If everyone has such faith in a polygraph then why not have the FBI perform one on Ford, Kav, and Judge, then see who is being deceptive. LOL, I know the righties here and trump would never agree to it since truth is not their goal.
More people, including me, felt she was credible. But I guess if one is invested otherwise, you see it differently.This is both hilarious and ridiculous. An idiot could tell Ford was/is off her rocker.
Man...this is gonna be one of the most embarrassing and costly weeks for the Dumbocrats ever.
I have a request...if I may?
Once Kavanaugh is confirmed and on the bench, would you fine Libbies go out at night and howl at the moon again for us please?
That was so entertaining...
41 percent of Americans said that they "definitely" or "probably" believe the testimony of Ford, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her at a house gathering when the two were in high school in the early 1980s.
A slightly lower percentage of respondents, 35 percent, said that they "definitely" or "probably" believe Kavanaugh's
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...iews-on-kavanaugh-ford-after-dramatic-hearing
because it isn't a criminal investigation. that is why.
and no polygraphs are not accurate which is why they are not admissible in court.
we know liberals are not there for the truth.
the slum dogs simply can't accept the truth.
1 being her story is so inconsistent and full of holes it can't be taken seriously.
Let me turn the table on your contention...
These were Kavenaugh's words?(from the linked article)Let me turn the table on your contention...
[h=1]Brett Kavanaugh: Polygraphs Are Important In Making Hiring Decisions[/h]
As the Government notes, law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses and criminal defendants. Those agencies also use polygraphs to “screen applicants for security clearances so that they may be deemed suitable for work in critical law enforcement, defense, and intelligence collection roles.” Declaration of Alesia Y. Williams, Defense Intelligence Agency, Chief of FOIA Services Section, at Joint Appendix 226. In Morley v. CIA, we stated: “Background investigations conducted to assess an applicant’s qualification, such as … clearance and investigatory processes, inherently relate to law enforcement.
because it isn't a criminal investigation. that is why.
and no polygraphs are not accurate which is why they are not admissible in court.
we know liberals are not there for the truth.
the slum dogs simply can't accept the truth.
1 being her story is so inconsistent and full of holes it can't be taken seriously.
More people, including me, felt she was credible. But I guess if one is invested otherwise, you see it differently.
So funny.how can you call it credible when her story changes every other day and she can't remember anything?
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/politics/rachel-mitchells-analysis/3221/
you know what an actual expert has to say.
of course you find her credible. you don't want him on the bench so any accusation that would keep him off of it you find credible.
just like the slum dog liberals in congress do.
.
More people, including me, felt she was credible. But I guess if one is invested otherwise, you see it differently.
how can you call it credible when her story changes every other day and she can't remember anything?
...
Nice Excuse, predictable.
I am not the one pointing to polygraph results, that would be one of your boys.
So let's give them all the test, are you afraid it might work out badly for Kav and his boyfriend?
Really? Because I watched a composed, calm individual who was able to discuss neoreceptors. Then I watched a guy who was supposed to be a federal judge, who was a raving lunatic -- blaming the Clintons and saying "what goes around, comes around" -- supposedly as a veiled threat should he be on the high-court, to anyone who opposed his nomination.Ya know...quite honestly...having actually seen the testimony...I think allot of people who claim that Ford said anything even remotely credible, are doing so to avoid the wrath of the #MeToo crowd. The woman is disturbed...and it shows.
Minor extraneous details might have been different but not the main important issues.
While on the topic, Kav's was clearly lying. He specifically lied about "Devil's Triangle" because it was about sex. He specifically lied about "ralphing" because it was about inebriation. He is accused of drunken sexual assault. So, anything that linked Kav to sex or alcohol had to be Orwelled away.
More on the lying: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying
we are talking about her polygraph but as usual i expect this excuse and level of dishonesty.
the FBI background that is done on SCOTUS nominee's is more intensive than a polygraph and is checked and double
checked again and again.
she was given a polygraph by a katz associate in conditions that were not conductive to giving a test when she was already
would be in an emotion state after the death of her grandmother.
there is no reliable way to tell what the polygraph would produce.
so therefore he polygraph is invalid and down right fraudulent.
Really? Because I watched a composed, calm individual who was able to discuss neoreceptors. Then I watched a guy who was supposed to be a federal judge, who was a raving lunatic -- blaming the Clintons and saying "what goes around, comes around" -- supposedly as a veiled threat should he be on the high-court, to anyone who opposed his nomination.
Yeah, because you say so but are unable to add argument to make a persuadable case.And I feel sorry for you. It must be difficult to see anything clearly, with TDS in the way.
The woman's a loon...plain and simple.
Yeah, because you say so but are unable to add argument to make a persuadable case.
Fox News Host: Ford Testimony 'Credible,' a 'Disaster for Republicans'
Leland Ingham Keyser."However, the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate it because she has no recollection of the incident in question."
Doesn't mean much at all, one way or another. Most polygraphs use a minimum of eight questions, including parameter setup, sample questions to create a reaction range by which to judge the comparative reactions to the salient questions. This purported polygraph utilized 2 questions per the release from her attorneys.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?