She gave her statement to her lawyer while the polygraph tester had left the room. Then when he came back, this is what it says, "Following this interview, Blasey was given a polygraph examination consisting of the following relevant questions:
A. Is any part of your statement false? Answer: No B. Did you make up any part of your statement? Answer: No
Okay, here is my take: How do we know WHEN question A was asked. For example, could this have happened (since we don't have the full report:
What is your name? She makes a statement of her name.
Then Question B. Did you make up any part of your statement? Answer: No
Also Ford's letter is attached and in this letter she says the bedroom was locked. But when she testified, she said she ran out of the room. How could she have run out of the room if it were locked?
What a FREAKING JOKE!!
Only someone as stupid as Susan Collins, as biased as Murkowski, as bitter as Flake
or as Partisan as the Democrats could possibly believe this lying harlot!!!
This is not how to ask questions. They are questioning her statement and as we all know changes were made to her statement at various points. The questions should be “Were you attacked by Kavanaugh in 1982?” “Has Kavanaugh ever assaulted you”. The statement is her facts, not literal facts.
1. Is your name Chrissy ? yeth
2. Do you own a cat ? Wotz a kat ?
Link doesn’t seem to be working right
Click on the link you provided and see what you get....
They should have asked, do you hate POTUS Trump.
It’s not simply a matter of the simplicity of the 2 questions but also if she were given the questions in advance to allow her to acclimate her mind and body to being asked those questions. A polygraph measures the body’s response to being asked a question that the subject is not prepared to answer.
This whole thing stinks.
It’s not simply a matter of the simplicity of the 2 questions but also if she were given the questions in advance to allow her to acclimate her mind and body to being asked those questions. A polygraph measures the body’s response to being asked a question that the subject is not prepared to answer.
This whole thing stinks.
Your article says September 26.
How do we know they were referring to the statement about the alleged attack?
They could have been referring to a grocery list.
By the way, has any MSM outlet ever referred to to attack on Ford as “ALLEGED ATTACK “?
They just refer to it as “THE” sexual attack.
“A. Is any part of your statement false? Answer: No B. Did you make up any part of your statement? Answer: No”
That’s true. She didn’t. The attorney made up the statement.
If the FBI does not administer another polygraph to Christine Blasey Ford, then the FBI investigation is as invalid as what was done with Hillary Clinton’s investigation, rendering it worthless.
She was emotionally unresponsive having just attended a funeral.
“What? Oh.”
What statement is being referenced in A?
Without the text of ‘the statement’ being referenced, the response is erroneous.
As someone who has undergone 3 polygraphs because of my security clearance, I call this a pathetic joke.
Here’s the FOX interview with the polygraph dude who explains why only two questions.
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.