Was Hillary using hand signals to Lester Holt during Debate and possible seizure?

a reply to: Sillyolme

Guess not

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Gotta love these youtube videos. So goofy.

"Oh noes, she scratched her nose - must've been a signal!"

"OMG, she looked at Donald - must have been code!"

My favorite "incredible" youtube video from the debate is the Trump sniff. What the heck was going on there???? (watch the whole video before passing judgement)

Must have been some kind of signal.

I wish I knew how to embed. There's a giff of him sniffing and his head grows bigger and bigger like he's filling a balloon head. Then... it releases and his nose flips back and forth as his head deflates like a balloon that's been released.

Tar har har. The funny thing is that's all the left could find on Trump in this debate. He sniffed.

Besides limiting the debate to Democrat talking points, false fact-checking, and the soft-balls, this also looks quite suspicious.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Hillary actually was pretty great. My opinion.
But it's shared by millions of others.

It really isn't.

a reply to: LSU0408

Oh trust me, there's quite a bit more. The sniffs were just the funny parts.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: queenofswords

Why would she need to work out a complex series of signals with Holt ahead of time? Why not just tell him, "do what you gotta do to make me look good against Trump"? You don't think Holt could figure out how to do that on his own? I know he's a black man, but he's not an idiot.

A debate between two people is not anything like a game of poker or baseball. Ya'll are just gonna have to face it - she was better prepared than he was.

What do you mean he's a black man but not an idiot? Are you saying black men are idiots?

a reply to: gmoneystunt

Couldn't Lester Holt have thought for himself and "fact checked' every time he heard something doubtful?

Why would Hillary need to signal to him at all? Seems elaborate, unneccesary and potentially would weaken her case if they were caught in collusion.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: LSU0408

Oh trust me, there's quite a bit more. The sniffs were just the funny parts.

Yeah, like going to Hillary's website to "fact check" Trump. I'm sure that's unbiased, lol.

a reply to: LSU0408

I'm saying all the people on this thread who claim she was signalling him are insinuating that he's too stupid to know how to make her look good on his own. Why are they insinuating that?

originally posted by: nobunaga
at 5:30 she has a mini seizure... trump looks at someone in the crowd and mouths the word seizure. definetly. also, trump refused to shake lesters hand because he was illegally wearing an ear piece.
47 direct interuptions of trump, only 7 of hillary.

An earpiece is illegal?

You do know they were in a TV studio. It is likely everyone except the audience was wearing an earpiece.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Besides limiting the debate to Democrat talking points, false fact-checking, and the soft-balls, this also looks quite suspicious.

I don't know we expect professionalism out of these moderators.

a reply to: kaylaluv

And are you insinuating that he is smart enough to make her look Better then trump? Well either way if he was doing it on his own her with her aid it doesn't take away from how bad it is for a moderator trying to make one side look Better then the other. That would be called unfair or biased.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: gmoneystunt

Couldn't Lester Holt have thought for himself and "fact checked' every time he heard something doubtful?

Why would Hillary need to signal to him at all? Seems elaborate, unneccesary and potentially would weaken her case if they were caught in collusion.

If Bill meeting secretly with Loretta didn't weaken Hillary's case, this wouldn't either. That only emboldened her.

a reply to: justneo

I will admit he was a tiny bit softer on Hillary than he was on Trump, but come on - Trump was an ass - as usual.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: queenofswords

You don't think Holt could figure out how to do that on his own? I know he's a black man, but he's not an idiot.

What the hell does THAT mean?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: LSU0408

I'm saying all the people on this thread who claim she was signalling him are insinuating that he's too stupid to know how to make her look good on his own. Why are they insinuating that?

It's not about him, it's about her. It's about her giving him signals when it's his queue to step in. I don't know if she was giving signals, although it wouldn't surprise me, but this is about her, not Holt.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: justneo

I will admit he was a tiny bit softer on Hillary than he was on Trump, but come on - Trump was an ass - as usual.

Speaking of being an ass you said "I know he's a black man, but he's not an idiot."

That is a rude comment

a reply to: justneo

That's why Trump made the comment that the MSM is Hillary's biggest supporter. It's true, they're trying to put everything right there in her hands because honesty and integrity and professionalism has gone right outta the window.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Besides limiting the debate to Democrat talking points, false fact-checking, and the soft-balls, this also looks quite suspicious.

So, creating jobs, tax proposals, race relations and police, cyber attacks, homegrown terrorism, positions on Iraq war, presidential judgment and nuclear policy are "Democrat" talking points?

a reply to: LSU0408

It is about him as well. First, the accusation that he would agree to such a set up, and then underlying accusation that he isn't smart enough to figure out how to do it on his own. So yeah, if I were Holt, I'd be pretty insulted by this thread.