Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Echo Talon
A lie detector can find out if they put their staff up to it, if so they are guilty also.

Not to be a skunk at the party, but lie detector results are not admissable in court, which means there is reasonable doubt as to their efficacy.

This is high stakes poker, if, indeed, Babin's story has any validity. The administration has to have Rockefeller dead to rights to fire this silver bullet. Otherwise, an unverifiable accusation against a sitting Senator of the opposite party could swing the momentum that is now in Bush's favor on NSA surveillance completely against him.

Besides, if the Judith Miller precedent holds, Rockefeller knows--if, indeed, he is the leaker--that he is completely at the mercy of James Rosen and Rosen's desire to spend time in the hoosegow in defense of him.

31 posted on 02/03/2006 8:59:32 PM PST by sinkspur (Trust, but vilify.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: sinkspur

Ok, skunk,...lol... the point is to make him refuse to take the polygraph. Let him dance and deny.


40 posted on 02/03/2006 9:04:02 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur

unless he used a cell phone to talk to Rosen, or some other telephone or email mechanism that is traceable.


42 posted on 02/03/2006 9:05:56 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur

Yeh.

Sandy Bergler was caught with classified documents stuffed in his pants and socks, and he admitted destroying some others, and all he got was a slap on the wrist, a small fine, and the loss of his security clearance for 3 years (if I remember right).


43 posted on 02/03/2006 9:06:08 PM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur

You're correct..Babbin said that polugraph results are not admissible, but he reiterated that under the code of secrecy, or whatever it is they sign..FAILURE to submit to a request for a polygraph is immediate grounds for loss of security clearance and access..


53 posted on 02/03/2006 9:10:09 PM PST by ken5050 (Ann Coulter needs to have children ASAP to pass on her gene pool....any volunteers?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Not to be a skunk at the party, but lie detector results are not admissable in court, which means there is reasonable doubt as to their efficacy.

But if you pass a lie detector pass, you have less a chance of being prosecuted, unless they have other much more damning evidence.

Which is why we will see the DNC offering classes for their members on "How to properly take a lie detector test...And Pass!"

For the swimmer there will be a Cliff Notes version.

118 posted on 02/03/2006 9:52:52 PM PST by Auntie Dem (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Terrorist lovers gotta go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur

As I understand, having a security clearance means that you have to submit to a polygraph at any time. If he refuses to take the polygraph, no big deal, it just means that he can't be ranking member on the committee. Look for him to step down from that role in the committee.


132 posted on 02/03/2006 10:50:55 PM PST by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson