ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Editing the audio

Neon Revolt appears to have uncovered some sort of conspiracy to hide something related to Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the Supreme Court:
I listened last night as was immediately discouraged because, frankly, I’m hoping RBG kicks the bucket soon. She has had some recent health scares, as I’m sure you’re all aware, but here, she sounded cogent, coherent, and quite vocal.... But something was bothering me about this clip, and I wasn’t sure what it was exactly, so I returned to it early this afternoon…

I had it playing in a tab on my browser when I clicked ahead, and suddenly heard what I thought was a repeat of audio I had just heard.

“Huh, that’s weird…” I thought to myself.

I clicked back and listened again.

There was that voice again.

Kagan’s voice!

I clicked forward…

Kagan AGAIN!
It may sound crazy, but let's face it, in light of the Mueller Report, Q is now officially more reliable as a news source than the entire mainstream media

Labels: ,

66 Comments:

Blogger The Pitchfork Rebel March 26, 2019 7:39 PM  

What would it say about the eight other members of the court if they were concealing the incapacity of the ninth.

Blogger VD March 26, 2019 7:41 PM  

What would it say about the eight other members of the court if they were concealing the incapacity of the ninth.

It would say Trump gets nine more Supreme Court Justice appointments.

Blogger Kristophr March 26, 2019 7:46 PM  

Removing SCOTUS judges requires the Senate to impeach them.

So we need better Senators. The 17th amendment screws us again.

Blogger Kristophr March 26, 2019 7:51 PM  

Although the Senate could demand she testify about her health. Easily done, if she has yet to become Zombie Judge RBG.

Blogger tublecane March 26, 2019 7:53 PM  

@3- The Senate convicts, but I don't think it ever has. Only one justice has ever been impeached by the House, to my recollection. That being Sam Chase because Jefferson didn't like Federalists. They failed to remove.

It honestly is way past time to Make Supreme Court Justice Impeachment Great Again.

Blogger Longtime Lurker March 26, 2019 7:58 PM  

Impeachment is moot. Dems hold the House for now.

Blogger Rex Leroy King March 26, 2019 8:00 PM  

SCOTUS should have Gong Show level turnover.

Blogger Kristophr March 26, 2019 8:12 PM  

tubelcain: Jefferson and Burr did take down a bunch of Federalist judges. And then redistricted the circuit courts and removed the lot of them wholesale.

I'd like to see the Ninth redistricted to Johnston Atoll.

Blogger John rockwell March 26, 2019 8:13 PM  

Given the EU copyright directive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4DhecQQjdM

Perhaps all evidence that would point to the swamp in the future will be subject to copyright.

Blogger Cyril March 26, 2019 8:26 PM  

Why? It's a nice little atoll. Aim hotter.

Blogger Cetera March 26, 2019 8:26 PM  

What would happen if Trump just "deemed" RBG dead and went ahead nominated her replacement? Would that force her to show up and prove her health?

Blogger Phillip George March 26, 2019 8:32 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Jack Ward March 26, 2019 8:53 PM  

I've grown to like Neon Revolt. Hit his site almost as often as Vox. Plan on buying that book he's been working on. Get a copy before the big A, or someone/organization kills it.
Should be an interesting read and reference come 2020 and beyond. I hope.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother March 26, 2019 8:57 PM  

That would be awesome if Trump told her to put up or shut up.

Blogger Silent Draco March 26, 2019 9:07 PM  

Cyril, Johnson Island is perfectly fine. They should have cleaned up all the CW stockpile that was previously stored there.

If the other justices have covered for RBG death or incapacitation, one can also make a case to take the SC into protective custody for their own safety. For the "interim."

Blogger Beardy Bear March 26, 2019 9:08 PM  

RBG is likely dead. 3 broken ribs and then cancer surgery within a month or so at 85 years old? It's more likely that the pandas survive than that she did.

https://youtu.be/hT9oep6GYdg

Blogger Unknown March 26, 2019 9:21 PM  

I actually listened to the tape provided. I couldn't hear anything amiss, it sounded like RBG. Mouth full of marbles. I am impressed that we have people listening to C-SPAN clips of Supreme Court arguments

Blogger tuberman March 26, 2019 9:24 PM  

"If the other justices have covered for RBG death or incapacitation, one can also make a case to take the SC into protective custody for their own safety. For the "interim.""

