Skip to comments.
Larry Sinclair: Obama Accuser Fails Polygraphs
bloggernews ^
Posted on 02/24/2008 3:56:19 PM PST by hotdog777
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-95 next last
To: mbraynard
So a candidate has to address every nutball accusation with not a shred of evidence behind it? Unfortunately yes, assuming you realize your question was too exaggerated. The penalty for false accusations should be stiff. But the importance of knowing the truth cannot be overstated when you are talking about the person who will be the President of the United States for 4 years at least. That's a lot of power to hand someone without thoroughly investigating serious allegations.
21
posted on
02/24/2008 4:10:52 PM PST
by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
To: Nachum
It’s not the nature of the evidence, it’s the seriousness of the charge....got it?
22
posted on
02/24/2008 4:11:43 PM PST
by
Las Vegas Ron
("I fear we have woken a sleeping giant and filled her with a terrible resolve" - Osama 9-11-01?)
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
What was he doing it for? Gee whiz, maybe because that's what he did. Just because a burned out doper homosexual fails a lie detector test, that doesn't mean he told a lie.
Over on the other end of Obama's speechwriter, campaign advisor Axelrod we find Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts. He's Obama's good buddy you know, and sometimes he delivers Axelrod's speeches first, and sometimes second, but whatever, he and Obama deliver the same speeches.
Anyway Deval's got a top level staffer who was picked up at the end of December for homosexual rape on a 15 year old boy.
Sex at both ends ~ could be?
23
posted on
02/24/2008 4:12:22 PM PST
by
muawiyah
To: hotdog777
...the sum of $10,000 to take a polygraph plus another check for $100,000 if he passedI wish someone would offer Huma the same deal
24
posted on
02/24/2008 4:12:53 PM PST
by
Popman
(Gold Standard: Trying to squeeze a 50 lb economy back into a 5 lb bag)
To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
"So what was this guys motive?" He was hired by Osama to make the false claims, be branded a liar. This non truth will be offered as proof Osama is not a doper.
All subsequent efforts to expose Osama's character will reference this polygraph as if Hussein has passed it.
Yet, Hussein Osama is an admitted doper.
yitbos
25
posted on
02/24/2008 4:13:21 PM PST
by
bruinbirdman
("Those who control language control minds. - Ayn Rand")
To: Las Vegas Ron
26
posted on
02/24/2008 4:13:23 PM PST
by
Las Vegas Ron
("I fear we have woken a sleeping giant and filled her with a terrible resolve" - Osama 9-11-01?)
To: HD1200
Yes, the seriousness of the allegation calls for the greatest level of scrutiny.
This should include DNA tests of Senator Obama's underwear.
27
posted on
02/24/2008 4:14:09 PM PST
by
muawiyah
To: hotdog777
Obama is a damned socialist. That’s scandalous enough for me.
28
posted on
02/24/2008 4:14:16 PM PST
by
Mr Ramsbotham
(Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
To: cripplecreek
It is news that it happened, whether true or false.
29
posted on
02/24/2008 4:15:37 PM PST
by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
To: bruinbirdman
He was hired by Osama to make the false claims, be branded a liar. This non truth will be offered as proof Osama is not a doper. All subsequent efforts to expose Osama's character will reference this polygraph as if Hussein has passed it. Yet, Hussein Osama is an admitted doper. yitbos Could be, except I would think Obama's media darlings would have been more willing to report the story if that were the case. That theory assumes Obama wanted the story to get play time.
30
posted on
02/24/2008 4:19:44 PM PST
by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
To: HD1200
The seriousness of the allegations trumps the questionability of Mr. Sinclair. You must be tom dasshole's long lost brother. That is stooping lower than the demorats.
31
posted on
02/24/2008 4:23:18 PM PST
by
org.whodat
(What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
To: Forward the Light Brigade
This is brilliantObama has this creep make a rediculious claim and be found to be a lier. Now any with simular claims will not be believed! Even Slick Willie never did this. Give Obama points for brains. I bet there is a trunk full of dark things in Obamas past.I honestly always thought that this was a clinton hit job, but one poorly done.
Obama has dirt, Hillary has slung plenty of it at him, but he's been teflon to her.
32
posted on
02/24/2008 4:25:38 PM PST
by
Sonny M
("oderint dum metuant")
To: hotdog777
I was skeptical of Sinclair from the onset. However, before the MSM and liberals will ever go after Obama only if there is a videotape of him having sex and them proving his DNA all over the clothes and sheets.
33
posted on
02/24/2008 4:26:04 PM PST
by
vetvetdoug
(Just when one thinks life is strange, it gets stranger.)
To: hotdog777
To: Brilliant
Polygraphs most certainly do work.
They are a stable of investigations and are considered by those who do this for a living as very reliable.
Whenever people don’t like the outcome of a polygraph they just, boom, state as if all the knowledge in the world were in their considerable brains....”Polygraphs don’t work.”
They’re not admissible in court and perhaps they shouldn’t be.
But they work quite reliably most of the time.
I base my assertion on the fact that the way vast majority of law enforcement organizations in this country use polygraphs as does the FBI.
On what basis is your assertion that....boom...they don’t work?
35
posted on
02/24/2008 4:28:34 PM PST
by
Fishtalk
(If you liked the above post, remember I've got a Blog you might like to visit.)
To: hotdog777
More wasted Clinton campaign cash.
36
posted on
02/24/2008 4:28:50 PM PST
by
billhilly
(I was republican when republican wasn't cool. (With an apology to Barbara Mandrell.))
To: bruinbirdman
He was hired by Osama to make the false claims, be branded a liar. This non truth will be offered as proof Osama is not a doper.I heard more about this guy from Clinton supporters then anywhere else.
Obama basically ignored this guy, I always thought he was a clinton plant, but no one really cared.
If he had been paid by the Obama campaign, they would have acknowledged him by both claiming he is lying and working for a rival campaign, and then they would have been trumping this lie detector as de facto evidence that the guy is a liar.
Instead they acted like didn't exist.
37
posted on
02/24/2008 4:30:31 PM PST
by
Sonny M
("oderint dum metuant")
To: hotdog777
No surprise. This was moonbat stuff from the go.
38
posted on
02/24/2008 4:35:50 PM PST
by
newzjunkey
(Why McCain in Nov? Clintons hated and dismantled the military; Obama is even worse!)
To: Sonny M
Instead they acted like didn't exist.
That seems like it was the wisest thing to do. Obama obviously knew it didn't happen and making unnecessary noise about it would be like dumping gasoline on hot cols that would burn themselves out otherwise.
39
posted on
02/24/2008 4:36:26 PM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Voting CONSERVATIVE in memory of 5 children killed by illegals 2/17/08 and 2/19/ 08)
To: hotdog777
Some Freeper posers are disappointed.
40
posted on
02/24/2008 4:39:14 PM PST
by
ex-snook
("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-95 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson