The original date of this post was January 4, 2012. This is a re-post.
The following is an excerpt from an article for The Today Show online called Why people lie — and how to tell if they are by Gail Saltz. It’s simply a heads-up before reading the piece that I wrote below.
A much more troubling group is those who lie a lot — and knowingly — for personal gain. These people may have a diagnosis called antisocial personality disorder, also known as a sociopath, and often get into scrapes with the law. Lying often gets worse with the passage of time. When you get away with a lie it often impels you to continue your deceptions. Also, liars often find themselves perpetrating more untruths to cover themselves.
I’m still waiting for the New Hampshire Herald’s second installment of Larry Sinclair’s interview. You see, I am certain that in 2012 there will most certainly be some sort of add-on or left out part of the story. So I held my breath, read the entire first installment and I must say, there were some minor changes to his story but the following, particularly caught my attention.
Larry speaks to the New Hampshire Herald…
Larry: The oral sex started, and then stopped for a minute, long enough for me to actually retrieve a
lighter from the cup holder behind me for him to light the pipe. And then I returned performing the oral
sex on him after he had started kidding the crack pipe saying it actually made him harder during sex. I
didn’t believe that. But you know some people have different fantasies. I would say the oral sex from
beginning to end probably was 10-15 minutes at the most.
Now everyone knew that Barack Obama was a smoker at the time and more than likely carried his own lighter with him. And surely a “crack-head” would have also kept a lighter with him at all times. But that’s just nit-picking. Here is the real discrepancy. Sinclair was administered a polygraph test by two different polygraph experts.
For obvious reasons, Sinclair and his minions have successfully overshadowed the results of the polygraph tests by not mentioning them at all. They repeat the “story” over and over again and of course, true to Goebbels’ word, more and more people started believing the story.
According to Gelb and Borland, Sinclair failed the polygraph tests. Gelb said his polygraphs indicated deception on the issue of oral sex. Borland qualified by saying that no test is “perfectly conducted” but that as far as he could see, he was in agreement with Gelb
Gelb’s Report on oral sex question (1st series):
“The issue under consideration dealt with Sinclair’s representation that he had performed oral sex on Barack Obama in 1999. During an extensive pre-test interview, Sinclair emphatically asserted the sex act took place in a limousine rented by him in the Chicago area…Two target questions: Did you perform oral sex on Obama in 1999? Are you lying when you say you performed oral sex on Obama in 1999? The…polygrams were hand-scored as required by the Government in a PCA examination. To render a conclusion of deception there must be a… -3 in any spot or…a grand total of -4 for both spots. Sinclair’s polygrams resulted in an evaluation of “deception indication” with a score of -15 (for the oral sex questions).”
Barland’s final analysis:
Barland: QC review of Larry Sinclair polygraph
Although no examination is perfectly conducted I believe that the irregularities in
this examination would be more likely to create an inconclusive result than.”an erroneous
However, these charts are not inconclusive. Based-upon my review of this
examination, I concur in Mr. Gelb’s finding that Mr. Sinclair was n0t telling the complete
truth in his claims to have engaged in oral sex with Senator Obama and that Senator Obama used cocaine in his presence .
However, in the interest of fairness, in addition to the epic fail of the polygraph tests, Sinclair has been morphing his story about the reason he contacted the Obama camp in the first place.
Original story line:
01/23/08: Rense Interview
‘I first decided to approach Obama’s camp in September…I had sent the Obama campaign several emails to their campaign website addressing the issue…I was ignored’.
02/08/08: The Right Perspective Interview with Larry Sinclair -
‘Actually, it’s funny. Everybody keeps saying, “now”. I’ve been trying to get this out since last fall and, umm, You Tube was pretty much a last resort…I mean, it should’ve come out back last fall when I first reported it, umm, to NBC [corrects self] MSNBC…I didn’t really want to come out on You Tube like that because I didn’t think it was the right way to do it. And I tried every possible way, ah, to come out with it.…I was actually, you know, inspired by Barack Obama as well until I saw a young person last fall, and saw Obama make a statement to this person that you know, hey, “I’ve admitted to what I’ve done in the past, but I didn’t…I haven’t done it since my teens”.’
Compare and Contrast:
12/11: New Hampshire Herald
Herald: Between 1999 and 2004 it was five years. You met Obama only very briefly. So five years after
you could still recognize his face?
Larry: Let me explain something to you. My grandmother is 96 years old. She will tell you when I visit her
I can tell her things that happened in her house when I was a kid, when my grandfather was still alive all
the way down to the type of clothes that either one of us was wearing at the time. My memory is excellent.
Herald: So you are sitting there in Mexico and Obama is addressing the convention?
Larry: I see him at the convention on TV. And again, I am in Mexico. It doesn’t bother me at all. I don’t
care. I’m just looking at another politician, winding his mouth, and I’m thinking ok, he’s definitely in the
right line of business! And again, it didn’t make any difference to me. I’m not from Chicago. I’m not
represented by the guy. It doesn’t bother me. What bothers me was in 2007, I happened to be watching
TV. I saw some female young people talking about how excited they were about Barack Obama. Saying
that he was this new kind of politician who was very transparent. That everybody knew everything about
him. And I’m like you don’t know everything about him. And they kept talking about the fact that he has
been so open and honest about his drug use and I’m like no, he hasn’t. Because his official stand was
that he hasn’t used drugs since high school. Then a couple of months later, it changed to well, when I
was in college I used this and now every now and then a little coke when we could afford it. Then the
campaign changed again to yeah, he hasn’t used drugs since high school. So when I saw that, it just
kind of appealed to me the wrong way. And that’s when I contacted his campaign and told them he
needs to come clean about the extent of his drug use.