Hillary Clinton has right frontal lobe epilepsy! video analysis and medical literature review
I won't disguise my animosity toward Hillary Clinton. But I am presenting here, for lay person's understanding, the neurologic disorders exhibited on video from multiple sources at multiple times. Extensive literature research has gone into the production of this essay, which will no doubt be labelled as fantasy by Clintonites. However the sources are independent, international and appearing in medically peer-revised journals. After talking to a very intelligent gentleman with a post-graduate degree, it became apparent to me that what I thought was obvious, was opaque to him. The problem is that he doesn't speak "medical". Be warned that I am fully aware that the main readership of this blog is non-medical. Therefor, I will make every effort to write in English instead of medical. Suffice it to say, that since I have only at work on this project for 5 days, I have reviewed over 50 journal articles. The reference to these articles are not intended for a lay audience, but the citations are presented just so that the factual basis for my assertions will be researchable by anyone who has the interest. Furthermore, I welcome questions in the comment thread (though I am not always prompt to respond to them. Anyone interested in more information, including URLs for the medical articles can c99-mail me.
Due to the subject, Hillary Clinton, we may assume several things, which are not medical but political in nature.
1. You cannot believe anything she says
2. We do not have access to her medical records, about which I will comment later
3. None of the so-called medical experts commenting on her condition did not have access to her medical records
As a consequence I feel it is incumbent upon her to release her medical records promptly.
The reason why I undertook this project was because of a video taken as she was walking off the stage following her acceptance speech. I then checked that reliable medical source YouTube (snark) for more videos. And there are quite a few. I have only seen 4 which I consider definitely neuropathological but there are probably more.
There are several other issues here about this essay. The list of references is not complete, as I felt that for the purposes of this essay that would be overkill. A second point also relates to listing my sources (references) is that this prospect has been entirely more time-consuming than I first envisioned, hence the references are not listed alphabetically by the first authors's last name.
Before we get to the video analysis, let's discuss what we do know about what happened to her in December, 2012. Alas, we know very little since, of course the reporting was done almost exclusively by the Main Stream Media (MSM).
First reportage in print of which I am aware is from CNN on December 15, 2012. The other almost contemporary report is from ABC news. the next press report which I found pertinent (which is not to say that my review of MSM offerings was comprehensive) came from CNN also.
On January 1, while Clinton was checking out of the hospital, further information relating to her medical condition was released
Mrs. Clinton, 65, was admitted to NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia hospital on Sunday after a scan discovered the blood clot. The scan was part of her follow-up care for a concussion she sustained more than two weeks earlier, when she fainted and fell, striking her head.
. The citation for this is:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/us/politics/hillary-clinton-is-dischar...
From this very limited sourcing, we have learned two things, which are unchallenged by Clinton:
1. She had a head injury resulting in concussion.
2. She sustained a symptomatic right lateral sinus thrombosis about two weeks later.
That information is undisputed.
Then there follows just two of the videos posted on YouTube
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMHOcmDVBP0 Hillary tries to laugh off seizure
This video demonstrates several things, best seen with slow motion:
Her eyes look down and to the right along with slight head turning briefly; immediately thereafter her head returns to neutral position but her eyes are not well-visualized because of slow blinking, slower than normal. Immediately thereafter, rapid neck flexion-extension oscillations begin; some brief time afterward she begins laughing but not making eye contact initially. These are involuntary movements--in other words, she had no control over them. Later, I will give scientific citations to what I am now proposing: first, this could be a manifestation of gelastic epilepsy, often seen with medial temporal lobe but more often frontal lobe seizures. Gelastic means "laughing". Secondly, but less likely this could be a manifestation of torticollis, which means "twisted neck". The problem with that explanation is that emotional displays do not occur. Third, it could be an immensely clumsy attempt at humorous interaction. This third alternative is also unlikely, because in previous video imaging of her laughing (or cackling) there are no such untoward movements.
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqbDBRWb63s, the truth about Hillary's Bizarre Behavior.
First of all, ignore 90% of what the narrator says. He seems to have little understanding of the issues he discusses. Example, her laughter (other than the subject of the preceding video) is not psychotic. Plus the narrator conflates two conditions: personality disorder, which develops early in life and is not evidence of brain injury. Some of the tendencies of her sociopathic/narcissistic traits would be ease of irritation, explosive bad temper (sometimes violent), and impulsivity. Consult Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, edition 5 for descriptions of the various personality disorder.
Now, having said that, let me add that either or one or both of her known medical conditions could exacerbate her psychopathic traits.
The key video here is the one obtained after the nomination acceptance speech. Again, slow motion tells the best story because important finding occurred but too briefly to be detected at normal projection speed. In the video, while walking off stage, Hillary's eyes open widely, staring straight ahead while her jaws become slack and open--this is fleeting. What happens next is diagnostic of focal right frontal lobe epilepsy: she turns here eyes which are wide open upward to the left, turns her head upwards to the left, opens her mouth widely--but notice it opens more widely on the left side than the right. These are typical signs of an aversive seizure in which the body parts move in the opposite side to the side of the brain which is abnormally excited.
Mild head trauma, by which the lay audience understands as concussion with brief loss of consciousness, actually spans a spectrum varying from no loss of consciousness at all, to prolonged deep coma. Focal neurological signs may or may not be present. Intracranial bleeding may occur even in the absence of unconsciousness. Headache, although present in about 90% of concussion, may be totally absent, or quite transient, or severe, prolonged and disabling. Due to the varying circumstances associated with concussion, there is great heterogeneity of pathologic responses both in location and severity.
Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is common in the United States, with estimates ranging between 1.3 million and 1.7 million per year. Of those TBIs, approximately 75-80% are mTBI. Only a small portion of otherwise neurologically intact are hospitalized unless acute imaging shows a lesion. Other reasons for hospitalization are failure of sensorium to clear, persistence or development of neurological signs or worsening headaches despite normal imaging.
Although the majority of patients with uncomplicated mTBI recover completely, there is a small but significant minority who do not. Other than outright neurological deficits, the bane of mTBI research and treatment has been the "post-concussion syndrome" (PCS). Only within the past 10 years has real progress been made between discerning purely psychological symptomatology and validated proof of underlying neuropathology. Five percent of mTBI patients go on to have PCS lasting 1 year or more.
This non-technical article describes common perceptions about minor head injury
This highly technical article discusses specific brain architecture changes following mTBI accompanied by PCS.
This article deals with neuropsychologic measures of PCS but no anatomic correlation with imaging. It contains a good description of some of the most commonly utilized neuropsychologic tests.
This article demonstrates early anatomic brain changes following MVA as demonstrated with advanced neuroimaging techniques within days of MVA. Most of the MVAs invalid neck extension-flexion injuries but some presumably were rotatory. Just as in concussion as a general field, MVA related neurotrauma is heterogeneous.
This article is long and complex but it illustrates very well the subtle anatomicdisturbances which are technically caused lesions. Though complex, these studies are totally safe (providing the patient has no metallic implants other than certain MRI-safe orthopedic implants), painless and noninvasive.
This citation is about an MRI-based technique which objectively quantifies chronic mTBI
Here is a very salient citation, concerning intermittent involuntary emotional outbursts, previously known as
pseudobulbar affect of which the primary symptoms include emotional volatility, pathological laughter--or crying. One of the causes for this condition is mTBI.
Another very appropriate question is whether Hillary Clinton is aware of her peculiar (epileptic) behavior. Surprisingly, the answer is No.
Saving the best for last: manifestations of frontal lobe seizures. Although the seizures described herein are "intractable". the general description of individual seizures comports with the video imaging and the medical literature cited not only in this essay but in the international literature. Note that some epileptics experienced coughing fits.
Commentary
Please consider this a work in progress. There is much more information to be explained by me--and I hope by others. Some of those issues involve further exploration of the post-concussion syndrome, neuropathology of cerebral dural sinus thrombosis, and inter-relations between post-concussion syndrome and cerebral damage from dural sinus thrombosis.
Admittedly, some of my remarks may be considered speculative. It would be delightful if knowledgable neuroscientists would comment on this work.
I make two requests of you, my fellow c99ers:
1. Please be liberal in your comments. Send me c99-mail questions/comments as well.
2. SPREAD THE WORD.
Comments
I think her pathological lying predates the head injury
To wit: the landing in a hail of gunfire story told circa 2008. The fall and head injury happened in 2012.
Having said that, I do not agree that the videos show convulsions, etc and are proof of epileptic seizures.
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.
What you are seeing is a possession.
She has been possessed by Mammon.
Until she gives up the demon, she will remain in it's grasp.
There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties.. This...is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.--John Adams
Well, I believe this
It's as likely an explanation as any other. Possession has been out of fashion for a few hundred years, but it still exists, as evidenced by ...[this is where you get to fill in the blank - take your pick]
I have to say this - this election cycle has been too bizarre.
Worship of Mammon = worship
Worship of Mammon = worship of money/wealth
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Maybe she just tripped on the landing and is a psychopath.
Instead of using an uninformed diagnosis of epilepsy to excuse Hillary's lies, greed, incompetence, and ethical deficits, I am comfortable in saying she is the most unfit candidate for president in history, and that includes George W. Bush.
Excuse me for being uninformed
Ok, so this essay was written for a lay audience. Why? Because I feel this information needs to be publicized.
As for the "uninformed" basis of the medical issues, let me advise you off the following:
1. The author has been a practicing neurosurgeon AND neurologist for 38 years
2. The author has performed numerous brain surgeries
3. The author has treated hundreds of epileptics
4. The author has treat hundreds of mTBI as well as severe TBI
5. The author is an active member in American Neuropsychiatric Association (more than 10 years)
6. The author is an active member of the National Neurotrauma Society.
7. The author has been a member of the AmericanStroke Association
8. The author haws been a member of the American Headache Association
Now please tell me that the author's opinions are uninformed.
Diagnosis via Internet videos
That's the problem, imo. You sound very qualified to make a determination about a patient who you have examined and seen their scans and test results. I don't question that at all. But diagnosis from afar based on just a couple of brief videos (one of which looks like it could easily have been edited)?
I recall a lot of derision directed at Dr. Frist for his attempt to diagnose someone he'd never seen in person, based on a video that made it appear she was awake and aware, even though her doctors said it was misleading video. His MD and experience as a doctor didn't mean he was "informed" about that particular patient.
Diagnosis based on videos and incomplete information, without access to her detailed medical information (which no one has access to) is by definition uninformed, regardless of your credentials.
I completely agree, CS.
Diagnosis at a distance is undesirable. Personally I would never do it. But, like ir not (and I don't), many hospitals are now resorting to tele-neurology whereby the remote clinical observes the patient and then has a physician-extender perform some maneuvers at the doctor's commands. this practice, woefully, is becoming more common.
Just to mention a few issues here, and only a few:
1. How can the remote physician (RP) feel the muscle resistance to passive motion?
2. How can the RP feel the quality of the reflex, which involves much more than seeing the lower leg swinging in response to a patellar tap?
3. How can the RP diagnose the eye grounds of the patient, which is often key to diagnosis?
4. How can the RP inform the health-extender in performance of unusual diagnostic maneuvers?
The list goes on. I feel sorry for any of you who fall victim to "tele-medicine".
So we shouldn't have the discussion AT ALL?
What are the folk so concerned about, that we can't even talk about this stuff unless it's fucking MEDICALLY IMPECCABLE Because CREDENTIALS?
I don't give a shit about derision leveled at anyone else. What I care about is being able to discuss something here, where speculation is permitted, without someone dishing up a ration of somethingorother toward any author presenting same. I care that we stop acting like they do at TOP, anytime someone DARES to present reasonable conjecture based in fact?
Wow. No, I didn't say anything like that! Geeze
I never said it shouldn't be discussed! Stop putting words in my mouth, thx.
Actually, I find the conjecture interesting and possibly correct, not that my opinion matters. All I did here was I specifically answered the question from the author In the comment above mine, about why it is "uninformed" to attempt a medical diagnosis via Internet videos. (Which he appears to agree with, by the way.)
The headline is Hillary Clinton has right frontal lobe epilepsy! That is stating a diagnosis, and in my view that goes too far. That is all. There's really no need to attack me over it.
I give you credit for your sentiments
. BTW, I did not attack you; sorry if anything I wrote was offensive.
Yes, my headline is conjecture which although based on fact is still conjecture (see numerous comments in this thread as well as the essay itself). But although the medical portion of the essay is supported by numerous peer-reviewed articles, politics is ineluctably intertwined. The reason for the bold headline is to grab people's attention--and that does seem to have happened. Unlike so-called conspiracy theorists, I welcome informed commentary from appropriate medical experts (excluding from that list any with ties to the Clintons or CGI).
Please feel free to disseminate this article and then refer back to me any commentary you receive.
Your reply to me was reasonable and fine, AE
It was lunachickie who attacked me, for DARING to answer your question. Heh. I left GOS mostly because of the edict, but also because I grew tired of the nastiness and rudeness in the comments there. I think we can do without that here.
As for disseminating this essay, I'm sorry to tell you I don't have anyone to disseminate it to. I avoid social media, I'm not on Facebook or Twitter, and my small circle of friends doesn't include any neurologists.
I would merely suggest that the title should be rephrased as a question - "Does Hillary Clinton have ... whatever?" to avoid stating a diagnosis.
My apologies for not making clear
that wasn't directed at you, CZ. It happened to be last in a long line of comments that was flat-out accusing the author here of lying, and it pissed me off--because speculation with supporting links is reasonable. Further, per the admins, it is acceptable here.
"by definition, this is "uninformed"
Is not exactly complementary, either, though re-reading your context, no, I don't think you were being awful about it. Again, that this sort of speculating IS in fact permissible here is the lens I am looking at all of this through. I took your comment in the same spirit that I took the ones upthread that had to be told to stop. If that was not your intent, I am very sorry to have assumed it.
Again, I never said or remotely suggested that
speculative essays and conjecture are "not allowed" here, so I'm not sure why you're lecturing me on that point. Obviously they are allowed, and I'm glad. I've never been a fan of thought control. I left GOS because kos decreed group-think as a stated rule. Not for me!
As far as I'm aware, however, readers are also allowed to question and even disagree with such speculations and conjectures. And I think that is a necessary and valid aspect to worthwhile discussion too.
I have a good friend whose wife doesn't believe in the moon landing. Seriously. She sincerely believes it was faked. She speculates about the evidence and possible motives for the hoax. She is absolutely allowed to think that. Others are also allowed to disagree!
And again you misquoted me: I didn't say "this" is uninformed -- I said (again, this was a direct response to a specific question from the author):
That is simply a statement of fact. NO doctor can or would claim to be able to make an informed diagnosis based on Internet videos. AE himself says above that he agrees, and "would never do it" (Notwithstanding his headline here). So one last time here: my suggestion is simply to remove the diagnosis and frame it as an informed question. That I would have no problem with at all. In fact, prior to this discussion I've been prone to dismiss such speculation, but some of what has been posted here is quite disturbing actually.
Excuse me?? I'm not lecturing you
I distinctly remember trying to apologize and at this point, I'm being talked past or I'm talking past you or something.
Apparently, I'm doing it badly, you think I'm judging you when I was certain I said I agreed with your statement of fact. What is the problem now?
The replies here do not
The replies here do not identify the person or comment being addressed and often appear some distance down the page, so it's understandable that confusion results. However, if you read the answers provided to which you apparently replied just now, you'll realize that such comments were directed at a commenter engaging in the behaviour objected to - which you were not.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Huh?
There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties.. This...is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.--John Adams
Zerohedge has an article up on this now,
with pictures and videos.
please send me URL.
I will eagerly comment on the article.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-08/something-wrong-hillary
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-08/something-wrong-hillary-bizarre...
I thought my comment on the zero hedge post was saved, but
obviously it was not. The article mentions that her stroke was three years ago, when actually it was four--a minor point. I saw the video regarding her 2005 faint but there were no actually images taken of the event itself, there this reported fainting bears no particular weight. The object held by the putative SS guard cannot be clearly identified. Although it might be a diazepam injector, it could just be an epic-pen, which is used for severe vasovagal syncope (though usually it is used for allergic reactions). For that matter the object might even be a small Taser. Upshot--no medical value in this article.
Wow. Bodyguard with diazepam injector. That's spooky.
Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.
In his hand, not even in his pocket
Whatever it is. No time to spare, apparently.
In his hand
Might argue for the small taser possibility noted by Ed. Less conspicuous than a gun.
Now interviewing signature candidates. Apply within.
Would it be uncool?
Would it be uncool for Trump to harangue Hillary while the debate moderator is asking her a question, in order to try and force a seizure? Yes, of course it would be uncool to force a dangerous medical reaction. As uncool as allowing that person to become POTUS?
“He may not have gotten the words out but the thoughts were great.”
They will, of course, do whatever they can to
make such a thing happen. Which is yet another reason that I don't believe that there will be any debates. Her handlers will keep her hidden away, out of debates and press conferences, in the hopes that no unfortunate occurrences are caught by cameras...
The extreme right are having a pissing contest over
this real or imaginary stuff [Stormfront/RedState/Freepers etc] I am loath to join them without medical expertise.
I wouldn't be
We damn sure aren't going to get any five-star doctors on the record, diagnosing the woman. Anywhere.
Why is it not okay to speculate? Seriously, did TOP do this to us? I NEVER saw a downside to speculation unless it's completely and totally uninformed, which is NOT the case here.
It is often by tossing "speculation" and "ideas" back and forth where people figure out WTF is going on. We have to stop acting like we must be PhDs in this or that discipline, to have a discussion about something like this. We DON'T.
So what's out of bounds then?
Can we speculate on her being an alien from a distant planet that wants to take over the earth? Can we speculate that she's really a demon from hell? We have videos and photos to prove it! I don't need to be a priest or an astronaut to identify aliens and demons.
All kinds of downside to speculation and rejection of trained specialists---it has been a large part of the dumbing down of our society--see intelligent design, creation science, ancient aliens, vaccines, rejection of Global Warming, etc.
"Possession by Mammon" has already been suggested
see comments above. It has also been suggested that she is one of the "Lizard People". http://www.thewire.com/national/2013/04/12-million-americans-believe-liz...
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Ummm, actually, possession by
Ummm, actually, possession by/worship of Mammon would be a commonly used reference to the worship of money/wealth, rather than a claim of literal possession.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mammon
Perhaps some are serious about 'Lizard People' as an alien species or whatever, although I know that I and many others use it jokingly, or perhaps not so much, in reference to those obviously exhibiting what are actually psychopathic characteristics, most notably a lack of capacity for empathy and a willingness/eagerness to harm others in pursuit of personal desires.
Perhaps one of the most chilling pictures I can recall seeing was that of a Nazi doctor casually perched for a photo-op on the edge of a bathtub in which the pathetically white and hopeless face of a naked victim from the Concentration camps being gradually frozen to death for experimental purposes, with blood measurements callously taken throughout, was also visible. 'Lizard people' would be the least I'd call those who were willingly involved in such as this and were incapable of recognizing the diseased inhumanity required. This sort of unbearable cruelty and suffering was - and meant - nothing to them, even as doctors... as with the Bush Admin 'legalization' of torture and so many other abuses. The Bush Administration, various actions of which Hillary has used as precedent for her own behaviours, this claim of 'he done it first' supposedly then making the unacceptable 'acceptable' when repeated.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
For crying out loud
you're an adult, yes? Do you understand that informed people can talk, and end up with "informed speculation"?
No? You don't understand that? Tell us, why not?
And these word games are going to stop. One sentence at a time.
Number One:
Please indicate exactly where the OP, Alligator Ed, "rejects" a trained specialist?
4chan says they have videos done by Huma
Consider the source.
They also say that Huma has been sending private information back to Saudi Arabia by internet and Anonymous intercepted them. Again, consider the source.
Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.
Very strange
Noticed that in speeches or discussions she has full-mouth, full-face explosive loud laughter and had the feeling she was high on some meds or something. It was a little too much and not natural looking.
