Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Cover-Up: Bush Wire Provides His "Answers"

This story copped this morning 11/12/04:

"This morning my mood is swinging from agony to ecstasy as more informed investigative scrutiny is been being brought to bear upon a potentially huge embarrassment to the White House--which the corporate media have covered up until today-- concerning the probability that George Bush cheated during his first debate with John Kerry and was secretly wired to offstage handlers, because the presidential dunce is too dense to successfully accommodate extemporaneous questions or debate without assistance.

Why is Bush so hermetically-sealed from the press and the public? Mike Allen in today's Washington Post reports that "Although all presidents are kept somewhat removed from reality because of security concerns and their staffs' impulse for burnishing their image, Bush's campaign has taken unprecedented steps to shield him from dissenters and even from curious, undecided voters."

And have you wondered why reporters don't just shout questions at the president, if he won't talk to them otherwise? Allen observes: "The tradition of the White House news corps shouting questions at the president has largely faded during this term because Bush reacts testily and does not answer, and his staff typically sets up events so he does not have to walk near reporters."

Dave Lindorff in Oct. 8 and Oct. 5: Bush's mystery bulge. The rumor is flying around the globe. Was the president wired during the first debate? Was President Bush literally channeling Karl Rove in his first debate with John Kerry? That's the latest rumor flooding the Internet, unleashed last week in the wake of an image caught by a television camera during the Miami debate. The image shows a large solid object between Bush's shoulder blades as he leans over the lectern and faces moderator Jim Lehrer.
The president is not known to wear a back brace, and it's safe to say he wasn't packing. So was the bulge under his well-tailored jacket a hidden receiver, picking up transmissions from someone offstage feeding the president answers through a hidden earpiece? Did the device explain why the normally ramrod-straight president seemed hunched over during much of the debate?...The theory is that Karl Rove and his minions gave their incoherent and intellectually-challenged candidate a secret little earplug connected to a wireless receiver, so that he could be provided with answers and clever punch lines when he heard a question and came up empty.

Remember the peculiar interjection "Now let me finish!" which Bush blurted out angrily during the debate in Miami? It attracted the attention of commentators and observers, because no one had interrupted him. No one we could hear, that is...a hidden wire connected to Karl Rove or some flunky transmitting for Rove would also explain Bush's...frequent expressions of annoyance, as well as the uncomfortably long silences at odd points in his statements which looked just as if he were listening carefully to some instructions.

...a debate is supposed to be a test of wits between two candidates, not between one candidate and another candidate's staff. If publicity about a possible wire on the president frightens the White House into pulling the plug on this alleged scheme, it could also make for a fun time at the next two debates, when he'll have to operate solo, which could also make for interesting reality TV.

From Some of the comments being posted about the Bush earpiece on other sites are clearly planted by Bush supporters who hope the story won't make it out, because when people start thinking about it, it's obvious that Bush's been doing this for at least four years in plain view. And there goes the election for the Republicans: the president is not only a miserable flub, but a cheat.

That's why Drudge et al. are puffing up silly stories about Kerry's pen. The point of the Bush wire wasn't to voice entire answers for him. It was to slip him critical information and phrases and cues and prompts. Bush can talk perfectly well for the limited kinds of things he wants to say. He can be folksy and funny. Dyslexic, yes, but he can talk. What he can't and won't do is apply himself (you know, "hard work") to learning things, or considering issues carefully, formulating arguments, assimilating facts. He's lazy. He hates thinking. And he's always cheated when he could. He believes in cheating and dirty fighting...

I suspect that it's been a slippery slope for Bush and Rove...First they gave him an audio prompter, so he wouldn't have to read speeches and stumble on words. Nothing wrong with that -- it's like a teleprompter for a dyslexic. They should have 'fessed up to it, though. When he started using a human cue card in his ear for press conferences, that's when it became very wrong.

Reporters should have looked into this long ago. But for the past four years through Bush's first debate last week with John Kerry -- and even in the days after the debate -- the press has ignored the evidence of its eyes and ears, and failed to ask whether the president secretly relies on unseen handlers for some public events, including press conferences. If Bush wore a hidden earpiece to cheat in this way during his first debate with John Kerry (however unsuccessfully), it is urgent that the fraud be exposed before the election.

"Sure, Bush uses an earpiece sometimes," a top Washington editor for Reuters said to me last spring. "State of the Union -- he had an earpiece for that. Everybody knows it," he said, "or assumes it."

"But everybody doesn't know it," I said. "Why hadn't Reuters investigated?" The editor shrugged and said it wasn't so different from using a teleprompter. Except that a teleprompter isn't a secret. And Americans have the right to know if the president can't or won't speak in public without covert assistance.

The agreement set by the debate commission barred shots of the candidates from the rear of the stage. (It also specified only hardwired podium microphones for the first debate, i.e. no lapel mics.) The networks refused to comply with the camera angle rules, broadcasting occasional shots of the candidates from behind...Many viewers thus saw a squarish bulge the size of a large battery pack under the back of Bush's suit jacket, with an S-shaped cord appearing to snake up the right side of his back. Several blogs have carried speculation that it was an audio receiver. A poster to NYCIndymedia says, "Think 'passive transducer' earpiece. The bulges under his jacket are likely receiver/repeaters that pick up the transmitter (and encrypted?) signals from his handlers and transmit them, at very low power, to the earpiece."

Television hosts and news anchors wear earpieces, called IFBs (for internal foldback, or feedback), which fit in the ear canal and are almost invisibly small, to receive cues from their producers. (Language scientists say that "shadowing," repeating the words someone else is speaking, is not at all difficult, but it is difficult not to move your eyes when listening.) Television journalists would be likely to spot the use of an IFB or at least to suspect it. So, why haven't they raised the question? I suspect it's untouchable in part because asking the question now points up all the years they let go by without asking it.

But these are the questions that must be asked now, by the Commission on Presidential Debates, and journalists: Does the president use an earpiece in his meetings with the public and with journalists? Did he wear one in last week's debate? How can members of the public who suspect he wore an earpiece be assured that he will not do so in the next debate? What was the object underneath his jacket? (End quote)

The suspicions of online blogger "Veritas" were aroused by a moment in a Bush news conference from last December:
Question to Bush at his December 15, 2003 press conference: "I know you said there will be a time for politics. But you've also said you wanted to change the tone in Washington. Howard Dean recently seemed to muse aloud whether you had advance knowledge of 9/11. Do you agree or disagree with the RNC that this kind of rhetoric borders on political hate speech?"

The President: "There's time for politics. There's time for politics, and I -- it's an absurd ansinuation (sic)."
A funny thing happened at the December 15th presidential press conference. Asked to comment on an earlier statement by Howard Dean regarding his alleged foreknowledge of 9/11, Bush stumbles about the stage, clearly caught off guard by the question, then delivers the line: "It's an absurd asinuation." It could not be more clear that Bush was provided the words with which to answer. At first, Bush stumbles about, repeating his previous line that "there's a time for politics."

During this time, he's avoiding eye contact, shrugging, and delaying. Then, the answer is given to him, presumably through a wireless ear piece. Bush then suddenly delivers his line that "it's an absurd asinuation." The suddenness of his reply, after having been speechless, the smile in his eyes when he's given the correct answer, and his incorrect pronunciation of the word "insinuation" all lead to [the] conclusion that he was prompted to provide this answer. (End quote from "Vertias").

In reaction to the news that Pres. Bush has postponed his physical exam until after the election, Dr. Joseph Price writes:
Consider, in contrast, the present: "the informal Q&As he has tried to avoid," "Bush's recent faltering performances," "his unfortunate puzzled-chimp expression when trying to answer questions," "his stalling, defensive pose when put on the spot," "speaking more slowly and less gracefully." ...Bush's problem cannot be "a learning disability, a reading problem, [or] dyslexia," because patients with those problems have always had them. Slowly developing cognitive deficits, as demonstrated so clearly by the President, can represent only one diagnosis, and that is "presenile dementia"!

Presenile dementia is best described to nonmedical persons as a fairly typical Alzheimer's situation that develops significantly earlier in life, well before what is usually considered old age. It runs about the same course as typical senile dementias, such as classical Alzheimer's -- to incapacitation and, eventually, death, as with President Ronald Reagan, but at a relatively earlier age. President Bush's "mangled" words are a demonstration of what physicians call "confabulation," and are almost specific to the diagnosis of a true dementia. Bush should immediately be given the advantage of a considered professional diagnosis, and started on drugs that offer the possibility of retarding the slow but inexorable course of the disease. --Joseph M. Price, M.D. Carsonville, Michigan (End quote)

The media are slowly being forced --by Internet activists or an ROTM faction of the Cryptocracy itself -- to reluctantly deal with this scandal. As of this writing, the Los Angeles Times has mentioned it only to scorn it, while in today's Washington Post, columnist Dan Froomkin is publicizing links to relevant Internet sites, such as Dave Lindorff's.

Joseph Cannon, who first broke the story ( prognosticates on the possible aftermath: "I have reason to believe that a 'respectable' publication will soon do some in-depth work on this story. When that happens, the official Republican harrumphers will enter stage right and do their act. Expect to hear many oh-so-clever references to black helicopters, tinfoil hats and Oliver Stone. Those jokes never get old, do they? Alas, they won't make the evidence go away."

As the multi-million dollar-funded establishment media hacks slouch their snail-like way toward this electrifying story of the entanglement of the President of the United States in brazen, public, on-air cheating (a function of self-destructive neo-con chutzpagh?), let us recall the most telling datum in this entire tale of the tape: "The suspicion that George Bush was literally channeling Karl Rove during the debate last week was first raised by blogger Joseph Cannon's girlfriend, who, during a video replay of the debate, noticed what looked like a wire running down the back of Bush's jacket."

It took some blogger's girlfriend to bring this story to the attention of the world?

Meanwhile our vaunted "free media," from Reuters on down, knew of it but did not regard it as newsworthy. Is this not the same media that presumes to instruct Iraqis and Al-Jazeera concerning how to establish an "open and democratic society" and "responsible" journalism?

What we have here is textbook ROTM (Revelation of the Method); there are at least four possible scenarios for its denouement: 1. Orwellian option: Shoved down the memory hole. 2. Masquerader's Jest option: Shock and tension defused through trivialization and comic relief. 3. Truth Serum option: Massively publicized and investigated with the result that on election eve, the American people are alerted to the fact that Bush is a cheat and a skulldugger, not a Christian statesman. 4. The Terror Option: Distract attention with a spectacular act of "Arab terror" or the capture of bin Laden/Mullah Omar et al."


Post a Comment

<< Home