Bush wearing wire at press conference... video... link... devastating

[Peak_Oil]

This is just unbelievable. It's so clear that he's being prompted. I've seen other clips where it may or may not be prompted, but his one is damning.

Clip is at http://www.philbrittin.com in the news section.

[LizW]

1. What does it show?

I'm too impatient to download it right now. Care to recap?

[Quadrajet]

2. I'm downloading it right now...

...but haven't seen it yet. The website says:

Due to a technical glitch at the meeting, Fox News broadcast Bush's prompter's voice telling Bush what to say..before Bush says it. The prompter's voice is also inadvertently broadcast to the entire room - watch the expression on Chiracs face.

[Bronco69]

3. Here's what it says:

"Bush Ear Prompter Video
Due to a technical glitch at the meeting, Fox News broadcast Bush's prompter's voice telling Bush what to say..before Bush says it. The prompter's voice is also inadvertently broadcast to the entire room -watch the expression on Chiracs face."

I'm about to go watch the video.


http://philbrittin.com/news2/news.php

[951]

7. Blah that video again?

I thought we had something new

[dogtag]

15. It is something new!

[951]

20. It is?

Sorry!

[Joe Momma]

64. 951...

that annthrax pic is hilarious. and eerily compelling.

[Quadrajet]

4. Well...

If this is something that can be verified with other news organizations or with people who witnessed it, it could open up a heck of a can of worms.

It's partially loaded, but I can see about 20 seconds of it. At first I thought "this might be the 7 second delay" think going on, but it isn't. The voice says "and I look forward to working with", GWB messes that line up and has to start over.

[annabanana]

5. I seem to be having a problem loading it...........anyone else? n/t

[NYC Liberal]

6. The server is incredibly slow.

I'm getting dialup speed on a cable modem.

[dogtag]

8. Me too. Slow isn't the word.

[POAS]

30. when the timer climbed

to over an hour left to dload I cancelled out of the dload.

[vetwife]

9. Check this out

http://www.carabinersurgical.com/PainPump.htm

[dogtag]

10. I'm watching it, just as I did on June 5 and it is

DEVASTATING!!!!!!

[951]

11. self delete

[teach1st]

12. I'm watching...

...it seems devastating, but not without confirmation from people who heard it live.

The other example, the CNN tape from France (different speech) was heard by many people. Unfortunately, I lost that link.

[dogtag]

13. I heard it live and so did some others on DU.

It's real and it was on MSMBC and CNN.

[teach1st]

14. If true, it does explain Bush's halting speech pattern

[Quadrajet]

16. CNN speech?

Is this it?

CNN Speech

[dogtag]

17. No, that CNN one is a dog and doesn't prove anything.

This is the real deal. Not the same.

[teach1st]

19. That's the one

So it's the same news conference.

[dogtag]

18. This is a SMOKING GUN.

It needs to get to anyone who has contacts that count.

[radwriter0555]

21. This is a photo of the device bush uses. The size sure is

right:

"...The inductive ear piece is like a small in ear hearing aid that picks up audio from a concealed loop worn around the talents neck and plugged into their belt-pack receiver..."






http://www.rentcom.com/catalog/Wireless.html

[Quadrajet]

22. No, this is NOT the smoking gun.

I downloaded it and when someone asks a question, you can hear THAT person and their echo, just like when * is speaking. ALSO, you hear the translator speaking in the same "way" when Chirac starts to talk. I think that what they're picking up is the delay they're using for the translator.

Listen to the full clip and you'll agree.

I do however question the part I mentioned above, when Bush messes up at near the beginning of the clip.

[dogtag]

23. I have and I disagree. Listen again. You are wrong.

[Quadrajet]

24. Ok, listening again.

[951]

25. I should have it in 15 mins

[pacalo]

52. Could you please re-think the smaller visual on your signature line...

regardless of its context, it's offensive.

[Quadrajet]

26. I listened again and...

...I still think that the video is on a delay and we're hearing the interpreter's audio feed or something like that. That isn't to say that I am 100% positive that it isn't some "Rovian audio feed", but when you're dealing with freepers, you have to have someone playing devil's advocate and they'll require indisputable evidence.

I do have to say that there are some funny things going on with that audio. It's worth investigating, I can tell you that.

[dogtag]

27. I don't give a crap about freepers.

I'm busy getting it to people who matter. I'm sure the freepers are already tipped off and working on some spin or other, but it's not going to fly this time.

[Quadrajet]

29. Ok

I just thought I'd weigh in with my opinion of it. Believe me, there's nothing more I'd LOVE to see than * and his henchman going down in flames. If there is some truth to this, I also want every media outlet to know about it.

I'm curious what others will think after watching it. My mind is open, I'd love to be convinced that this is the real deal.

[goclark]

70. Dogtag you are amazing!

Now I remember seeing this and wondering what the hell happened?

Interesting that I don't recall any reporter talking about the "bad feed" or echo or translation difficulties.

I recall that Chirac looked puzzled that day. Frankly, I would be troubled too standing beside the Puppet Boy! What a dishonor to have to be on the same stage with Bush...puke.

My feeling remains, it is not up to us, just little lowly bloggers that are just country bumpkins, to prove it.

It is up to us to use the only voice that we have left in this country, the internet(s). - The extra "s" is for GW. LOL

Inquiring internet bumpkins just want to know. This issue remains "compelling."

Go Dogtag go!:bounce:

[teach1st]

28. Is the French interpretation at the end

Is the French interpretation at the end coming in ahead or behind what Chirac says?

Why would somebody be interpreting what Bush says into English? (No jokes)

[951]

33. Its a hoax IMO

Sounds like someone dubed and edited his own speach so it would sound distorted pay attention to where he says " *sigh* Now jim angle" this is a hoax IMO.

Very clever but I'm not buying it he would have been tripping over his own words at certain points which he didnt do.

[teach1st]

35. It would be easy to fake, I think...

...by laying down another audio track. And if I was Bush, I'd be tripping up all over the place with that voice talking at me while I was talking. On the other hand, there are people who say they heard it live.

[teach1st]

31. Why wouldn't FOX have stopped the broadcast?

[dogtag]

32. I saw it on MSNBC and other saw it on CNN -

I think none of the cables stopped it, because in their control room they couldn't tell it was happening. If they had, all of them would have shut it down immediately.

When I saw it live in June, I was astonished that it went on so long.

[NYC Liberal]

37. Explain this then:

Listen to the part about looking forward to working with Chirac.

The first voice says it just fine. "I look forward to working with President Chirac..."
The second voice (Bush) says: "I look workin'...look forward to working with President Chirac."

It is NOT the same thing.

[dogtag]

42. Exactly!!!!!

When I saw it live, at first I thought it had to be some kind of feedback, but then realized that Shrub wasn't repeating it verbatim.

Also if you listen closely the voice tells him which reporter to point to.

[dogtag]

43. Is there anyone here who can get this to some of the

"superbloggers" or TV people? I hope I'm not the only one who saved the video. This is really huge!

I don't think the point is whether or not he wears a wire in the debates because we all know that it doesn't do him much good, but the fact that he's been doing his press conferences as a puppet is a big, big deal.

HELP! I'm about to pee my pants here.

[Bluebear]

59. Don't pee lol...

Kick for the truth. It is true that we can't get burned but it does bear looking into!

[October]

68. Hmm..I'll have to listen again

I really thought it sounded like Bush's own voice.

Would he pre-record his speech? Would he do so because of his dyslexia?

Not to make excuses, but...

The link given on this thread is awfully slow.

[NYC Liberal]

71. I think he might have...

But it is definately not an echo or anything.

[notadmblnd]

56. what did you think about the two times...

he raised his hand and adjusted his earpiece?

[Cat Atomic]

73. I agree. And as for the sentence Bush messes up at the beginning,

he was still talking when the out-of-synch audio would've played that bit. It makes it sound like he didn't mess up on the delay, but I think he did. You just don't hear it, because he was still speaking.

[floda]

34. very strange

I listened to the video and thinking hard for a rational explanation.
So far no luck.

1. Its not the voice of a translator.Because Bush is speaking.

2. First you hear the earpiece voice and then Bush himself. So its not an echo.

3.Bush makes a mistake in the 15th second of the tape. The earpiece voice says : i look forward to be working with
Bush says: i look working look forward to be working with
So its not a technical glitch or delayed sound i guess..

4. Later in the tape the echo's do occur. Echo's from he reporter and echo's from Bush. But thats totally different than the pre-sound in the beginning.

[the_outsider]

36. the other voice says nukular too

that's an odd coincidence if it's a prompting. It's not conclusive of course. Bush may have learned that pronunciation from the other person.

[teach1st]

38. Also the voice says "ta" instead of "to"

Just like Bush.

[GreenPoet64]

44. Some suggest Bush pre-records his own prompts. . .

That is why it sounds like his own voice--it is! However you are right, these are definitely short prompts to help him remember and he is not repeating them word for word so it CANT be an echo. I think this explains why Bush was so incoherent during his first debate--he was unplugged during most of it!! :toast:

[edhopper]

39. I heard that too

Bush says "I work forward...I look forward to working..."
Now it sounds like the voice beforehand is say it correctly, so this would mean that it can't be an echo of Bush's voice. But, the begining of the voice speaking is over the end of Bush's last line. So it is hard to tell if that mistake is there or not. If those others here with broadband on any of their "internets" could listen to this (about 15 secs in) we could tell if it's his voice, or as RCA used to say his master's voice.

[NYC Liberal]

41. The first voice says it correctly.

Bush flubs it. It's not an echo or delayed sound.

[Quadrajet]

46. Dial Up

edhopper - "But, the begining of the voice speaking is over the end of Bush's last line. So it is hard to tell if that mistake is there or not."

I just listened to that portion again (LOUDLY) and you can hear the faint voice (the flub) talking right at the end of *'s last line. If you listen to it loud enough, you can hear it.

You don't have to agree with me, but I believe there are just too many coincidences to call this the smoking gun.

[ecstatic]

40. Will Bush DARE wear a wire at next week's debate?

Hmmmmmmmm... Just how bold is his camp??

[Skittles]

85. yes

he has no choice

[teach1st]

45. I've converted it into a smaller movie

WMV (I made it with Windows Media Player 10, so it may not play for all). 885 KB

http://www.tuff-teach.com/pics/echobush.wmv

The sound on this one is poor and I won't keep it online long.

[i like pizza]

47. omg

OH
MY
GOD

we need to spread this around.
Moveon.org needs to see this.
All they have to do is play this in a commercial.
oh man

[Sterling]

63. It's nothing

This is just some sort of sync feedback issue. It's Bushes voice and then the voice of the reporter later when the questions start.

Thx for posting the file.

[teach1st]

48. I have no clue how valid this is..

..I keep thinking of Dan Rather!

[dogtag]

49. It's valid. It is exactly what I saw and heard on June 5, 2004.

I'm not wearing tin foil on my head, I don't believe in UFO's and this is certainly not the only video that exists of the June 5 press conference. It is a huge deal, but it needs to get exposure and from someone with mucho cred.

[teach1st]

54. White House Site

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020526-2.html#

I can't get the video or audio to work.

EDIT: Oh, you said 2004. This is 2002.

2004

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040605-6.html#

Video seems to work

[baldguy]

50. This is bullshit.

The video is on a delay.

[teach1st]

51. Read all the posts

Are you saying it's an echo? It doesn't seem to be since the Bush stutters at a point and the voice doesn't.

[Quadrajet]

55. Turn the volume up...

teach1st - "Are you saying it's an echo? It doesn't seem to be since the Bush stutters at a point and the voice doesn't."

Turn your volume up really loud and listen for the first stutter, it's there in the echo, but hard to hear because * is completing a sentence.

[teach1st]

58. Don't hear it....

Not saying it's not there. I just can't hear it.

I certainly wouldn't make a big thing out of this yet. Certainly could be fake.

[annabanana]

53. Would be fatal to get burned on this.............must be 100% provable.

Voice matching and identification on the "prompter" etc etc

[dogtag]

57. We don't need to prove it - we need to get it to the right people.

They can prove it. It's provable, I'd bet the farm on it.

[teach1st]

60. June conversation at Daily Kos

http://ebradlee10.dailykos.com/story/2004/6/9/122728/8176

[Old and In the Way]

61. I think the audio feed was screwed up.

My gut feeling is the audio signal was getting preprocessed and was mixed into the primary audio/video signal....this is a satellite transmission, afterall. If the 2 soundtracks could be isolated, I think think they'd mirror each other.

[dogtag]

62. When I shout in a canyon, my echo does NOT

come back with the words slightly jumbled. Listen again.

[teach1st]

65. At the end, Chirc coughs

At the end, Chriac coughs (2:39) and the echo of the cough precedes Chriac's real cough. I think that it is just some sort of an audio mix-up.

[shawmut]

66. self-delete

teach1st beat me to it.

[grasswire]

67. Please tell me....

....where the clearest download is that doesn't take an hour. I'm willing to get this to the big bloggers for their perusal. But we need an accessible file.

Now. Wasn't there a problem with the feed another time? Was it on 9-11 at Bush's first stop? Where a voice was heard telling Bush what to say? DU-er Stephanie remembers it, IIRC.

[i like pizza]

69. damn

if you put your ear right up to the speaker, the second voice is actually bush. : (

[Quadrajet]

72. Yup

You're right.

[Cat Atomic]

74. It's just a delay. You don't hear his stuttering on the delay because

he's finishing the previous sentence. The reporters are delayed as well.

And yes, I did read all the posts in this thread.

[NYC Liberal]

75. No, you can hear the whole sentence,

and the first voice definately does not screw it up.

[Cat Atomic]

76. Sorry, I just don't hear it.

I hear this:

**So for the sake of peace I'm committed to helping the Palestinian people**

"So for the sake of peace I'm committed to helping the Palestinian people establish a democratic and viable state of their own."

**look forward to workin' with Pres**

"And I look workin'- look forward to workin' with President Chirac."

The delayed "I look workin'-" would be playing while Bush is saying "state of their own".

[goclark]

77. So, when we will hear about this so called

taped delayed process from the administration?

I am "All EARS!" - LOL

As I see it, it is not up to us to do an investigation.
We are not Columbo!

It is up to this administration to explain this whole process of Bush and his speaking style.

It may be perfectly fine.
But - it is not fine to me.

My tax $$'s paid for the enhanced little earpiece for Puppet Boy.
I want to know all about it.

If it so innocent, bring it on!
Let the information start flowing.
From THEM to US
Not US to them.
We are to question.
They are elected to answer and PROVE IT.

Let's HEAR all about it!
:bounce:

[Point_n_click]

78. Having watched and listened to a bit of it ...

...

I noticed a couple of things.

First, Bush visibly adjusts the earpiece early on in the video. Watch it again and look for him to reach up to his right ear to adjust it.

Second, while my audio was down low so as to not disturb anyone, it sounded to me as if he pre-recorded the speach and was reciting it from his own voice playback.

[jayctravis]

80. he adjusts his earpiece...

because it's a multi-lingual conference. He's having French translated to English in his ear as Chirac talks. Bush was wired, but he was supposed to be.

It's an odd pre-echo. More than likely there was the raw feed from the room, and there was an English frequency which Bush's mic and the French-to-English translator were on, and assumably a French frequency with all of Bush's words translated to French and Chirac's live mic. More than likely the idea was for the broadcast to play the live room to us when bush was speaking, then crossfade into the English translation when Chirac was speaking. Something glitched in the satellite feed and somehow the multiple audio frequencies were jogged about 4 seconds ahead of the video/live room audio. Or perhaps the video feed was actually behind...either or.

If you listen close, Bush's cadences match the pre-echo perfectly. It just happens in the first part of the tape that his usual "4-5 words and pause" speaking rhythm synced up perfectly so that it sounded like he was repeating from it. Later in the tape you hear him speaking over the second track; still with the same cadences *without any apparent confusion about this.*

If you've ever been on a cellphone talking to someone while hearing your own voice back after a delay (or worked in a call center when you hit bad echo) you know it's nearly impossible to talk comprehensibly while hearing your words echoed back to you. Most people's brains do not work full-duplex. Knowing what a poor speaker Bush is and seeing him talk normally over this "prompt" track more than likely means he wasn't hearing it.

It's very difficult to listen and repeat at the same time. I sincerely doubt Bush could do this...at least in this particular case it's not a smoking gun.

If Bush is wired in the debates, he's not getting a speech read to him; he'd be getting quick reminder cues of points he's probably rehearsed before, possibly having the occasional dictionary look up for a word like "facile" or "vociferous."

[ripplingwater]

84. <<< visibly adjusts the earpiece >>>

Watch it again, then watch the full vid at the Whitehouse site. In this one he messes with his right ear, but in the WH site he originally places an earplug into his left ear.

There may be earplugs (one that he acknowledges, and the other one) in BOTH ears.

[dogtag]

79. The line that really tells the tale is:

"I work forward...I look forward to working..."

Bush flubs it after 'the voice' says it correctly. It's early in the tape. Listen carefully. It's the killer.

We'll see where this goes, but it won't be good for the boy king. It doesn't matter if it's his pre-recording or someone else prompting in real time. No one is going to think it's OK to have 'help' at a press conference or at a debate.

[elperromagico]

81. I'm inclined to believe that this isn't a Peter Popoff moment.

Popoff, as you may know, is a minister/"faith healer" who was exposed as a fraud; someone was talking into his earpiece, telling him who to talk to and what each person's physical ailment was.

I think what we witness in that video is not Bush being prompted; the voice is his - the cadence is the same, the pronunciation is identical to Bush's. If someone were prompting him, I can't imagine it being someone with an identical voice.