Something seems not right.
TK
I may be beating a dead horse, TuKonai, but...
Your observations about Clinton's mouth motions coupled with full-face explosive laughter can be a sign of Inappropriate Affect Disorder (which used to be known as pseudobulbar palsy). The reason for this name change is that pathology located in non-brainstem areas can also cause such inappropriate laughter.
In the explosive laughter episodes her "smile" is bilaterally symmetric. But in the putative right frontal lobe seizure seen post-acceptance speech, the smile is asymmetric with the left side of the mouth open more widely than the right. This is to be expected from a focal right hemisphere lesion.
I'm going with something else I read
That makes more sense to me. She appears to be exhibiting symptoms of Parkinsons disease.
In my opinion, having treated scores of Parkinsonian patients
she does not have Parkinson's disease.
In mine, living daily with someone with Parkinson's,
I concur. It's possible, but not likely. (By the way, if anyone wants to know what "controlled" Parkinson's looks like, check out the late movies of Katharine Hepburn....)
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Also...
Check out Michael J Fox's guest appearances on "The Good Wife." He, like Hepburn, does a really good job of controlling and masking his dyskinesia but it's definitely there.
"Nothing's wrong, son, look at the news!" -- Firesign Theater
I guess it doesn't matter as much but Bill's mental abilities
seem to have suffered as well.
Beware the bullshit factories.
Video: This has all of Hellery's symptoms rolled into one video
Probably produced by Rightwing nutjobs but so what. I like the speculation that the canker sore on her tongue is Syphilis she caught from sex maniac Bill. Hahahha.
Length: 5:53
Donnie The #ShitHole Douchebag. Fake Friend to the Working Class. Real Asshole.
You may not be far from the truth
In my opinion, the circular depression on the upper surface of the midline of her tongue is just too circular, to reflect a natural phenomenon. It is a stretch to say that that she has tertiary Lyme disease or a gumma from tertiary syphilis. But, it's unlikely we will ever learn the truth. Certainly, if we do learn the truth, it will not come from Medusa's mouth.
This reminds me of the shape
This reminds me of the shape shifting lizard people on Utube. Utter nonsense and an embarrassment to the serious posters here on CP99.
It certainly shouldn't, if you read the actual post
I think what's an embarrassment to the rest of the site is the thoroughly obnoxious reaction and subsequent attacking of the poster for this, in particular trying to equate it with "shape shifting lizard people". You have nothing to base that on, unless you're so afraid of Speculation that you never dare do it yourself, ever, because someone on a blog might make fun of you and call you out.
That's what they do at the Daily Kos, you know. And you get Banned!!!!!!
Who are you calling serious? :-P
If we didn't indulge in a little playful mockery and Wild Mass Guessing, we'd all go MAD, I TELL YOU - UTTERLY MAD!
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
IMHO the ! in the headline is the problem
A ? or even a !? - clearly labeling the essay as speculation from the get-go - would probably have drawn less hostility.
Too late now, but something to consider for the next time something like this comes up (as it will).
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Thank you TOM--
The exclamation achieved its purpose which was to bring attention to the serious medical issues discussed. From the start I did say that much of the essay was speculation--but all progress emanates from either serendipity or speculation. BTW, thank you for your comments.
oh my, this diary and its discussion thread surely
has changed my mind about a couple of commentators' capabilities to feel empathy or sympathy for a political candidate, who they don't endorse for political and ideological reasons.
I just wonder, if some may feel a little ashamed about what and how this dispute between "medical experts" speculating about HRC's health condition evolved here. And even if the health condition could clearly be proven through her medical records, ie that she has post-concussion syndromes, it would not be a reason to use that to trash her. In addition apparently this is the first time it was observed.
This seizure event shown in the video has happened directly after the convention speech a time period that was clearly highly stress inducing. And any video editor can run amok with his cuts to "bully" his points into your visual perception of her.
I think it smells very bad to use this incidence as a tool to destroy her politically, using her health as a weapon against her. She certainly didn't faint and hurt herself in 2012 on purpose. Was not her fault. She did though on purpose a lot of stuff politically that you definitely can use to oppose her.
