hard. Googling that photo of Trump's enormous booger really wore me out.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump plans to wear this

in order to get a direct feed from the Kremlin.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Trump plans to wear this

in order to get a direct feed from the Kremlin.

Won't be too hard to hide under his toupee

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Her people at the presidential debate commission would not deny this reality...

http://www.worldtribune.com/noearmics/NoEarMics.html

Really? An article about some random dude e-mailing the FEC commissioner about Trump and Hillary not being allowed to wear ear pieces, who gets no response because he's nobody, and you turn it into "Hillary is going to wear an earpiece at the debate." Do you work for Fox? At what point does spinning a story cross the line into being a complete fabrication?

Somebody erased the link. It has been removed.

Jeri posted the riveting, smoking gun of an article in its entirety

Well, right now, nothing was at that link.

Then they have erased that one too. Why go to the trouble to remove info off a link if there is nothing to it?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Both candidates should be checked to make sure there are no microphones, wires, etc. This is a debate. Each candidate should be able to answer the questions without any assistance or back up.

I think I've heard enough about this. I will just ask God to bring judgment on those who involve themselves with, participate in any scheme to cheat or deceive the American people during the debates. He is well able to handle this matter.

Goodnight.