May 23, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Hello, zach jones
Please see following link for info regarding Larry’s polygraph. I have literally been posting this link for months now. And yet I still keep reading that Larry failed twice. Balderdash!
On Page 2:
“I also evaluated the second series using the computer algorithm PolyScore (v. 6.0). It evaluated the charts as No Deception Indicated, and calculated the probabilityof deception as being less than .01 on a scale from .00 to 1.00.”
“So the PolyScore algorithm (that Ed Gelb so hailed in his polygraph report for Wendy Ellis) found Sinclair truthful with a less than 1% probability of deception! But in this case, Gelb and Barland (who cannot have been unaware of the firestorm of controversy that would have resulted had they found Sinclair non-deceptive with regard to this question) somehow reached a completely opposite conclusion!”
One commenter wrote that Larry had been sandbagged. Indeed, he was.
You may also find this of interest:
Trinity people aren't speaking up either because they don't want to be the one to stop the first black president or they are scared to talk.
June 30th, 04:15 PM
I told you exactly what I have been told by people in the gay community here who have said there are definite open secrets about BHO. I've never remarked on the Sinclair stuff for one solid reason: it does not make sense with what the gay community in Chicago tells me. Not saying it couldn't be true, but that's not BHOs' M.O. here.
Being on the down-low means you only fool around with other married guys on the down-low, and there are enough successful, wealthy down-low members of Trinity, who are married, and thus have as much to lose if they rat out the other guy who is on the downlow. Some are athletes, some are other high profile men in the community, and some are not even members of the church, but elected officials themselves, in other states (that start with "M", like in Michelle) or other cities (that start with "B", like in beard).
The people I have spoken to who know Trinity well, and know open secrets well, say people aren't speaking up either because they don't want to be the one to stop the first black president or they are scared to talk....HOWEVER, they said they are positive that, after he would become President, that the open secret will no longer be a secret, and that the carefully-arranged down-low secret pacts will collapse, because the media will have an incentive to create the most sensational sex scandal to ever hit the White House: the first bisexual president.
In short --- and let's see if this clears things up --- there are people who know open-secrets who are staying quiet because outing a presidential candidate is not something they want to do, but outing a president, and exposing him as a bisexual, would be something they'd see as important, because it's a step towards having an openly gay president.
Think James McGreevey....yes, his administration collapsed when he came out, and he came out only because his affair was being telegraphed, but McGreevey still served, briefly, as an openly gay US governor. That's a step towards having other openly gay governors in the future -- ones not tainted with scandal, preferably. Outing Obama as a candidate will keep him from being elected....outing him if he becomes President means the US will have its first outed bisexual/gay president.
There is no putting that genie back in its bottle.
I don't agree with any of this Adrienne....I am just telling you what I hear on a regular basis here in Chicago.