The only way they are all staying mum would be severe threats to them and their loved ones.

Blogger JAG March 26, 2019 9:24 PM  

Unknown wrote:I actually listened to the tape provided. I couldn't hear anything amiss, it sounded like RBG. Mouth full of marbles. I am impressed that we have people listening to C-SPAN clips of Supreme Court arguments

The analysis shows beyond any doubt that the audio has been tampered with.

Blogger tuberman March 26, 2019 9:27 PM  

17. Unknown

Pay attentions, so yes, it is RBG, but it's spliced RBG.

Blogger Pope Cleophus I March 26, 2019 9:31 PM  

Einewetok atoll?

Blogger Watcher of the skies March 26, 2019 9:33 PM  

you don't need spectral analysis to tell it is edited. Also, Sheri Johnson
doens't seem to be answering RGB's question. Sheri started her sentence with
a "but..." It sounded odd to my ears.

Blogger carnaby March 26, 2019 9:34 PM  

"The analysis shows beyond any doubt that the audio has been tampered with."

No, it does not.

Blogger GAHCindy March 26, 2019 10:02 PM  

Sounds to me like Kagan tried to ask the question once, around 21 minutes in, and then got her chance at 22:38, the second time. Sounds very similar, but I think hear a slightly different pitch. It's just the same question begun the same twice. RBG is alive. No way do you get all 8 of the other judges to pretend otherwise.

Blogger dh March 26, 2019 10:15 PM  

Take it for what's worth, but I try to get to oral arguments at SCOTUS once a year, and I was there on the 19th and 20th. I was in the gallery on the 19th, but lost out on the 20th, and didn't get a seat (by about ~20 people give or take).

Anyways, on the 19th, RBG was alert and asking questions and seemed very much in control of her facilities and mind.

If there is a conspiracy to hide the actual health status of any of the justices it's Justice Thomas, who has really gained weight in the last 7 terms I've been personally at the Court. He looks very fat. Interestingly, during the hearing I witnessed, he spoke for the first time in oral arguments in, I think, 3 or 4 terms, and did so at (relative) length. He sounded gravelly and unhealthy with a tiny bit of a wheeze.

I have on clue about RBG, but if anyone drops dead, or retires for health next, my money is on Thomas, not someone else. He would likely want to do it after this session or perhaps the next one, especially if it looks like Pres. Trump or the Republicans lose control during the next administration.

Blogger SouthRon March 26, 2019 10:24 PM  

Take it with a grain of salt, because I haven’t analyzed the audio myself, but there was a frequency shift in what Neon showed fitting what GAHCindy said.

Blogger Jab Burrwalky March 26, 2019 10:27 PM  

RGB is not human. She's an immortal Skeksis powered by the Dark Crystal.

Blogger KBuff March 26, 2019 10:30 PM  

That's what it sounded like to me. I can't read any more into it than that.

Blogger JAG March 26, 2019 10:31 PM  

carnaby wrote:"The analysis shows beyond any doubt that the audio has been tampered with."

No, it does not.


Yes, it does.

Blogger Matt March 26, 2019 10:44 PM  

SCOTUS arguments are public. Anyone willing to stand in line can see her in person. While I hope she... retires soon, I don't think we're quite at Weekend at Bernie's yet.

Blogger Kristophr March 26, 2019 10:56 PM  

Cyril wrote:Why? It's a nice little atoll. Aim hotter.

I was on Johnston during a Continental airliner refueling. Not much to do there except watching the wildlife swim by.

As for hotter places, I think you need to get there on your own efforts.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd March 26, 2019 11:05 PM  

Kristophr wrote:As for hotter places, I think you need to get there on your own efforts.

I have no doubt that all nine qualify for hell on their own merits. Pray that Trump expedites their trip.

Blogger Voracious Reader March 26, 2019 11:08 PM  

@15 "Protective custody." Oh, that needs to become a term of art once again in the legal system.

Damned Nazis abused that fine ambiguity. That's why we can't play with nice concepts anymore.

Blogger phunktor March 26, 2019 11:25 PM  

17A screws the States. they are left impotent to protect us from a tyrannical central gov..
the states embodied home rule.
by Peolple Like Themselves.
REVERSE MARBURY!!
now thats a REVOLUTION
now all devoured by lincoln and puritan moral certitude
theres a reason the Pilgrims got kicked out of Holland

Blogger phunktor March 26, 2019 11:29 PM  

refreshing absence of atual arguments on this one

Blogger Crew March 26, 2019 11:57 PM  

She's dead Jim!

Blogger Damn the torpedos March 27, 2019 1:30 AM  

We’re having a public showing of the propaganda RBG film at my Uni tomorrow. Tempted to crash the party with this info....then again I don’t want to be expelled.

Vox you are completely right about media credibility. My dog’s hind left leg is a more legitimate news source than the media post Muller. Q anon is interesting. Can’t wait to see what happens.

Those more knowledgeable about Q than me, does he mention the power of the Israel lobby at all? Or has that never come up in his postings? Thanks.

Blogger MeneMene March 27, 2019 2:12 AM  

Q did say something about "Israel last."

Blogger tublecane March 27, 2019 3:12 AM  

@33- Protective custody is a common term in the prison system as well as in family law, for children in danger.

Blogger Dominik K. March 27, 2019 4:16 AM  

Clearly altered...wow...I'm getting to be a cynic. Wherever you look, scams and lies everywhere.

Blogger Gettimothy March 27, 2019 7:48 AM  

ot.
Thousand points of light.
Kinder, gentler nation.
Compassionate Conservative.
War Room

Blogger Avalanche March 27, 2019 7:55 AM  

@17 "I couldn't hear anything amiss, it sounded like RBG."

You missed Neon's point: they spliced in RBG and then REPEATED KAGAN! It's not "does this sound like RGB?"; it's "Kagan's interjection is heard both before AND after the spliced in RGB."

Blogger Avalanche March 27, 2019 7:57 AM  

@18 "The only way they are all staying mum would be severe threats to them and their loved ones."

It apparently worked really well to threaten the Chief Justice Roberts into 'passing' obamycare! (Allegedly) They threatened to 'out' his ... dicey ... adoption of his kid (kids?) -- and he seemed to immediately fold and do as he was supposedly told. (Lots of weasel words there, but ... never proven.)

Blogger Avalanche March 27, 2019 8:09 AM  

OT? Oh holy crap! Linked off qmap.pub (Q drop: 3216) to this twatter acct:

https://twitter.com/Incarnated__ET/status/1110635537755365376

First twit:
Kim Foxx is married to Kelley Foxx, who WORKS FOR WORLD BUSINESS CHICAGO (WBC) where JIm Reynolds of LOOP CAPITAL SITS ON BOD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Foxx

Bit later: (several graphical expose's provided:)
Craig Roberts -- partner of Kim Foxx's husband -- is 'MICHAEL' OBAMA'S brother!!


(Don't drain the swamp: NUKE THE SWAMP!!)

Blogger Avalanche March 27, 2019 8:15 AM  

@25 "Anyways, on the 19th, RBG was alert and asking questions and seemed very much in control of her facilities and mind."

Body double? How closely would you recognize her?

Blogger VD March 27, 2019 8:30 AM  

Avalanche, STOP USING PARENTHESES! (seriously!!) It renders your comments practically illegible.

What do you think you are accomplishing by utilizing them? Just write what you want to say and stop trying to manipulate the reader through fucking punctuation!

Do you not understand that is what you are doing? It's intrinsically dishonest and manipulative.

Blogger CarpeOro March 27, 2019 9:20 AM  

Maybe RBG actually stands for Ruth Bader Golem. It is programmed to simulate her, but they forgot to add distortion or randomness to the voice replication so it reproduces it the same way every time.

Blogger Avalanche March 27, 2019 9:42 AM  

@46 Thanks? Lately, I've been spending time trying to recognize and exterminate the apparent 'gamma' behavior I seem to express a lot. Also the Asperger's thing turned up. Not that women are gamma / fit into the SSH, but that the traits that make gamma men so unpleasant to deal with are or seem to be awfully female traits. By way of: sorry this is long and solipsistic, but does this seem somewhat accurate?

I'm carefully trying to not make any excuse here: I'm working through my unconscious rationalization. I believe I have no manipulation attempt in anything I write here. Oops, I almost put "intended" in parens there. And maybe I should have written: "I have no intended manipulation in what I write"?

