Hillary’s Teleprompter Debate Rigging?

A modem light, a teleprompter, hand signals, and a man directly involved in negotiation and production of major candidate’s debates.

Two men that are not workmen, but a part of Hillary’s stable, approach Hillary’s podium before the debate and work behind it while on their knees. They exit stage.

During the debate, a horizontal light can be seen on her podium and a flashing light beneath her on a shelf. The horizontal light and flashing light revert to black after the debate ends and she leaves her podium.

And BOOM – a conspiracy is born – with quite a bit of evidence.

Immediately after the debate, Brady Williamson, a lawyer whose website claims he is ‘directly involved in the negotiation and production of major political debates’, can be seen picking up Hillary’s papers, and some objects which he covertly transfers to his pocket before walking toward Lester Holt and giving him a smug expression and possibly ‘something’. Williamson then returns to the podium as though checking for something a number of times, reaching down, crouching, trying and failing to detach something without being noticed.  Distracted, as though he can’t grasp what he needs, he walks away.

A woman in a green dress appears in the video frame standing behind the podium and Williamson.  She seems to be a lookout gesturing whenever the camera is focused on Williamson as though in warning. He has not been able to gather what he needs and his agitation is evident. He stands up walks to the side stage with the woman in green while repeatedly looking back at the podium.  They appear to be evaluating the situation.  He speaks with her and then walks back on stage and over toward Hillary and Bill. He then can be seen talking with someone else – pointing to the podium. He is most definitely very concerned at this point.

Suddenly another woman approaches Billy and they have a short whispered discussion before Williamson once again approaches the podium and is spooked away. More whispering with this other woman and the Billy before they, Bill and Hillary choose to walk back toward the podium, instead of exiting the stage. As they and two others approach the podium, Williamson is blocked from complete video view, but it is evident that he has extracted an object from the podium. Unfortunately, the photography is grainy and although he seems satisfied that he has gotten what he needed, it is not clear what that object is.  

They then all exit simultaneously surrounded now by body guards.

Finally, as the stage is emptied and the audience is leaving another man appears at the Clinton podium and appears to unhook a box of some sort – perhaps a receiver – before walking off stage. And yet another man appears briefly and removes additional objects before disappearing.

During the debate there are continual moments in which Hillary rubs her finger on the side of her nose, and each time Lester Holt would seem to interrupt Trump to allow Hillary the opportunity to counter with a ‘zinger’.

Was the debate rigged?  Did Hillary have advance notice of the questions?  Was she being prompted in her answers by a teleprompt which provided her very pact answers?  Was the blinking light a modem or battery pack for the teleprompter?  Is she capable of answering a question without a teleprompter?

But other questions fly…  Why would this lawyer, Brady C Williamson, extend himself, his integrity, his reputation and put it all in jeopardy for Hillarygate?

While his relationship to the Clintons dates back to Bill’s presidency, his most recent boast deserves a mention:  His constitutional work has been sponsored, under a grant from the U.S. government, by the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs…”

The National Democratic Institute: 

Critics charge that the term “democracy assistance” and “democracy building” are rhetorically employed to overpower nationalist and socialist resistance to US economic and cultural domination, particularly in Russia.

It is affiliated with two notable organizations, the Liberal International and the Socialist International, both based in London. THE NDI is funded by the US Department of State (Hillary) and The Open Society Institute (Soros). Other notable contributors include: Google, Amazon and Madelaine Albright who has multiple connections with Soros and his agenda.

In 2004, Williamson was also an ‘observer’ in the Ukraine election that was considered pivotal in US vs Russia alliance.

He has been the attorney at large in major bankruptcy cases including GM and Lehman. Cases that made multi-millions for the attorneys who are stated to even charge daily fees for limo services, and a pack of gum… Appointments, one would not want to lose.

And while the media is focusing on Trumps lack of preparedness, they seem to gloss over the fact that Hillary has always used a teleprompter, and can not speak without one. Of course, the only way a teleprompter can be effective – is if the questions are already known so as to provide the correct answers.

FYI:  While Snopes has already falsified these allegations, their reasoning, journalism, research, and vilification is absurdly vacant and appears to be a response created for them by another source…

Rubio – Was The GOP Debate Rigged?

While the headlines of bloggers evaluate the news that Rubio’s Campaign Press Secretary is the daughter of Fox News VP, Bill Sammon, the crafter of the GOP debate questions, they seem to have missed a point.

While Fox News had a direct conflict of interest – so did Rubio!

With Brooke Sammons tweeting extensively about Rubio’s purported ‘win’ at the debates, and Cruz making the statement that he was being unfairly and unequally attacked by the questions posed to him – Rubio skated. In fact Christie even stated that the questions seemed to be unfairly targeting Cruz while Rubio seemed overly cocky, his answers potentially rehearsed. When responses are too clean, too sharp, too rehearsed, the hairs on my back begin to prickle…

Could Sammon have given the questions to his daughter, Brooke Sammon, so that Rubio could craft answers before the debate?

Definitely a possibility. Sammon has a history and it isn’t all good.

To add fire to the furnace, apparently, the pollster, Frank Luntz, who was asked to air results of the debate immediately afterward is also connected to Rubio. Luntz was hired by Rubio in 2012 to write “100 Innovative Idea’s for Florida’s Future”. Luntz tweeted and tallied and splurged in his raving reviews of Rubio while cashing in on the frenzy. While these relationships should be revealed for their conflict of interest, they weren’t and the silence didn’t just run through Fox News – it ran through Marco Rubio. And that does not bode well for an honest, God driven, man of integrity.

While Fox News purports to be unbiased, this is a rather disingenuous move with one motive – bump up Rubio in the ratings, and attack Cruz and Trump. If it is discovered that Rubio had access to the debate questions beforehand, that could mean the end of his campaign. But the ideal of unbiased is a rock laden road for Sammon who has been caught directing the opinion of his journalists on a number of occasions.

While it is not a media crime to be biased, most stations openly admit their view, others allude to it, and still others are bought out. But Fox’s claim puts each and every journalist into the limelight as they lose credibility with the knowledge that Sammon tells them what to say, what to think, what opinion to have, and who will win in an ‘unbiased format’. It’s like rigging a football game.

Could Rubio and Sammon find themselves in a legal pickle?

There are laws regarding “Ethics” under the US Office of Government Ethics Statute 18 USC; 201 – 209 which detail the code of conduct of all government employees. Conflict of Interest laws require ‘full disclosure’ – Rubio did not comply with that directive.

In addition, Florida has enacted very strict Ethics Laws with respect to past and present government employees and those running for public office. The purpose of these laws is to uphold faith and trust by the People in a government that is not beyond reproach. When that truth is violated, there are consequences in place.

While as a result of Sammon, Fox News may lose viewers, Rubio stands to lose his very core – his integrity as a Presidential candidate.