I think this thread is worse than what I have seen on TOP. The hate boggles my mind. Why can't you see a "normal human being" in her, when it comes to health issues that are beyond her control ? Just like you and me. I don't get it.
Pretty disappointed.
https://www.euronews.com/live
If you want the most important job in the country,
you had better be prepared to prove that you are ready, willing and able to handle it. That takes more than being a "normal human being", since most of us have serious disqualifiers.
Hating on politicians is a fine old American tradition. Hating on politicians who seem to go out of their way to dismiss, disparage and discard large sections of the electorate is only to be expected. And as for politicians who present themselves as unpleasant and unlikable people from the get-go, they hang "Kick Me" signs on their own back.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
I believe, if these conditions are disabling her from
functioning, it will come out in the next three month. Her records can't be hidden for ever and the answer to the question, if she is health wise fit enough to serve, might become obvious. The stress on her will be even higher than it was so far and the likelihood that she is either heavily medicated or having more seizures will become evident. I don't dispute the points being made, but the sound of the music that is played with those points.
Well, I guess I am too faint of heart to like your American traditions of hating their political opponents. I am glad if it's over. I pray for a miracle that both candidates disappear and the parties regroup themselves.
https://www.euronews.com/live
This thread has made me
sympathetic toward Hillary Clinton for the first time in my life. So, I guess it wasn't all for naught.
Thanks, AE, for your effort in putting together the essay and responding to comments. It's certainly opened my eyes in a way I never expected.
Edit: Oops This was meant to be a new comment, not a reply to mimi.
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
If Hillary truly has a debilitating condition
Then it is incumbent on her to take care of herself and not put the Country in jeapordy because of her desire to be President. If this is true then I would have sympathy for her but not to where I would support her politically. Those are 2 separate issues.
Beware the bullshit factories.
oops sorry injury was in 2012
I'm just editing out the part where I said that Hillary hid her injury pretty well as Secretary of State and keeping the part that says I'd like Jill's medical opinion of Hillary.
Beware the bullshit factories.
I think there's more going on
I think there's more going on than just this possible brain thing. If you notice, she never wears a skirt and her ankles are never showing. A lot has been made about her cankles, but she used to wear dresses and skirts and her legs looked normal to me. Also the mandarin collars and definitely wintery stuff in the middle of July and August, always 3/4 sleeves or longer. Something is off.
And I don't think it is because she is fat, she is very normal sized to me. Jill Stein is normal appearing on TV but she is about a size 0 or a 2 and she's about 5'9" or so and wears flats. The TV is very harsh on body size.
...the high collars...
A while back, and no I can't even remember where, there was someone speculating that HRC had thyroid issues (goiter?) because of her incessant cough and her constant wardrobe of high collars or scarves. Well since then, she has worn open necked clothing some and I have noticed the excess loose skin at her neck. IMHO as a female, the high collars were just a vanity thing to hide the skin folds and maybe not a medical cover-up.
The constant unflattering pantsuit is a puzzle though...
And now that I think about it, the Obama hug all the way off stage at the DNC after her speech? Was that affection or a disguised crutch? Because it did seem off to me at the time.
The voters have a right to know
Ed, thank you for questioning the health of our candidates. Because, whatever your credentials, her behavior was NOT normal. I don't think one needs to be medical to tell that something was wrong. She was very giddy after that eyes closing/head bobbing episode. Not presidential level social behavior! The video did not look altered when you saw the one with both angles--because if you watched the other people you did not see their movements going back and forth like Hillary's.
I read somewhere that Hillary hasn't driven herself in years, since the 90s. She has a chauffeur. I wonder if she has a drivers license? Would a seizure disorder have to be disclosed to the DMV in her state?
I agree with whoever posted that we, the voters, are hiring someone to do a job of leading this country. And whether that individual has periods of altered mental function, regardless of how short lived, we do have a right to know so that we can make an informed hiring decision.
And so...sub cortical vascular dementia?
The other thread links to a screen shot of a Twitter feed with this presenting condition from her doctor.
Gonna go reread at that link. Truth, or, conjecture?
Pages