I am -- I believe? -- providing ancillary info that explains, defends ... maybe weakens? ... the info / point I am trying to make. This is also the way I talk in person: asides, tidbits of backup info, checking for comprehension. Ooh. {wince} When I spell that out.... yuck. Guess I really am a PitA! And yeah, I just now see that I'm just using em-dashes and ellipses in place of parens. So: Exterminate!

I don't have solid info that C-Justice Roberts folded to protect his dicey adoption. I have a memory of several generally reliable-ish sources. It seems reasonable. But, I am leery to just state it like a fact. So, I guess I have tried to imply the lack of solid verification by throwing in what would sound in speech like recognizable asides. Because I can hear it in my head, I suppose I have unconsciously assumed it comes across that way.

Maybe it's a girl-thing, maybe it's a gamma thing -- but stating things forthrightly, when those things aren't assured, is uncomfortable. I've also thought I'd make a weak bravo if I were male. Being in a hierarchy, supporting and backing up my leader, is my all-time fav position. Or is that just normal ... subordinate wife to strong husband? Leading as a putative alpha, whining as a gamma, gittin' 'er done as a delta, even preferring working alone as a bit of a sigma and sometimes being a slob as an omega -- all fit at various times.

Is it possible that women don't have / fit into the SSH because they actually have all the qualities in various, unsorted, random ways?

I'm not asking you to address what a woman's SSH would or could be. God knows, you're more than busy enough for ten men! But, in trying to understand the SSH FOR men, and how to end the gamma that I really don't like in myself, I'm trying to work out how to end gamma in more specific / actionable ways that the Alphagame essays. The "tell the truth" directive is hard but easily understood. "Lifting" won't teach a woman how to end her own gamma. I do it anyway!

And, I suppose, this is a sort-of "what about meeeeee." I'm REALLY looking forward to your SSH book: I'm finding it amazingly helpful to work through the SSH because, of course, I've been shaped and honed and rewarded and twisted and stunted and punished by feminism to be a fake-man.

Blogger Balam March 27, 2019 9:49 AM  

''No way do you get all 8 of the other judges to pretend otherwise.''

Easy to imagine scenarios where they stay quiet. The swamp shows the 8 judges what happened the Scalia if they don't keep their mouth shut. On the other end Trump tells them to play along and stay quiet while his guys root the swamp out. The judges move on with their judicial work while the invisible war rages around them.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd March 27, 2019 10:14 AM  

GAHCindy wrote:No way do you get all 8 of the other judges to pretend otherwise.
You don't get nominated, let alone confirmed, unless the Left and their controlled opposition agree you are reliable. There is no way they wouldn't go along with the narrative, or they wouldn't be there.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd March 27, 2019 10:23 AM  

I'm not seeing it. Not saying that Neon is wrong, but I can't see that he's right from what he published. I'd want to see frequency domain plots of the two Kagan clips, for a start. He posted some pretty abstract art, but no idea what they represent.

SouthRon wrote:Take it with a grain of salt, because I haven’t analyzed the audio myself, but there was a frequency shift in what Neon showed fitting what GAHCindy said.

If you inserted some RBG in the middle of some Kagan, why would the Kagan bit get duplicated? Why would the frequency shift if it did? If the pitch of the voice is different between the two, my first thought would be that indicates that Kagan started talking, was interrupted, and started over.

If there is a splice, I'd expect to see some abrupt change at the beginning and end of it. They're probably too sophisticated for a burst of static, but at least some little change in the time or frequency domain before and after the RBG bit. Not a change in the level, but a change in the first derivative, a kink in the curve.

Blogger Unknown March 27, 2019 10:52 AM  

This wall of text is itself gamma behavior.

Blogger John Bradley March 27, 2019 11:35 AM  

@51 Agreed. If Neon was arguing that the two Kagan quotes were a copy-paste of the same audio, then the audio waveforms should be identical, and they visibly are not in his screenshots. That the spectrum graphs look similar merely indicates the same voice making roughly the same pitch, with the same harmonic overtone content... but 'ears' are enough of a tool to determine *that*.

Blogger VD March 27, 2019 11:42 AM  

I am -- I believe? -- providing ancillary info that explains, defends ... maybe weakens? ... the info / point I am trying to make.

That may well be. The point is this: don't do that. No one wants or needs the ancillary info. All that accomplishes is to render everything you write into an impenetrable, self-referential Petersonian word-salad.

Writing is supposed to be about communication, not self-examination.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother March 27, 2019 12:00 PM  

Avalanche is a woman

Blogger MrNiceguy March 27, 2019 12:58 PM  

What he said. Speak or write a complete sentence. If you feel an irresistible urge to add additional information in order to clarify or qualify, start a new sentence. Finish one thought before branching off to a new one.

Blogger Shimshon March 27, 2019 2:02 PM  

Avalanche, if I close my eyes while reading your (walls of) text, you (do) sound (a lot) like my wife. Right down to the parentheses.

I keep telling my sons AWALT. They don't believe me.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd March 27, 2019 2:13 PM  

Shimshon wrote:... I close my eyes while reading ...

Shimshon, don't your eyebrows get hot?

Blogger Valley Forge Patriot March 27, 2019 3:55 PM  

Pope Cleophus I wrote:Einewetok atoll? I like your thinking! Especially when the USAF does Minuteman III missile tests...

Blogger Jester March 27, 2019 5:30 PM  

Neon linked to the entire 54 minute audio file hosted on the SCOTUS website. I listened to most of it. RBG had many comments, questions, and exchanges with the prosecuting attorney. It was all seamless and in context. If someone had dubbed in an artificially manufactured voice track of RBG's statements/inquiries, they would have had to manufacture the relevant answers and comments of the attorney as well. It seems plain as day RBG was there and participated. In the time it took Neon to produce this article, Neon could have done what I did and come to the realistic conclusion instead of that lazy and erroneous effort at confirming the wishful thinking of so many.

Blogger spinoza March 27, 2019 6:34 PM  

...women are (fucking) women, they have a spectrum and not order. You cannot be ergodic, if you are a woman, no useful heuristic can be used to determine predictive modeling of your behavior, most especially, within the one sexual hierarchy.

Why would (you think) there (would) be more than one (ssh) ?

Blogger Avalanche March 27, 2019 9:42 PM  

@61 "Why would (you think) there (would) be more than one (ssh)?"

Because Vox has refused on several occasions to describe or write a book about such an SSH for / about women.

...women are (fucking) women, they have a spectrum and not order. You cannot be ergodic, if you are a woman, no useful heuristic can be used to determine predictive modeling of your behavior, most especially, within the one sexual hierarchy.

And yet, if one sees painful examples of gamma behavior in oneself, would not trying to define such a predictive model be useful in learning to moderate that behavior? Men, here, have discussed their attempts and/or work to de-gamma themselves. Vox refers to the 4-part blog entry on gamma-to-delta. I see in myself such behaviors and the accurately deprecated over-use of parens is one such exhibit. I am unsure how much 'gamma-ness' is just female or perhaps feminist; or is actually badly done feminine.

But I take Vox's direction that this is not the place, and will deal with it elsewhere. And try very, very hard to not use parens!

Blogger Avalanche March 27, 2019 9:48 PM  

@57 "I keep telling my sons AWALT"

Shimson -- Owen does a great bit in one of his shows about men saying: "oh, my girlfriend is crazy, I gotta dump her and go find a not-crazy one to marry."

Owen yells: "STOP IT! They're ALL that way! Just find one you can live with and marry her! There is no not-crazy one!"

Blogger Ominous Cowherd March 28, 2019 9:00 AM  

Avalanche wrote:And yet, if one sees painful examples of gamma behavior in oneself, would not trying to define such a predictive model be useful in learning to moderate that behavior?

Gamma is a man acting like a woman. In a man it indicates damage, in a woman, it doesn't. Relax and accept that you will never be one of the boys.

Blogger Shimshon March 28, 2019 10:15 AM  

"Gamma is a man acting like a woman. In a man it indicates damage, in a woman, it doesn't. Relax and accept that you will never be one of the boys."

Exactly. Avalanche, we already know you're crazy. There's no point in trying to not be.

Blogger spinoza March 28, 2019 12:34 PM  

If you would allow yourself the time to comprehend what I wrote I originally said sexual hierarchy and not what Vox has been talking about. I had a feeling you would only focus on the parentheses, ignoring what I wanted to communicate.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts