Home > Bush Conspiracy

Bush Conspiracy

by Open-Publishing - Sunday 3 October 2004
24 comments

If you watch the debate, rather than listening to the clip, you will see
that Bush was pointing to the moderator when he said let me finish.

That was because he was coming to the end of his time, and had pretty much finished making his points. The green light had come on, and if he was done, then Kerry, who was indicating that he wanted a thirty second rebuttal (evidenced by the fact that he got it) would have been given the floor. He wanted to say more, and had the time, so he told the moderator let me finish, as he was pointing at him.

If you don’t watch it, and don’t see the green and red lights, and then don’t see that it resulted in one of the thirty second rebuttals that the candidates are allowed when requested, then you can entertain the conspiracy theory.

(all facts the audio misses)

But if you actually watch what happened it is completely not a conspiracy.

And that box under Bushes jacket, and the wire????

Hello, he was wearing a microphone, we all know that.

But in your rush for a conspiracy you ignore the microphone.

You see a box and/or a wire (both parts of a microphone - if there was no wire, which I never saw, then the box is still a part of the microphone because it is an ampifier) and assume, my god that must be the earpiece he was talking into.

Well what was his microphone attached to if the box is for an earpiece????

If you saw two boxes, maybe.

But you see one, so that is for his microphone.

In your quest for a conspiracy you miss the obvious.

Forum posts

  • I guess Bush has just lied so much to the public that its like the boy who cried wolf, no one believes him even if he isn’t deceiving them....

    • I agree with the above statement. Bush has lied so many times and even when Kerry called Bush for "misleading the American public" during the debate - Bush continued to lie after Kerry straightened his shit out multiple times. It’s truly sad. Any theories examining the truthfulness of anything Bush does is simply brought on by his own character and his pathetic inability to ever admit to doing ANYTHING wrong. Oh Oh - the heat is on - TERRORISTS - TERRORISTS - TERRORISTS. Boy who cried wolf all the way. No one is paying any attention any more.

  • That’s just it, he wasn’t at the end of his time... the green light was on, but not the yellow or red. Mr. Lehrer never once appeared as though he was going to cut a debater off, and if he had, he certainly wouldn’t have done so then, as Bush hadn’t paused or otherwise motioned that he was done.

    As for the box, I don’t suscribe to this. I don’t see that it’s necessary. This is the White House after all... if they were intent on such a deception they would have the technological means to carry it out, without our being the wiser. Of course, getting Bush to not blow the deception is quite another thing.

    There were numerous occasions in the debate where Bush seemed to be waiting for something before speaking.

    And has been pointed out elsewhere, the numerous gaffes and misstatements that characterized the beginning of his term abruptly disappeared. It is suggested that this was when Bush was first made to use the earpiece. Once he was made to feel secure when speaking to people with the earpiece in place, it would be be difficult to remove it, esp. for a critical occasion like the debates.

  • What I find interesting is that as soon as this "conspiracy" theory hit the web (right after John Reynolds released the editorial) all of the links to the C-span video & NYT audio clips have been disabled. No one that I know has been able to gain access to these files all day. It could just be server overload (or it could be time to edit the files), but then again, that little coincidence in itself is enough to make one scratch they’re head a little bit.

    Azar

  • "If you watch the debate, rather than listening to the clip, you will see that Bush was pointing to the moderator when he said let me finish." This is an outright lie! Both his hands are resting on the podium- he looks to his left (lehrer is on his right) and he even closes his eyes when he says it! Mr. Clark is a repub goon lying- telling people not to bother watching the video.

    This is great news- the bushies are running scared.

    for all you skeptical readers out there: WATCH THE VIDEO

    see for yourself- he was not motioning to lehrer, the green light did just come on, but he still had 30 seconds at that point. And the way he says it.... he is not projecting his voice to lehrer or the audience, it’s sort of a mumble under his breath- "let me finish"

    i am a level-headed logical person- and i am 99% sure that he was talking to his earpiece. don’t listen to the disinformation specialists that have nothing to offer but- ’tinfoil was on sale today’ and other stupid comments. the repub goons are worried about this goof up- hence the heavy smear campaign.

    ps- re: the lump in his back- more disinfo imho. a microphone transmits the signal, so it would need a battery pack as seen in bush’s jacket. earpieces do not need large battery packs because they only receive data, a tiny battery will do. the ’lump in his back’ is not related to the earpiece, but suggested here just to discredit the story.

    • Actually the lump on his back is all the evidence any one claims to have...

      And I was responded to those claims, which even you are saying are meaningless, because accordingly to your post, an earpiece wouldn’t need the lump on his back that 108 other posts talked about.

      And you completely ignored the real point, Kerry who you cannot see, is motioning to rebut, Bush is at the end of his alloted time (and what is more important is that he also appeared to be at the end of his point), if he didn’t want to speak anymore he would have been done, whether the red light was on or not.

      Kerry got an unscripted 30 second rebuttal, which means he asked for it.

      Logic says, considering Bush said let me finish, that Kerry was trying to interject. Or else why would he have gotten the unscripted 30 second response that has to be requested.

      You want to see a conspiracy, so you see one.

    • And cut the blatent lie shit out, I used evidence and you ignored it...

    • You say that " Kerry who you cannot see, is motioning to rebut", well, I have just two letters: B S

      Surprise! You CAN see Kerry, if you view the "Podium Watch Style" video at C-SPAN

      rtsp://cspanrm.fplive.net/cspan/project/c04/c04093004_debate1podium.rm

      http://www.c-span.org

      It shows both candidates in split screen throughout the entire debate. Bush barely pauses before the "let me finish" remark, and Kerry barely looks up at Lehrer before that. There is no "motion to rebut". You should check the record before you make up stuff like that, how lame. Also, remember that Kerry can see the green light under Lehrer clearly, he knows Bush has plently of time remaining. AND, as was pointed out already, Bush is not gesturing towards Lehrer, but straight ahead into the camera. Lehrer is to Bush’s left because of the angled podiums. You can see many times during the debate how far to the left Bush faces when looking at Lehrer, and when he says "let me finish" he is NOT looking at Lehrer.

      Bzzzt. Thanks for playing.

    • Well I had a mistake when I used the words "motioning to rebut" I didn’t mean to imply gesticulating or waving his arms.

      In the first post I stated "Kerry, who was indicating that he wanted a thirty second rebuttal (evidenced by the fact that he got it)."

      In my response I used "motioning to rebut" but still provided no evidence other than the fact that he got an unscripted 30 second response. I said, "Kerry who you cannot see". So I clearly wasn’t implying that he was waving his arms, because I didn’t see that.
      What I was saying was, the moderator had to know Kerry wanted to interject (meaning unscripted 30 second response), and it made more sense to me that Bush was talking to the moderator and not to himself. From the video I saw, Bush is definately not looking straight at the camera or pointing at the camera.

      Next:
      Bush is not gesturing towards the camera any more than he was talking to the camera when he shifts his eyes, hands, and head towards lehrer to his left.

      His focus and concentration immediately go to the left and did not stay straight ahead. It does appear as though he is looking at lehrer. Are we watching the same stuff. I just watched it a dozen times. At 40:43 with Bushes finger pointing you can see his eyes left, and his hand and finger pointed left, not straight at the camera. His attention is to the left, you can tell that because his attention shifts back to the camera. Your only point is that he isn’t looking far enough left. But then you mistakenly claim "Bush is not gesturing towards Lehrer, but straight ahead into the camera" Well you know, "You should check the record before you make up stuff like that, how lame." Because the record shows he isn’t looking straight at the camera.

      Where Bush is looking at 40:39 and 40:43 and 40:51 are exactly the same, and in all of them he is not looking straight ahead. In fact at 40:39 he has just finished a point, and was looking at lehrer. What is most important is where he is looking, and not where is head is pointed, even though it is not pointed straight ahead. His eyes clearly return to the same points, looking at lehrer. There is not disputing this, go through it, it is clear as day.

      Kerry is standing and staring right at lehrer as Bush appears to finish his point, and Kerry almost begins to speak (40:41-40:44). He opens his mouth right as Bush appears to be done, there is a 1 1/2 - 2 second pause from Bush, Kerry quickly wets his lips, and then has to close his mouth and looks down as Bush continues. There is not disputing this, go through it, it is clear as day.

      So thank you for pointing out the video to me, because now I actually do have the visual evidence I needed.

      Bzzzzt. Thanks for playing.

    • Who cares???? Bush had to take Cheney to the 9/11 Commission hearings because Cheney had to put his hand up Georgie’s butt and move his lips for him. The president is a dumb bastard and that should be the point of the argument.

    • Who cares if the accusation is true? The fact that the Swift Boat Veterans were lying, or that the "McCain fathered a black child" rumor was a lie didn’t stop them. It’s worth investigating at least, which is more than the Republican’s accusations are. (I’m not arguing that political campaigns should be lies, just that Bush is getting the kind of rumors he deserves.) We need more unsubstantiated rumors about them, not less. How about photos of the cross-burning parties they have every weekend on the ranch in Crawford? (Oh yeah, I forgot, that kind of rumor wouldn’t discredit Bush with his base... Never mind.)

    • Regardless if the swift boat accustions are true or not Kerry served in viet-nam can Mr. Bush say the same

  • As to the idea that the box on his back was the amp to his mic, the presumption is ridiculous. You only wear the amp if you are wearing a Lavalier mic, which is attached to the lapel of a jacket. The amp which is also a transmitter) then clips to your belt, it isn’t taped to your back. They weren’t using Lavalier mics anyway, they were using hardwired mics that run cable to an amplifier offstage.

    • That’s what I couldn’t figure out. When I first heard about the whole thing, I figured it was for his microphone...then I realized that they had microphones on the podium.

      I’m not entirely convinced he was wearing a hearing piece, and I don’t remember the "let me finish" episode, but he was acting and speaking very strangely. It would also explain why he seemed so unprepared—why would you prepare if you’re expecting someone to feed you answers?

      The thing I also can’t figure out—if it wasn’t a wire, what was it?!

  • It’s important you know that the candidates agreed there would be no body microphones, only podium mic’s. That means the question remains, what is that thing under Bush’s jacket? It’s not a wrinkle, and body armor attaches on the side, not high on the back.

    It certainly looks like it could be a battery pack. And the points about Bush’s speech rhythms, pausing before he answers, etc...provide pretty strong circumstantial evidence.

    Whether or not the "let me finish" was directed to a voice in his ear or was just a slip-up upon seeing the first (green) light go on with 30 seconds is debatable, and I’m inclined to give the President the benefit of the doubt. But I also doubt that the wire story is total speculation, either.

    salon.com has a good article about this that really makes me think there’s something to this story.

  • Bush was not wearing a microphone. From Salon:

    An official for the Commission on Presidential Debates, which set up the lecterns and microphones on the Miami stage . . . said that "microphones were mounted on lecterns, and the commission put no electronic devices on the president or Senator Kerry." When asked about the bulge on Bush’s back, the official said, "I don’t know what that was."

    See entire article here: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/08/bulge/index.html

  • Please check your facts. This is stated above"

    "But if you actually watch what happened it is completely not a conspiracy.
    And that box under Bushes jacket, and the wire????
    Hello, he was wearing a microphone, we all know that.
    But in your rush for a conspiracy you ignore the microphone.
    You see a box and/or a wire (both parts of a microphone - if there was no wire, which I never saw, then the box is still a part of the microphone because it is an ampifier) and assume, my god that must be the earpiece he was talking into.
    Well what was his microphone attached to if the box is for an earpiece????"

    AHEM his microphone was wired through the podium. Check the 32 page of rules of engagement. They insisted on having mirophones wired through the podiums NOT lapel mics. Also they negotiated to have NO CAMERA SHOTS FROM BEHIND. hmmm....that’s a funny thing to ask for isn’t it? lets get real here folk. Bush lies, Cheney Lies, Rove lies, they all lie BUT nothing to fear. It’s all over for them. Anything short of a hostile takeover of our entire elction process will not be enough to save the Bush Regime now.

  • How desperate, for his microphone, right, but Kerry didn’t need one, thats because Kerry has a brain, he doesn’t need to be supplied with answers. Just another Bush deception.

  • what the hell was he carriering a microphone for if he had one attached to himself already

    • All you Bush conspiracy people are talking out of your ass. You have no proof what so ever. Like most cospiracies and dems, you pull stuff out of thin air, throw it to a wall and try to make it stick, oh so desperately. I haven’t seen any photos that would point to an earpiece, which you would see easily. The truth is, all you have is this conspiracy theory to support your choice candidate. I saddens me to witness first hand, on this post, the dumbing of America.

    • The problem is that there is proof, the photos don’t lie and it’s visible on the video too; so you may see that as a "conspiracy theory" attempt but you cannot CANNOT deny that there IS something strange on Bush’s back. Besides, the earpiece itself would not necessarily have been visible, a simple checking of the kind of material this is and you will realise that it can be so small as to pass perfectly unseen. The other thing is that when asked about that bulge in Bush’s back, everyone either said they had no idea what it was, or denied the fact that there ever was something (this would be the answer of republicans officials); now if having such a thing on one’s back was allowed and legal there would be no denying whatsoever and this story would be done with in minutes. Yet that’s not what is happening and there’s no justification coming from the Bush camp. Therefore the question remains: what is that thing on Bush’s back???????

      I read an article about earpieces and the fact is that if you use one with a source that is remote from you, you’ll need a receiver to your earpiece; just like that thing on his back.

      Earpieces themselves are not at all easily visible as was said in the previous message: that’s an outright lie. You cannot hope to see an earpiece on a photo or a video because they’re too small. If you don’t believe just check for yourself about earpieces. I’m sorry but you can’t deem this bulge mystery a conspiracy theory made out of thin air. There are pictures, it’s undeniable that there WAS something in Bush’s back. That much is a proved fact. Now, you check the reactions to this thing, none acts like it’s a regular thing, Kerry did not have such a thing on his back. You cannot disagree with this unless you’re severely biased of foolish.

  • Fuck bush. He’s not American. He’s an infidel. Cock sucker needs to be be-headed. He’s a felon, by American law. who would be so stupid as to vote for their ass-hole???????????????

  • Bush wasn’t wearing a microphone. His excuse on Good Morning America was "bad tayloring", not "I was wearing a microphone." I believe the microphones were on the podeums.