It's quite possible that Bush is prompted in press conferences; I just don't believe this is proof of it. I'm going to chalk this up to a technical glitch for now. It could even be a feed from the French translator's headphones finding its way onto the audio feed. I'm just not sure.

[goclark]

82. Are you a professional voice expert?

I was just wondering.

I think before we brush it aside as if we are the beginning and the end of the decision making process, we need others to check it out.
It could be all those things that you suggested but it could very well be something else.

A few have suggested that "they would be stupid to do somthing like that!

Why not? They were stupid enough to invade another country and they are stupid enough to have Puppet Boy wired.

[elperromagico]

83. No. Are you?

I never said that I don't believe he might be getting prompts. But I don't believe this is proof of it.

Find me a voice expert, while you're at it, and let's see what conclusions he or she reaches.

[goclark]

93. I never said that I was any kind of an expert

It is really not up to you or to me to find the experts.

It should be up to the WH to prove to the doubting public that Bush can speak for himself.

I don't believe that he can and that is a BIG problem for all of us.

The TRUTH shall set us all free.

[lazarus]

86. has anybody ever tried this?

Next time you're watching the news, try reciting what's being said, and see how long you can keep up.

Bush ain't that smart, folks. It takes a LOT of skill to do this.

[Obamarama]

87. Something else I noticed:

At the :23 to :25 area, the "voice" appears to says "...the people of Lebanon should determine their own future."

Bush says: "...the people of Lebanon should BE FREE to determine their own future."

[progdonkey]

88. TECHNICAL GLITCH!

Look, it's quite simple how you can tell this is just a technical glitch where a copy of the audio signal preceded the regular AV signal. Listen when the reporter asks his question! His voice is highly distorted as well, but when the distorted voice ends, you can hear the reporter just finishing up his question. Now, are the "smoking gun" people going to claim the reporter was wired as well to the same source, whose voice happened to change when prompting him?

As much as I'd like it to be a smoking gun, it's quite plainly an example of an audio fluke. A copy of the audio signal, heavily distorted, made it to the broadcasts ahead of the audio and video feed.


Move along....

edit: spelling

[floda]

91. so how do you explain the stutter?

in the 15th second in the tape
the copy of the audio signal is not the same as the words bush speaks

[progdonkey]

96. did you read my post?

The fact that the same "echo" occurs with the reporter indicates that it is not something specific to Bush. It's as simple as that.

But I'll address your concerns anyway. To be honest, the section you're describing originally had me thinking this was a smoking gun. But if you check the video, you'll find that Bush is still finishing his last statement when the "echo" would be saying "and I look working."

Considering the sound is already of poor quality and it's very difficult to distinguish the channels (especially the distorted "echo"), unless the "normal" Bush stops speaking, it's not too much of a stretch to conclude that the "echo" of the mistake is buried beneath the louder "normal" voice. We only hear the "echo" saying "I look forward to working" because there is a break in the "normal" voice.

If you turn up the speakers very loud, you can hear the distorted "echo" saying something when the the "normal" voice is saying "state of their own"; although it's quite indecipherable, the timing of it fits perfectly with the consistent difference between the "echo" and the "normal" voices.

But, as I said in the first paragraph, it's a pointless exercise as the presence of the distorted "echo" accompanying the reporter proves that it's not anything exclusive to Bush.

Furthermore, listen to Bush's opening of questions: "Ah, now, Jim Angle...." Do you honestly think a "prompter" would even go so far as to prompt inhalations and interjections?

I know everyone wants this to be some great proof, but it's really nothing! Remember, the "normal" voice is itself a DELAY. All of this conjecture is assuming that the "normal" voice is in real time. It's not. It went through processing, got bounced off the satellite, got split among the different cable networks (they were all working off the same feed), went to the cable or satellite services, and then appeared on the TV. Is it at all strange to conclude that one distorted audio signal (ie. not fully processed) made it to broadcast in 3 secs, and the clean audio and video followed about 2 secs later?

[HFishbine]

89. One BIG BIG Problem

The voice that is heard ahead of Bush's video statements is HIS OWN. Looks more like a technical glitch or some clever editing.

[NYC Liberal]

92. Then maybe we were hearing his thoughts..

because the first voice didn't say the same things as Bush.

[HFishbine]

95. Can you give me an example?

Sounded identical to me.

[Sparkle]

98. This could be something big but you 're right.

This is Bush's own voice. Weird.

[bullimiami]

90. i thought he was wired in the russert interview

how long he took to answer, looking kind of vacant. i thought then he was listening to someone.

[goclark]

94. Do you have a link?

That would help a lot.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.