Hillary Medical Records about to be leaked?? - Unconfirmed

As to whether the documents are real or not....who knows...


I do know I had to submit paperwork from various doctors while undergoing my disability claim.


Strangely enough, they looked exactly like what is shown in this thread. Could be fake... might not be.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: elouina

They are not the same brain.
MotherMayEye found the other image doing a Google search.
The comparison image was not Hillary Clinton.

I didn't say who they belonged to but yes that is the same brain. First off by looking at them it is quite obvious that they are the same brain. They are sort of like fingerprints, everyone's is different. Plus, brain lesions are personal and you would never find 2 identical and obvious lesions such as this in 2 people.

And lastly I was hinting that if this was the scan of a woman of Hillary's age, there would have been age related changes. And also, there is a 12 year old lesion on this scan but no lesion from the clot in 2011. So this is not Hillary's brain.

originally posted by: atomish

originally posted by: elouina

originally posted by: imthegoat

originally posted by: atomish

originally posted by: efabian
You were all asking for it... and looking through some sources I found THIS:

files.abovetopsecret.com...

This little document was leaked about two hours ago by some supposed ex-employee of the clinic. If real this is going to have some pretty big implications on the campaign.

The person claims.... MORE TO COME... Truth? False? Let me know what you think.

Here's the link

twitter.com...

Fabian, you mind clueing us in as to where you first picked up on this? The hoaxer hasn't returned again so at this point I'm assuming they were found out or gave up.

It would be really interesting to try and figure out where this came from initially.

I'm more curious as to where efabian is? They haven't posted in this since MotherMayEye busted this whole ordeal wide open. I mean..if we're on a conspiracy site, one can speculate, right?

They have been a bit busy with some other project plus other work. You are welcome to think whatever you wish about any of this. Without this being confirmed by Hillary herself or her attending physician, all we have is conspiracy which we all enjoy so much.

If anyone were TRULY speculating, they might be wondering why you are seemingly covering for efabian after tag-teaming with them in many posts over the last few days.

That and your continuance to push the hoax of the brain scan image that is fairly clearly debunked might get ones conspiracy senses tingling even more!

I don't feel that way. Just sayin'.

Umm... Read my words again, I actually debunked the scan. I thought I had described my thoughts in layman's terms.

"But I would expect to see more age related changes over 10 years considering Hillary's advanced age. The hills shills should love this. "

Meaning the missing age related changes means this is not her scan.

"The clot was what, 2 years ago? And the abnormality is from 12 years ago?"

Meaning, there is no new lesion on the newest and post clot scan and there should be.

Me and Efabian are not a tag team, we are working on a special project together. We talked last night and we both mentioned we were short on time at the moment. No conspiracy needed.

a reply to: elouina

I think the disconnect here is that both the scan from 'HillsMedRecords' and the scan from the epilepsy website are the same exact 12 year old scan...not just the same brain. These aren't two scans of the same brain done 10 years apart.

If you are talking with efabian, please ask her/him to post the sources she mentioned in the OP.


ETA: Or maybe I am just confused by what you meant.

originally posted by: RickinVa
As to whether the documents are real or not....who knows...


I do know I had to submit paperwork from various doctors while undergoing my disability claim.


Strangely enough, they looked exactly like what is shown in this thread. Could be fake... might not be.

I bet if you went back and looked at the letterhead and at the language, you'd find that these don't actually look the same as a real document from a physician.

Since you've got a Signal Corps insignia, you know how to tell the difference between a real signal and background noise (fake signal.) Use the same sort of analysis skills (look at your medical documents, at the language and the presentation.)

Any truth to THIS?

Man Who Leaked Clinton’s Medical Records Found Dead

www.freerepublic.com...

Less bogus-sounding report.
newyork.cbslocal.com...

a reply to: IAMTAT

Well this certainly adds an interesting wrinkle.

Good find!

a reply to: IAMTAT

If this man had Hillary's medical records, I do not believe they are what was posted by HillsMedRecords. I'm firmly in the hoax camp on these records.

Just my .02¢.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: IAMTAT

Well this certainly adds an interesting wrinkle.

Good find!

Yeah...but it feels manufactured.
Was this really the guy who leaked them? If he actually died suspiciously, then...yes...we have something of interest.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: IAMTAT

Well this certainly adds an interesting wrinkle.

Good find!

Yeah...but it feels manufactured.
Was this really the guy who leaked them? If he actually died suspiciously, then...yes...we have something of interest.

Here is his obit, this confirms he did have a son, Daniel Fleck.

Obituary

When you Google "Vincent Fleck LinkedIn Mount Kisco", CareMount's linked in is the second result. I do not have an account but I will make one to try and dig deeper on this.

Great find, IAMTAT. Not sure if this ties to the @HillsMedRecords account or how it might but this is certainly another red flag. Maybe it wasn't ALL disinformation?

I'll post any further info I find trying to link this guy to that clinic.

originally posted by: elouina

originally posted by: atomish

originally posted by: elouina

originally posted by: imthegoat

originally posted by: atomish

originally posted by: efabian
You were all asking for it... and looking through some sources I found THIS:

files.abovetopsecret.com...

This little document was leaked about two hours ago by some supposed ex-employee of the clinic. If real this is going to have some pretty big implications on the campaign.

The person claims.... MORE TO COME... Truth? False? Let me know what you think.

Here's the link

twitter.com...

Fabian, you mind clueing us in as to where you first picked up on this? The hoaxer hasn't returned again so at this point I'm assuming they were found out or gave up.

It would be really interesting to try and figure out where this came from initially.

I'm more curious as to where efabian is? They haven't posted in this since MotherMayEye busted this whole ordeal wide open. I mean..if we're on a conspiracy site, one can speculate, right?

They have been a bit busy with some other project plus other work. You are welcome to think whatever you wish about any of this. Without this being confirmed by Hillary herself or her attending physician, all we have is conspiracy which we all enjoy so much.

If anyone were TRULY speculating, they might be wondering why you are seemingly covering for efabian after tag-teaming with them in many posts over the last few days.

That and your continuance to push the hoax of the brain scan image that is fairly clearly debunked might get ones conspiracy senses tingling even more!

I don't feel that way. Just sayin'.

Umm... Read my words again, I actually debunked the scan. I thought I had described my thoughts in layman's terms.

"But I would expect to see more age related changes over 10 years considering Hillary's advanced age. The hills shills should love this. "

Meaning the missing age related changes means this is not her scan.

"The clot was what, 2 years ago? And the abnormality is from 12 years ago?"

Meaning, there is no new lesion on the newest and post clot scan and there should be.

Me and Efabian are not a tag team, we are working on a special project together. We talked last night and we both mentioned we were short on time at the moment. No conspiracy needed.

Relax, I'm only poking fun. This is a conspiracy forum after all.

Thanks for clarifying what you meant, that was not clear to me but that is probably my fault. What you've posted above is much more clear.

You have to admit, it DOES seem kinda shady how efabian vanished but no, I don't honestly believe you guys are working together to fool ATS.

Regardless, still incredibly interested to hear how he stumbled upon this, particularly now with this curious death of Vincent Fleck.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: elouina

I think the disconnect here is that both the scan from 'HillsMedRecords' and the scan from the epilepsy website are the same exact 12 year old scan...not just the same brain. These aren't two scans of the same brain done 10 years apart.

If you are talking with efabian, please ask her/him to post the sources she mentioned in the OP.


ETA: Or maybe I am just confused by what you meant.

Could very well be the same scan, but can't rule this in or out by the scan alone. Although I did notice one minor difference which could be contrast. But does this matter at this point, there is especially no post clot lesion let alone 12 year long changes related to her age. Also if you notice there is shrinkage of the cortical gray matter and along with the lesion whoever this is has some issues.

The source for the medical reports has been deleted from Twitter. It was something like Hillsmedicalrecords if memory serves me right. But once again. does this matter? Unless we get actual reports from Hillary's doctor herself anything else is conspiracy.

originally posted by: elouina

The source for the medical reports has been deleted from Twitter. It was something like Hillsmedicalrecords if memory serves me right. But once again. does this matter? Unless we get actual reports from Hillary's doctor herself anything else is conspiracy.

I am referring to the 'sources' that the OP mentioned which led them to the Twitter account.

ETA: And YES, it matters a great deal who turned the OP onto the HillsMedRecords twitter account just two hours after the records were tweeted.

originally posted by: elouina
Could very well be the same scan, but can't rule this in or out by the scan alone.

Both scans done on the same machine, in the exact precise position 10 years apart?

And the scan they used for the HillsMedRecords hoax scan just happened to be one that looks exactly like the one that came up from a google image search on an epilepsy website, only this 'new' one is now only 2 years old?

I am going with the pics being identical except Hillary's name and a more recent date was overlayed....because I really just can't follow the logic any other way.

a reply to: elouina

I mispoke.
I meant that the image MotherMayEye found is NOT Hillary's. It was found in a Google image search.
Which means the fake presented by the OP is also NOT Hillary.
Yes the same brain, you are correct. But neither is Hillary.

Well, Snopes has now declared this 'False:' Link

No mention of ATS, although I did send them a link to this thread and an explanation.

Their reasoning -- other physicians say they look like forgeries to them:

We contacted the Mount Kisco Medical Group to ask whether the displayed documents matched internal formatting of medical records or reports but were unable to immediately reach anyone there who could answer that question. In addition to contacting the practice, we also asked doctors to review the "leaked" records to determine whether they contained obvious signs of fabrication visible to physicians (but not necessarily laymen), and they unanimously agreed the documents appear to be forgeries.

Not sure what to think of that, all things considered.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: elouina

The source for the medical reports has been deleted from Twitter. It was something like Hillsmedicalrecords if memory serves me right. But once again. does this matter? Unless we get actual reports from Hillary's doctor herself anything else is conspiracy.

I am referring to the 'sources' that the OP mentioned which led them to the Twitter account.

ETA: And YES, it matters a great deal who turned the OP onto the HillsMedRecords twitter account just two hours after the records were tweeted.

Then this means every post on ATS is a conspiracy because we all got our info from somewhere. Some media sources are quicker than others and some members are better at finding it. I would have found it moments after him, I assure you. I was just busy at work at the time.

Accusing other members of illegal activities isn't appropriate here.

originally posted by: elouina

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: elouina

The source for the medical reports has been deleted from Twitter. It was something like Hillsmedicalrecords if memory serves me right. But once again. does this matter? Unless we get actual reports from Hillary's doctor herself anything else is conspiracy.

I am referring to the 'sources' that the OP mentioned which led them to the Twitter account.

ETA: And YES, it matters a great deal who turned the OP onto the HillsMedRecords twitter account just two hours after the records were tweeted.

Then this means every post on ATS is a conspiracy because we all got our info from somewhere. Some media sources are quicker than others and some members are better at finding it. I would have found it moments after him, I assure you. I was just busy at work at the time.

Accusing other members of illegal activities isn't appropriate here.

I didn't accuse anyone of jack.

And it is standard to actually cite sources here on ATS. In the case of the OP, no sources were cited although they were referenced in the original post. Most posts contain an actual source. How did the OP find this Twitter account so fast? It's a simple question.

Quick or slow, I'd still like to know the referenced sources from the OP. I'm not satisfied and distracted by your claim that you would have found the Twitter account anyway. That's not relevant.

ETA: Also, I do not mean to single out the OP. I would never find any other ATSer credible, either, if they simply said they were looking through "some sources" and found something like this...AND then never said what those sources were when questioned.

a reply to: elouina

A conspiracy is not necessarily a fact. Some are true, some are not, and some are in between.
The purpose of discussion and further research is to determine the validity of information and theories presented.

If something is proven false, then the choices are either to accept the findings or provide additional evidence to support your case.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: elouina

A conspiracy is not necessarily a fact. Some are true, some are not, and some are in between.
The purpose of discussion and further research is to determine the validity of information and theories presented.

If something is proven false, then the choices are either to accept the findings or provide additional evidence to support your case.

Why would you state the obvious? Oh wait, now I see where you are going with this. Since I and others already claimed the scan was fake, I would take this to mean that you feel it was released to discredit the reports themselves? Gotcha you sly one you.

Yeah you have a really good point there.