21 votes

Former House stenographer describes outburst: "I did not lose my mind. Audio was edited and dubbed"

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Please stop helping. These so-called christians mock God, and mock the Liberty movement.

To all "christians": Develop relationships with people, and then they will see Love in you. All you do when you preach at people is look ridiculous, sound uneducated, and come across as if you're unbalanced in the mind.

When did common sense become a super power? –Patrick F. Holman

comments from an audio engineer by trade

Something I find interesting is why there is no recording of her while standing at the podium. There is a microphone in front of her until she is dragged off. This microphone, while not on in the speakers or the CSPAN broadcast, should still have been recording.

I am an audio engineer by trade and almost all recording systems are of the kind that even though the output from the recording console isn't sent to the speakers of the chambers or to the CSPAN broadcast they are still recording at the console(or recording system).

The reason you work like this is because you never want to lose any kind of data, you (not always but often) want the idle sound from the actual microphone to do editing for post-production products, and also because this makes the recording, live mixing for the chambers, CSPAN broadcasting and any other kind of use for the audio into discrete systems. This eliminates many problems that you might have in both a live environment and post-production. It makes no sense what so ever to make it the old-school way to have only a 2-track recording from the console, especially when you consider the budget of the American political system.

The discrete systems is more expensive, sure, but the money saved from missing data, possible live-errors or inability to do quality post-production from a non-discrete system makes no sense what so ever from this audio engineers perspective. All systems I have worked on in a production and live environment with any kind of budget have used the discrete system.

I have no data about products used in the house chambers so I cannot say what kind of setup they have. But I repeat the non-discrete system makes no sense what so ever.

If it is true that they use a discrete system then the audio still is somewhere in the house computer system or the company hired to do the live-audio and recording for the house chambers. Unless everything was deleted of course, which is a possibility, even a probability.


She probably had a break down and its why she doesn't remember. Either way she has no right to go and make a mockery of the House of Representatives jumping onto the podium and acting like a maniac. Sorry. Fired.

Beside profaning the Holy of Holies, no harm no foul.

The bigger question, is why the cover-up by the House.

If she called them out for altering the Congressional Record, many would cheer.

Free includes debt-free!


deleted, decided to make a separate comment instead

I just had a funny thought

People here are debating the woman's sanity.

Every word she said, regardless of whether she said it in the chambers, the hall or the elevator, is true.
"God will not be mocked."
And, "The signers of the Declaration were Free Masons." (Puppets, not unlike the puppets we suffer in D.C. today)

Plenty of Constitutional scholars point out the conflicts embodied in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Ask Larken Rose.

The God of the bible is a God of Liberty. He tried to give his people kingdoms without kings.

The only two countries in the history of mankind that were not founded by a human king are Israel and America.

The people seemed to think they needed a "King".

The Jews and the Colonists were both granted 'free countries'. Yet that part of human nature that seeks to be 'herded' hungered for domination.

The important question to be asking is; "Why do we want kings?"

People must have thought Jesus was crazy when he said "Destroy this temple and I will rebuild it in three days." But he did it.

"The Jews' Demand for a Sign... or Prove You're a Real King"

The reason Jesus said this was because the Jews demanded a sign to prove his right to take such authority in the temple when he drove out the money changers. "What sign have you to show us for doing this?" And Jesus' answer is: "When you destroy this temple, I will build it again in three days." This is essentially the same answer he gave to the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 12:38, 39. It says, "Some of the scribes and Pharisees said to him, 'Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.' But he answered them, 'An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah.'" The sign of Jonah coming out alive after three days in the fish and the sign of Jesus rebuilding the temple in three days are the same—they both refer to the resurrection of Jesus. Both these sayings prove that Jesus did predict his death and resurrection. The early church did not make up such difficult sayings and put them in Jesus' mouth in order to support their hoax. All Jerusalem knew Jesus had said something about rebuilding the temple in three days. There is no escape: Jesus foresaw and predicted not only his death (which an ordinary person could do), but also his resurrection (which no ordinary person could do).


great analysis

thanks for sharing

proverbs 20:15
There is gold, and an abundance of jewels;
But the lips of knowledge are a more precious thing.

crazy person


Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
Rand Paul 2016

Uhhhh... This was supposed to prove she WASNT crazy???

Uhhhh, maybe Im the one who missed the boat, but it looks like the "unedited" clip was supposed to make her look less crazy, yet Ive never heard of this story before and having not listened to the supposed "edited" one, hearing the "unedited" one had me thinking shes a lunatic and rather hurts the message of Christ in the eyes of most. If it was supposedly misunderstood because it was a message from God meant for the chamber, yet God also gave us technology so of course he would have known it would go viral and its apparent shes a little nuts, thus I highly doubt this is something God would have wanted.

Ron Paul 2012

I agree with what you're

I agree with what you're saying but there is no "unedited" video of her speaking at the podium where you can hear what it is she is saying. Or am I misunderstanding something here?


She's crazy

She is telling the truth

You have to have the Spirit of Truth to hear it. Her message was only for those in the chamber, that is why she can not remember what was said. The powers that be edited out the audio to make her sound crazy, but in effect they were doing God's will because the message was only for the members of Congress as a witness against their sins and hypocrisy. Judgement is coming soon.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
Thomas Jefferson


Sigh... *facepalm

I didnt lose my mind

but i just cant remember what i said...huh ?

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams

As a man of God, called of God for His Good pleasure

I have, like she describes, deliver a " Rhama word " to a few individuals, and I NEVER remember what I said. This is as it should be according to scripture.

I've had dreams, some prophets have visions. My dreams are always interpreted for me as I recall them to others, God has also given me the spiritual gift of interpreting dreams for His praise.

The only sure way to determine if a message delivered by a prophet is of God is simply this " did it come to pass ? ". If not, then it was a false prophecy and so is the person a false prophet.

In these the last days even the youngsters will see visions and those of age shall dream dreams. This event shall coincide with the " latter rain ", which is the final outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon humanity just before Jesus returns to end this controversy. The " latter rain " can NOT come, untill the Gospel has been preached throught this earth and Hods people are in one accord.
There are but TWO church groups who are even close to completing this, the Roman Catholucs who have outreach in all but seven of the 196 Nations on this earth presently, and my church the Seventh Day Adventists who have reached all but three ( N. Korea, China and one other I can not recall ). We are therefore VERY close to going home. Additionally, like the first desciples, untill we who are His surrender all and depend in unity and one accord the latter rain will be withheld.

Personally, I feel this woman is being truthful.


Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

Uh, It's spelled

" Rhema word "

And you're right. It's common not to remember every word that was uttered through you.


Re:"The only sure way to determine if a message delivered by a prophet is of God is simply this " did it come to pass ? " "

I disagree. If the alleged prophet's message comes to pass, or if they perform miracles, or were even a true prophet in the past, that doesn't necessarily mean that they were speaking for God or that they are trustworthy:

Deuteronomy 13:1-3 "If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul."

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

Also check out 1st Kings chapter 13

The message needs to be consistent with scripture, and that is not testable if you can't remember what it was.

1Th 5:21 "but test everything; hold fast what is good."

How can you hold fast to something you can't test for lack of memory?

1Co_14:33 "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."

Also, if two people prophesy inversely(one that something will happen, and another that it won't happen), both might have been presumptuous in what they "prophesied" even though one will be correct.

Charasmatics - sigh....

There is a very good chance these people are nuts. They are what we call "charismatics" in the Christian community. They often claim to have a "word from God" or say things like "God spoke to me". Typically, they come from the pentecostal background (speaking in tongues) and will also ramble on about stuff and claim they are prophesying. Most of the T.V ministries are of this type.

Looking for this?


I believe in Hope & Change..I Hope the government will Change
Spindale-Rutherford County-North Carolina

This is NOT the audio from

This is NOT the audio from what she said at the podium. The audio comes from when a reporter managed to get close enough to her while waiting for the elevator.

The audio has been edited on top of the video from her speaking at the podium. There is a video of her at the elevators speaking these exact words at the elevator. Also she is clearly moving away from the microphone at the podium, the microphone that was off, and there is no change in volume when this happens.

I must say that if you believe that the audio and the video is from the same time you are sadly mistaken and the proof is in the video and out there in another video showing what happened at the elevators. If you are willing to search for it.

Either she had a psychotic

Either she had a psychotic episode or God was speaking through her, and I suppose all of us will choose whatever we want to believe and assume the person of the opposite opinion is wrong.

The fact that you as a

The fact that you as a christian, I assume, cannot see and distinguish between a rambling madman and someone getting inspired by "god" tells me much about your ignorant state of mind and the folly of the religious basis in which you choose to follow.

Anyway enough down votes for me, let see if you can beat the -6 I have below at the time of writing with this comment.

The fact that I can't tell

The fact that I can't tell between a rambling madwoman and someone communicating God's message means I am ignorant on the singular issue, not that my mind is in a perpetual state of ignorance.

Since my gut doesn't get inspiration from a woman rambling on about free masons as a divine message, it makes me think in this case she was not inspired by God. Perhaps the devil being such a trickster was behind this one. Something moved her, and it was spiritual.

I suppose an atheist would argue something about brain chemicals being out of balance and then be unable to elaborate on the exact cause of it. Not enough serotonin, because of a malfunction we can't explain, blah blah blah. They would certainly conjure up some faith on the matter. First you are mentally ill if you are gay, now you are mentally ill if you hate gays. Ah science...such a bedrock of conclusive reasoning for those that lack any spirituality, lol.

No my gut feeling is nothing

No my gut feeling is nothing about imbalances of signal substances. My gut feeling is pure mind control of the kind that the Church hearings from the seventies talks about. Meaning to put a person through pure hell over a long time to get a separation of consciousness and then abusing this coping mechanism to get the person to do something she otherwise might not do. The religious bs she is clinging on to is her ordinary consciousness trying to make sense of what happened and justify her actions and inability to remember her actions.

This is my opinion when observing her past actions and the way she internally handles the said actions and the consequences thereof.

flame away

Flame away? Well Sir, I am too cultured for that.

and disagreement does not equate to flaming.

I think MK Ultra is possible, since I do not have the answer and no means to eliminate that as a possibility, it would be an act of ego to claim to know for sure. I am entitled to my own best guess like the next guy, but I know it is just guessing.

If she was mind controlled, what was the objective to put her up to a rant most people would write off as a mental breakdown? What was accomplished by it? Who stood to gain and how? Was she supposed to do something else and failed to?

She might not have ranted

She might not have ranted while at the podium but that it ended with the rant we hear from the audio at the elevators. In fact none here knows what she said at the podium and since no transcript or audio has been released from a situation where it should have been more than easy to get a hold of that audio (read my comment far below about audio engineering), people don't want you to know what she said. Infact someone is trying to fool you into thinking that the rant at the elevators was the rant at the podium. Someone took the time to superimpose the audio on top of the video, sync it with her hand movements and removed the "ding" from the elevators that clearly could be heard in the audio from the first days upon this happening.

So clearly someone is trying to make you think that it was a rant, or a pointless god/free mason rant. That makes this even more suspicious since the editing I can see in the videos posted about does take some time, effort and skill to do.

my 0.02$

I would guess that if any

I would guess that if any "god"-like entity chose to speak through her she would be a little bit more coherent and not rambling like a retard. Or maybe god is a little bit behind, riding the short bus.

Thanks for proving my point.

There is no way to know if it was God or mental illness, but absent any proof, you have all the answers.

No I have no answers only

No I have no answers only questions. But I do expect a lot more than this from a "god"-like entity, more than I expect from a man/woman. In my opinion the only thing this shows is the gullibility of religious individuals.

My toddler aged son has a lot

My toddler aged son has a lot of questions, and expects me to do things. He thinks he knows better than me and gets demanding, but his base of knowledge and experience is small. He has a very hard time accepting the idea that I can see the big picture that he cannot. He has a hard time having faith that I mean well for him. He just thinks I am depriving him when I don't let him run out into traffic.

Submission to God requires an ego check, an acceptance that we don't have all the answers, acknowledgement that we are already as good as dead in the flesh, and an understanding that what may seem cruel is a dad that has the whole picture that we do not have. Just like my son doesn't comprehend why not to run out in the street, we don't comprehend the complexities of the universe. We can be stubborn toddlers that try to fill in the blanks and be all knowing, but that doesn't make us all knowing.

Finally, when my son is beyond reasoning with and wants to harm others, he may get a swat on the ass for his own good. When life gives us those inevitable kicks, maybe it is time to start listening.