Posted on 09/29/2018 5:37:49 PM PDT by PrayAndVoteConservesInLibsOut
What’s a turtle?
2 questions but it took so much longer than she thought it would
Such a fraud
Does the FIB even do lie detector tests?
Good point about calling this an alleged attack.
The liberal left are sly about using words.
That is why they never refer to a Pro-lifer as a pro-lifer. They will always say anti-abortion.
We should call them anti-lifers.
Or Pro-Baby killers
Back to the polygraph:
I hope a polygraph is given to Dr. Ford from an impartial polygrapher.
If you click the correct link, you will also see her letter. Things don’t match what she said on the day of the polygraph and the day of the testimony. So then how could she have passed that polygraph?
on their agents and on applicants for employment in the fbi and they can always ask someone to submit..
As someone who has undergone 3 polygraphs because of my security clearance, I call this a pathetic joke.
You are correct that the article was written on September 26.
But I posted this on 9-29-18
That is what the post date is referring to. Hope that clears that up.
Oh, I see what you are referring to.
Yes,thank you for another correction: the article should say 9-26-18.
I made that error because when I first posted this I was going to write my own post without linking anything. But then I did not know if the Free Republic lets a person do that, so I looked for an article that had the polygraph. And I found this one.
But I had already filled out the date previously for my little paragraph.
Originally, I had found this polygraph info on Ben Shapiro’s FaceBook page. I am not on FaceBook myself. But one doesn’t have to be to just read his page.
But I could not link to his FackBook Page because that would have Brough up multiple comments instead of the polygraph only.
On that Ben Shapiro FaceBook page, there is also an interesting story about Dr. Ford’s school that she went to. References are made in her yearbook about wild parties and drinking and promiscuity. Go To Ben Shapiro’s Facebook page and look for this blog, Bombshell: Christine Blasey Ford’s Hidden High School Social Life”
Here’s the FOX interview with the polygraph dude who explains why only two questions.
I just read a bunch of articles about polygraph testing procedure. This guy justifies asking only two questions because “she is the victim, not a suspect.” He says that is normal SOP for victims. That smells like pure horsesh!t to me. There were no “control” questions to establish her baseline physiological responses to known truths and known lies.
Amazing how he said all that with a straight face, huh. Total horse, pig and rat poo.
Oh, I see now how Ford could have gotten out the locked bedroom....because it is only locked from the inside.
Also at the testimony Ford said the polygraph took a long time. Didn’t she say that there were a lot of questions? I would have to go back and watch the testimony. But that is what I remember. She made it seem like a stressful process. And then also, didn’t she give two different dates of when that polygraph happened? And then she wasn’t sure. There is a date given for when that polygraph happened, that is if they are being truthful about that.
Does anyone else besides me find it odd that the attorney took a photo of Ford hooked up. Have any of you ever seen a photo of someone hooked up to a polygraph as if to prove she really did that? To me, that makes it seem like they are really stretching it to prove she is not lying which seems odd and fishy to me.
There is another article detailing how Sen. Grassley wanted the entire polygraph report.
http://www.cfcpac.org/content/2018/09/26/grassley-seeks-more-details-from-kavanaugh-accusers-polygraph/
Grassley seeks more details from Kavanaugh accuser’s polygraph
September 26, 2018
But I feel the need to translate it:
This next article is a unclear so I will give my take on it: I think in a round about and hidden kind of way it is saying that Republicans requested the polygraph “earlier” than the Wednesday that they received it. After all it was given a long while before this in August so there was enough time to do this. But the deceptive lawyers waited until the day before the hearing to hand over the weak, un-detailed report. Then, since the Republicans were given such a weak eport they requested every part of the report. But by then, the attorneys objected saying they only had an hour to put that together. I say, they make enough money, get busy and get the entire report to the Republicans. Oh wait, not only is it because they don’t have time, but if they give all of the report then it surely won’t prove Ms. Ford’s innocence or deception. Can’t have that…So that is why the attorneys only want to give a summary of two questions that are so vague that those two statements could be referring to anything.
You are absolutely correct.
The guy’s explanation is bunk. There have to be baseline questions of known truthful responses and lies the subject says while the machine is on and measuring physiological reactions for the polygrapher to later compare. It is the comparison between the subject’s physiological response to known thruthful responses and lies of yes/no questions to the physiological response of questions the polygrapher does not know whether the subject is lying or not which are judged.
I say judge because the machine will only record your physiological response to answering the questions. It is up to the polyghrapher to judge whether the subject told the truth or not; and sometimes they can not tell with certainty.
With all that said, I submit to you Aldrich Ames and Ana Montes as two spies who successfully passed periodic examinations from their respective agency’s in the midst of their espionage careers.
Some lawyer out there can correct me if i am wrong, yet I am certain polygraph examinations are not admissible in court yet too many people place too much stock in these. One more thing, there are likely outfits out there that will administer a “passing test” for the right fee.
Regards.
Wow! You and others on this thread have given important information about how a polygraph works.
What you said needs to be brought out.
My Note:
Why did Christine Blasey Ford. say this polygraph took “Much longer than I anticipated. I told my whole life story, I felt like. I endured it. It was fine.” Later she said, “I didn’t expect it to be as long as it was going to be, so it was a little bit stressful.”
According to Ford it took a long time.
My Question: If it took so long why were only two questions (that we do not what was said before or after) used to say she was not deceptive....
Where is the full report?
Also, in the last article I referenced (”Grassley seeks more details from Kavanaugh accuser’s polygraph”) added this “Broadly speaking, the accuracy of polygraph examinations is a disputed matter. The American Psychological Association has said there is little evidence the tests can effectively separate true from false accounts, and they are not admissible in criminal trials in some states.”
Unfortunately, many congress critters know and understand all I explained above.
The use of the polygraph by accusers and defendants alike is a stunt by the representing legal teams to sway public opinion not governmental or legal proceedings. In this case the media and the leftist activist groups can trumpet the accusers truthfulness based on a dubious lie detector test without the need to provide any actual evidence to support their claim.
Other info here:
https://science.howstuffworks.com/question123.htm
https://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph.aspx
Regards.
How much would you like to bet that the polygrapher never asked this question: Are you Christine Blasey Ford?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.