Posted on 02/24/2008 3:56:19 PM PST by hotdog777
The man who recently made allegations that Senator Barack Obama met him back in 1999 for sex n drugs in the back of limo has failed not one, but two polygraphs.
The site, Whitehouse.com, had offered Sinclair the sum of $10,000 to take a polygraph plus another check for $100,000 if he passed. To prove they were not bi-partisan the site also offered the woman at the center of the McCain lobbyist mini-scandal, Vicki Iseman, the same offer.
Whitehouse.com used the services of highly respected polygraph expert, Dr. Ed Gelb. Sinclair passed a drug test before taking the tests, both administered on Friday. On the first test, questions were administered about Sinclair’s claims that he and Obama had sex. The second test focused on Sinclair’s claims that he and Obama did drugs. Dr.Gelb found “deception was indicated” in both tests. Absent any other developments this is the end of the road for Larry Sinclair.
[video]
As DBKP reported in its story yesterday, the supermarket tabloid, The Globe, had found additional information on Sinclair’s background. According the Globe, the 46-year-old ex-con Sinclair had spent time in prison for credit card fraud, had admitted being a dope smuggler and a “coyote”, a person who smuggles people into the country, for a price. What were the possible motives for Larry Sinclair?
Read rest of the story:
Larry Sinclair: Obama Accuser Fails Polygraphs
Hey ten thousand bucks is ten thousand bucks...
Gee, I am shocked.
So what was this guy’s motive? Who makes such accusations against himself, let alone Obama?
We'd be best to steer away from this creep. Aside from the fact that his story is failing to pan out, this kind of "bad news" wouldn't sink Obama at all. As I've said before, the Democrats did not care in 1992 that Bill Clinton was fooling around. They won't care if Obama had done it either.
Yes, the money was the motive for the polygraph I suppose. But what was the motive to make the accusation in the first place? Who was behind it, or did this genius come up with this all by himself?
A polygraph is totally inaccurate. Larry could be telling a lie and the polygraph says he is telling the truth, or Larry could be telling the truth and and the polygraph says he is telling a lie.
They are worthless. What has to happen next is an investigation and questions addressed to Senator Obama.
The seriousness of the allegations trumps the questionability of Mr. Sinclair. It is only proper that Mr. Sinclair, the accuser, get as much attention to his complaint as those that have accused President Bush of have over the last several years.
Again, this polygraph neither PROVES nor DISPROVES anything as the left has been reminding us for a week now, just in case he passed it.......
I agree.
I would like to know his motive for making this accusation, however.
Somehow, it doesn’t fit w/ who he is.
Polygraphs don’t work.
On the other hand, I figured he was a liar all along.
You sound like a Democrat. Specifically, Tom Foley.
This is brilliant—Obama 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 Obama’s past.
I agree.
And thus proving the wisdom of FR in not letting to many of these stories run here.
It looked and smelled like a tar baby from the beginning.
So a candidate has to address every nutball accusation with not a shred of evidence behind it?
Not fake but accurate? I wonder how much the Clinton campaign paid this guy.
If Obama is out doing this sort of thing there will be others. Sinclair failed his own test. I would still like to know why he did this. Was he just looking for attention? Was he part of a scheme to bring down Obama? What?
A polygraph is totally inaccurate. Larry could be telling a lie and the polygraph says he is telling the truth, or Larry could be telling the truth and and the polygraph says he is telling a lie.
They are worthless. What has to happen next is an investigation and questions addressed to Senator Obama.
The seriousness of the allegations trumps the questionability of Mr. Sinclair. It is only proper that Mr. Sinclair, the accuser, get as much attention to his complaint as those that have accused President Bush of have over the last several years.
Again, this polygraph neither PROVES nor DISPROVES anything as the left has been reminding us for a week now, just in case he passed it.......
I agree. Polygraphs are absolute junk
Any sociopath can beat them.
However, I think Sinclair’s background probably makes his Obama story a fraud...espeicllay if he was a convicted con man
I’m pretty sure Hillary was gonna try it herself. Just couldn’t find anybody - male or female - will to say they’d had sex with her.
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.