$15,000 lie detector software shows Cain is telling truth, accuser is not.

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

His primary opponent for State senate,
His primary opponent for US Senate
His Republican opponent for US Senate.


Senator Ryan had sealed record from his divorce published, one of his primary opponents was accused of being a wife beater. the details on the third have escaped me, but there is a guy on the board who has the list as his siggy line.

I'll take your word for it.

Those were his opponents, though. Cain isn't his opponent. Cain's opponents are the GOP contenders.

And making a black guy look like an over-sexed drooler is something the GOP has track record of doing.

Like when? (to take a page from your book )

 

[Ravi]

What does Natalie Holloway have to do with this story?

The PI in the OP was the lead investigator in her case, according to his website.

I think Baruch wants to know how you think that relates to this software.

I never said it did. Some idiot was claiming this guy is the world's best PI or some such boloney, so I asked if he's so good, where is Natalee Holloway.

Try to read for comprehension.

 

[Douger]

Squirrel ?

 

[MikeK]

I wonder about the validity of a test given to a sound byte.

Anyhoo..

My gut feeling is that there is some element of truth to, at the very least, the original two cases given that they received a monetary settlement and had to abide by the stipulation of silence about the situation. If there were nothing to them, originally, then why pay out and require silence? I'm willing to believe that the latter accusers have less than honorable motives but..

the thing that convinced me was Cain's attempt to explain away the original accusation with the whole "She's as tall as my wife (puts hands horizontal to chin)" line. I'm willing to bet that no one is going to pay out because of a statement like that.

what WOULD cause a payout with a silence clause is if he held his hand up, bobbing, in a horizontal position as if implying that she could suck his dick. THAT is my guess as to what really happened. He's quick to react and less than savvy when it comes to retorts. Not that it matters, really. This situation is nothing less than misdirection so that we're not talking about the Mormon's history of liberal policies.

At last -- a common sense assessment of the obvious! I was beginning to lose hope.

$35k settlements are not paid out unless there is substantial evidence to support a complaint. If this were not true there would be lines around the block to file false complaints in every civil courthouse in the U.S.

A single $35k settlement should be sufficient to convince the reasoning mind that the complaint against Cain is valid. But there are two such settlements (which Cain had the audacity to say he couldn't remember), yet there are those who cling to the idea that he's telling the truth.

 

[Foxfyre]

Having working in the insurance industry in some capacity for most of the last two and a half decades, and having lived and worked through the militant women's liberation phenomena of the 70's and 80's, I can say with absolute confidence and first hand knowledge that NUMEROUS settlements are made despite there not being a shred of evidence of the accusations made in all sorts of cases including sexual misconduct. Why? Because the organizations or businesses don't want the negative publicity that invariably ensues and don't want the distraction and expense of a lawsuit. And in the sexual harrassment cases, some of the reported 'offenses' were so minor and unintentional or inconsequential as to make a person's head spin, but the women got money just the same. $35k is a pittance compared to what is paid in some of these cases.

Unscrupulous lawyers, including Gloria Allred, know this all too well. And they are easily bought or are most eager to accept very VERY lucrative fees for high profile lawsuits and legal actions no matter how dubious. And I am pretty confident they will accept a lucrative fee to smear a popular political candidate.

 

[Ravi]

I wonder about the validity of a test given to a sound byte.

Anyhoo..

My gut feeling is that there is some element of truth to, at the very least, the original two cases given that they received a monetary settlement and had to abide by the stipulation of silence about the situation. If there were nothing to them, originally, then why pay out and require silence? I'm willing to believe that the latter accusers have less than honorable motives but..

the thing that convinced me was Cain's attempt to explain away the original accusation with the whole "She's as tall as my wife (puts hands horizontal to chin)" line. I'm willing to bet that no one is going to pay out because of a statement like that.

what WOULD cause a payout with a silence clause is if he held his hand up, bobbing, in a horizontal position as if implying that she could suck his dick. THAT is my guess as to what really happened. He's quick to react and less than savvy when it comes to retorts. Not that it matters, really. This situation is nothing less than misdirection so that we're not talking about the Mormon's history of liberal policies.

At last -- a common sense assessment of the obvious! I was beginning to lose hope.

$35k settlements are not paid out unless there is substantial evidence to support a complaint. If this were not true there would be lines around the block to file false complaints in every civil courthouse in the U.S.

A single $35k settlement should be sufficient to convince the reasoning mind that the complaint against Cain is valid. But there are two such settlements (which Cain had the audacity to say he couldn't remember), yet there are those who cling to the idea that he's telling the truth.

Exactly.

If there was no merit, there would be no settlement. If there was a basis for the charges it would be in the best interest of the NRA to offer a settlement.

If Cain was an honest man he would be demanding that the details of the claims should be released. But he's not demanding that. Which leads you to only one conclusion.....he's guilty.

 

[edthecynic]

I wonder about the validity of a test given to a sound byte.

Anyhoo..

My gut feeling is that there is some element of truth to, at the very least, the original two cases given that they received a monetary settlement and had to abide by the stipulation of silence about the situation. If there were nothing to them, originally, then why pay out and require silence? I'm willing to believe that the latter accusers have less than honorable motives but..

the thing that convinced me was Cain's attempt to explain away the original accusation with the whole "She's as tall as my wife (puts hands horizontal to chin)" line. I'm willing to bet that no one is going to pay out because of a statement like that.

what WOULD cause a payout with a silence clause is if he held his hand up, bobbing, in a horizontal position as if implying that she could suck his dick. THAT is my guess as to what really happened. He's quick to react and less than savvy when it comes to retorts. Not that it matters, really. This situation is nothing less than misdirection so that we're not talking about the Mormon's history of liberal policies.

At last -- a common sense assessment of the obvious! I was beginning to lose hope.

$35k settlements are not paid out unless there is substantial evidence to support a complaint. If this were not true there would be lines around the block to file false complaints in every civil courthouse in the U.S.

A single $35k settlement should be sufficient to convince the reasoning mind that the complaint against Cain is valid. But there are two such settlements (which Cain had the audacity to say he couldn't remember), yet there are those who cling to the idea that he's telling the truth.

Which is exactly why anyone who isn't brainwashed knows AQUILA Cain is lying his fat ass off!!!

When the lying Groper blamed Perry for the leak, AQUILA Cain pointed out that he went over the charges, he says he can't remember that he suddenly remembers, with Anderson before his 2004 Senate campaign!!!!!!!

Cain Says Perry Camp Behind Sex Harassment Leak - Forbes

In the summer of 2003, Cain recalls briefing Anderson—his general campaign consultant at the time—that sexual harassment claims were brought against him while he was chairman of the National Restaurant Association from 1996 to 1999.
“I told my wife about this in 1999 and I’ve got nothing to hide,” Cain told me Wednesday. “When I sat down with my general campaign consultant Curt Anderson in a private room in our campaign offices in 2003 we discussed opposition research on me. It was a typical campaign conversation. I told him that there was only one case, one set of charges, one woman while I was at the National Restaurant Association. Those charges were baseless, but I thought he needed to know about them. I don’t recall anyone else being in the room when I told him.”

 

[edthecynic]

Having working in the insurance industry in some capacity for most of the last two and a half decades, and having lived and worked through the militant women's liberation phenomena of the 70's and 80's, I can say with absolute confidence and first hand knowledge that NUMEROUS settlements are made despite there not being a shred of evidence of the accusations made in all sorts of cases including sexual misconduct. Why? Because the organizations or businesses don't want the negative publicity that invariably ensues and don't want the distraction and expense of a lawsuit. And in the sexual harrassment cases, some of the reported 'offenses' were so minor and unintentional or inconsequential as to make a person's head spin, but the women got money just the same. $35k is a pittance compared to what is paid in some of these cases.

Unscrupulous lawyers, including Gloria Allred, know this all too well. And they are easily bought or are most eager to accept very VERY lucrative fees for high profile lawsuits and legal actions no matter how dubious. And I am pretty confident they will accept a lucrative fee to smear a popular political candidate.

Your whole post is complete BULLSHIT!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I suspect that the truth lies somewhere in between what the women are saying and what Cain is saying.

well according to these "experts" this machine is more accurate than a polygraph and it shows that it is simply a paid off woman lying to bring down a candidate. what else could it mean?

That Cain is a pretty-damned-creative, when it comes to....

...generating CAMPAIGN-BUCK$?????

​

 

[Foxfyre]

Doesn't it ring a bell with any of you that when Clinton was undergoing his bimbo eruption, the media and leftists attacked the WOMEN? They were in it for the money it was said. They had no proof it was said. They were being paid to do it, it was said. Until he himself had to admit it was true, there was nothing but denial, denial, denial from the leftist media and his supporters.

So what makes the difference now? We have faceless women and vague accusations, one woman with a very dubious track record and one of the most famous and expensive high profile lawsuit filing attorneys in modern history--how is she affording that do you think?--accusing a man with an exemplary track record and impeccable reputation up until now? But all of you leftists and even some on the right are proclaiming him guilty. Where is the element of doubt now?

The difference is that he is registered Republican and he is a conservative. And most especially he is a conservative black man who MUST be destroyed lest others get a notion to stray off the reservation too. Is that it?

But no, no innocent until proven guilty mentality here. That's only reserved for the guys on the other side.

 

[Ravi]

Doesn't it ring a bell with any of you that when Clinton was undergoing his bimbo eruption, the media and leftists attacked the WOMEN? They were in it for the money it was said. They had no proof it was said. They were being paid to do it, it was said. Until he himself had to admit it was true, there was nothing but denial, denial, denial from the leftist media and his supporters.

So what makes the difference now? We have faceless women and vague accusations, one woman with a very dubious track record and one of the most famous and expensive high profile lawsuit filing attorneys in modern history--how is she affording that do you think?--accusing a man with an exemplary track record and impeccable reputation up until now? But all of you leftists and even some on the right are proclaiming him guilty. Where is the element of doubt now?

The difference is that he is registered Republican and he is a conservative. And most especially he is a conservative black man who MUST be destroyed lest others get a notion to stray off the reservation too. Is that it?

But no, no innocent until proven guilty mentality here. That's only reserved for the guys on the other side.

We have the evidence of two settlements being paid to shut the woman in question up.

Bimbo eruption? Is that what you think of women that are harassed? Even women you believe, in Clinton's case?

Sad.

 

[KissMy]

If that thing works it should be installed in all podiums used by politicians.

The best way to tell if a politician is lying is to see if their lips are moving.

 

[Foxfyre]

Doesn't it ring a bell with any of you that when Clinton was undergoing his bimbo eruption, the media and leftists attacked the WOMEN? They were in it for the money it was said. They had no proof it was said. They were being paid to do it, it was said. Until he himself had to admit it was true, there was nothing but denial, denial, denial from the leftist media and his supporters.

So what makes the difference now? We have faceless women and vague accusations, one woman with a very dubious track record and one of the most famous and expensive high profile lawsuit filing attorneys in modern history--how is she affording that do you think?--accusing a man with an exemplary track record and impeccable reputation up until now? But all of you leftists and even some on the right are proclaiming him guilty. Where is the element of doubt now?

The difference is that he is registered Republican and he is a conservative. And most especially he is a conservative black man who MUST be destroyed lest others get a notion to stray off the reservation too. Is that it?

But no, no innocent until proven guilty mentality here. That's only reserved for the guys on the other side.

We have the evidence of two settlements being paid to shut the woman in question up.

Bimbo eruption? Is that what you think of women that are harassed? Even women you believe, in Clinton's case?

Sad.

Given the dozens of accusations in Clinton's case that were never publicized, I have no doubt that many of those were unscrupulous women trying to get in on the gravy train and whatever payout might come from it. I don't think such unscrupulous women go after only Republicans.

But my comments were not directed at the women but at the dishonest double standard applied when you compare the left's reaction to the initial accusations against Clinton and how they are now treating accusations against Cain. The media was absolutely merciless in trying to dig up dirt on and discredit the women accusing Clinton. Democratic spokespersons were merciless in denigating those women. And now the media and Democratic spokespersons are equally merciless in trying to dig up dirt on and discredit Cain and are trying their damndest to make his one public accuser look credible.

What we do know abut the woman is that she has been in a lot of financial difficulty, has filed bankruptcy twice, and isn't wealthy. Where is that accuser getting the money to pay a high profile lawyer like Gloria Allred? Why would somebody like Gloria Allred even be involved in this case that is unlikely to result in any money being paid by the accused person? Doesn't that even remotely register with anybody on the Left as being a valid question?

Why isn't the media asking it?

 

[bodecea]

i dont put much in youtube experts

You're an idiot.

Oh, this is Precious. SB is an idiot because she doesn't put much in "youtube experts"

 

[KissMy]

Oh, yeah....that's credible.

Cain is such a buffoon.

Ravi is a dog molester. Five people have said so. It must be true.

I can't speak about Ravi's dog molestation after she paid me to sign a confidentiality agreement.

 

[Foxfyre]

i dont put much in youtube experts

You're an idiot.

Oh, this is Precious. SB is an idiot because she doesn't put much in "youtube experts"

I have also posted accounts from CBS and ABC on the reported technology, so it isn't just a 'you tube' expert.

I am also fairly confident that if the 'expert' had said that the test showed Herman Cain was lying, you Cain-must-be-guilty-because-somebody-got-paid people would be trumpeting this marvelous new EVIDENCE to the skies.

I am equally convinced that if the woman takes a lie detector test--and I think there's a snowball's chance in hell of that happening--and fails while Herman Cain takes a lie detector test and passes, you will be also crying foul or manipulation or lie detectors aren't reliable.

Seems like honor and integrity and fairness in how we treat people just doesn't factor in where politics and ideology are involved. And that's a tragedy for all of us.

 

[RadiomanATL]

The video shows that the woman was speaking truthfully when she said that Cain pulled her head to his crotch.

If the software is to be believed....

 

[Ravi]

The video shows that the woman was speaking truthfully when she said that Cain pulled her head to his crotch.

If the software is to be believed....

hahaha

You are absolutely right.

Does this mean the PI was lying about who was lying?

 

[pete]

I suspect that the truth lies somewhere in between what the women are saying and what Cain is saying.

But why did they keep their mouths shut (if they did) up to this point if its so important to them? This is where the administrations effort is truly going. Why would the last one be up on him again .. wouldnt a woman despise and keep her distance?

 

[RadiomanATL]

The video shows that the woman was speaking truthfully when she said that Cain pulled her head to his crotch.

If the software is to be believed....

hahaha

You are absolutely right.

Does this mean the PI was lying about who was lying?

I think the whole thing was a stunt for the local television station. For reasons I described in post 115, I seriously doubt the ability of the software in this instance.

I believe that the software can work, just not in this case.