Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Official game day thread Kavanaugh edition
Comments
-
He is just repeating his talking points.RaceBannon said:
Great melt down as always2001400ex said:
Now the argument is. He was a nerd. A nerd would never hurt a fly.SFGbob said:
The guy is a nerd, who the hell kept a daily calendar when they were 17? Better yet, who keeps those calendars? Highly organized, intelligent, obsessive compulsives. I'm sure he wasn't what would have been considered cool in school but he was most definitely a good student who if he were 17 today would be really into computers.AZDuck said:Dude, this guy's demeanor is horrible. Did anyone even prep him to be a witness? He reminds me of a rookie CID agent that wanted to fight the defense attorney and almost single-handedly lost a rape case I prosecuted.
-
That first story is entirely accurate and does not support your assertion. The second story you link is much more slanted but still does not support your assertion.Sledog said:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/experts-doubt-claim-of-truthful-polygraph-result-from-kavanaugh-accuserAZDuck said:
who?Sledog said:
He only asked two. They were about the written story line prepared while the examiner was not in the room. It was heavily changed, scribbled and had parts inserted and redacted.AZDuck said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHASledog said:
Her polygraph test was a joke. Complete utter foolishness. Two questions and they were not specific. Polygraph tests require specific single subject questions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Be a better poasterAZDuck said:
you clearly know nothing about polygraphs
The SOP is to ask the examinee a bunch of questions that are obvious "yes" or "no" questions that are irrelevant to the topic.
Then the polygrapher asks a VERY LIMITED number of questions, usually no more than 2-4... and the polygraph will hit or not hit on "deceptive response."
Too many questions and the machine will start hitting or not hitting on every question.
"The interviewer asked Ford whether “any part” of her statement was false or whether she made up any detail included in her initial report."
Funny experts think this isn't a valid poly. But please enlighten me.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/report-ford-polygraph-expert-says-victims-like-ford-you-believe-them-dont-ask-specific-questions/
As I've said, all a poly does is tell you whether a subject is being "deceptive" or "evasive," which is pretty much what the first story says. Also, polygraphs aren't admissible in court, for the very good reason that they have to be interpreted and that interpretation is subjective.
Smart defense attorneys have ex-FBI, CID, or NCIS polygraphers on speed dial, because the investigative poly will almost invariably come along with the polygrapher, who also tends to be the best interrogator in the office (funny how that works).
Of course, while the poly isn't admissible, anything the accused says *is.* Which is the real reason for the season in terms of polygraphs.
-
How common is it for the person being given the polygraph to be asked only two questions?AZDuck said:
That first story is entirely accurate and does not support your assertion. The second story you link is much more slanted but still does not support your assertion.Sledog said:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/experts-doubt-claim-of-truthful-polygraph-result-from-kavanaugh-accuserAZDuck said:
who?Sledog said:
He only asked two. They were about the written story line prepared while the examiner was not in the room. It was heavily changed, scribbled and had parts inserted and redacted.AZDuck said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHASledog said:
Her polygraph test was a joke. Complete utter foolishness. Two questions and they were not specific. Polygraph tests require specific single subject questions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Be a better poasterAZDuck said:
you clearly know nothing about polygraphs
The SOP is to ask the examinee a bunch of questions that are obvious "yes" or "no" questions that are irrelevant to the topic.
Then the polygrapher asks a VERY LIMITED number of questions, usually no more than 2-4... and the polygraph will hit or not hit on "deceptive response."
Too many questions and the machine will start hitting or not hitting on every question.
"The interviewer asked Ford whether “any part” of her statement was false or whether she made up any detail included in her initial report."
Funny experts think this isn't a valid poly. But please enlighten me.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/report-ford-polygraph-expert-says-victims-like-ford-you-believe-them-dont-ask-specific-questions/
As I've said, all a poly does is tell you whether a subject is being "deceptive" or "evasive," which is pretty much what the first story says. Also, polygraphs aren't admissible in court, for the very good reason that they have to be interpreted and that interpretation is subjective.
Smart defense attorneys have ex-FBI, CID, or NCIS polygraphers on speed dial, because the investigative poly will almost invariably come along with the polygrapher, who also tends to be the best interrogator in the office (funny how that works).
Of course, while the poly isn't admissible, anything the accused says *is.* Which is the real reason for the season in terms of polygraphs. -
fuck off misogynist she was crying due to having to take a plane to take the poly testSFGbob said:
How common is it for the person being given the polygraph to be asked only two questions?AZDuck said:
That first story is entirely accurate and does not support your assertion. The second story you link is much more slanted but still does not support your assertion.Sledog said:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/experts-doubt-claim-of-truthful-polygraph-result-from-kavanaugh-accuserAZDuck said:
who?Sledog said:
He only asked two. They were about the written story line prepared while the examiner was not in the room. It was heavily changed, scribbled and had parts inserted and redacted.AZDuck said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHASledog said:
Her polygraph test was a joke. Complete utter foolishness. Two questions and they were not specific. Polygraph tests require specific single subject questions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Be a better poasterAZDuck said:
you clearly know nothing about polygraphs
The SOP is to ask the examinee a bunch of questions that are obvious "yes" or "no" questions that are irrelevant to the topic.
Then the polygrapher asks a VERY LIMITED number of questions, usually no more than 2-4... and the polygraph will hit or not hit on "deceptive response."
Too many questions and the machine will start hitting or not hitting on every question.
"The interviewer asked Ford whether “any part” of her statement was false or whether she made up any detail included in her initial report."
Funny experts think this isn't a valid poly. But please enlighten me.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/report-ford-polygraph-expert-says-victims-like-ford-you-believe-them-dont-ask-specific-questions/
As I've said, all a poly does is tell you whether a subject is being "deceptive" or "evasive," which is pretty much what the first story says. Also, polygraphs aren't admissible in court, for the very good reason that they have to be interpreted and that interpretation is subjective.
Smart defense attorneys have ex-FBI, CID, or NCIS polygraphers on speed dial, because the investigative poly will almost invariably come along with the polygrapher, who also tends to be the best interrogator in the office (funny how that works).
Of course, while the poly isn't admissible, anything the accused says *is.* Which is the real reason for the season in terms of polygraphs.
#believewomen -
Understandably, BK comes from a world that would be like Mars to a person of your background. To the contrary, being an athlete and a good student in the world of prep schools and money does not translate to your hackneyed stereotype. In his world, he was in all likelihood socially successful and mobile.SFGbob said:
The guy is a nerd, who the hell kept a daily calendar when they were 17? Better yet, who keeps those calendars? Highly organized, intelligent, obsessive compulsives. I'm sure he wasn't what would have been considered cool in school but he was most definitely a good student who if he were 17 today would be really into computers.AZDuck said:Dude, this guy's demeanor is horrible. Did anyone even prep him to be a witness? He reminds me of a rookie CID agent that wanted to fight the defense attorney and almost single-handedly lost a rape case I prosecuted.
-
The ironic, cut-off-their-nose-to-spite-their-faces fact is that Kavanaugh, with a passable wife and two daughters, would probably be more favorable to womens rights and issues than almost any other conservative judge Trump might choose.
-
Substantial questions? Very common. The polygrapher asks a lot of easy questions, both right and wrong, to calibrate the machine. Like, where were you born? And then they only ask a couple of substantial questions because the signal-to-noise in the poly goes way down after about 3-4 Qs. That's what I was told by my CID expert witnesses when this came up anyway.SFGbob said:
How common is it for the person being given the polygraph to be asked only two questions?AZDuck said:
That first story is entirely accurate and does not support your assertion. The second story you link is much more slanted but still does not support your assertion.Sledog said:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/experts-doubt-claim-of-truthful-polygraph-result-from-kavanaugh-accuserAZDuck said:
who?Sledog said:
He only asked two. They were about the written story line prepared while the examiner was not in the room. It was heavily changed, scribbled and had parts inserted and redacted.AZDuck said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHASledog said:
Her polygraph test was a joke. Complete utter foolishness. Two questions and they were not specific. Polygraph tests require specific single subject questions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Be a better poasterAZDuck said:
you clearly know nothing about polygraphs
The SOP is to ask the examinee a bunch of questions that are obvious "yes" or "no" questions that are irrelevant to the topic.
Then the polygrapher asks a VERY LIMITED number of questions, usually no more than 2-4... and the polygraph will hit or not hit on "deceptive response."
Too many questions and the machine will start hitting or not hitting on every question.
"The interviewer asked Ford whether “any part” of her statement was false or whether she made up any detail included in her initial report."
Funny experts think this isn't a valid poly. But please enlighten me.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/report-ford-polygraph-expert-says-victims-like-ford-you-believe-them-dont-ask-specific-questions/
As I've said, all a poly does is tell you whether a subject is being "deceptive" or "evasive," which is pretty much what the first story says. Also, polygraphs aren't admissible in court, for the very good reason that they have to be interpreted and that interpretation is subjective.
Smart defense attorneys have ex-FBI, CID, or NCIS polygraphers on speed dial, because the investigative poly will almost invariably come along with the polygrapher, who also tends to be the best interrogator in the office (funny how that works).
Of course, while the poly isn't admissible, anything the accused says *is.* Which is the real reason for the season in terms of polygraphs.
-
Ford believes Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. Kavanaugh believes he didn't. Only one has any corroborating evidence for their claims, and it isn't Ford.
-
You're the base. You've already made up your mind.Dude61 said:Ford believes Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. Kavanaugh believes he didn't. Only one has any corroborating evidence for their claims, and it isn't Ford.
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NPR_PBS-NewsHour_Marist-Poll_USA-NOS-and-Tables_1809251359.pdf#page=3
48 percent of white evangelical Protestants would support Kavanaugh even if the allegations were true. -
I don't care about polls, I am talking about evidence. Ford has no evidence to back her claim.
-
Oh shit, Leahy with the blow up of the yearbook. This is spectacular.
-
Simple minds think a polygraph is like how they do it on TV. That ends up with a conclusive yes or no.AZDuck said:
Substantial questions? Very common. The polygrapher asks a lot of easy questions, both right and wrong, to calibrate the machine. Like, where were you born? And then they only ask a couple of substantial questions because the signal-to-noise in the poly goes way down after about 3-4 Qs. That's what I was told by my CID expert witnesses when this came up anyway.SFGbob said:
How common is it for the person being given the polygraph to be asked only two questions?AZDuck said:
That first story is entirely accurate and does not support your assertion. The second story you link is much more slanted but still does not support your assertion.Sledog said:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/experts-doubt-claim-of-truthful-polygraph-result-from-kavanaugh-accuserAZDuck said:
who?Sledog said:
He only asked two. They were about the written story line prepared while the examiner was not in the room. It was heavily changed, scribbled and had parts inserted and redacted.AZDuck said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHASledog said:
Her polygraph test was a joke. Complete utter foolishness. Two questions and they were not specific. Polygraph tests require specific single subject questions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Be a better poasterAZDuck said:
you clearly know nothing about polygraphs
The SOP is to ask the examinee a bunch of questions that are obvious "yes" or "no" questions that are irrelevant to the topic.
Then the polygrapher asks a VERY LIMITED number of questions, usually no more than 2-4... and the polygraph will hit or not hit on "deceptive response."
Too many questions and the machine will start hitting or not hitting on every question.
"The interviewer asked Ford whether “any part” of her statement was false or whether she made up any detail included in her initial report."
Funny experts think this isn't a valid poly. But please enlighten me.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/09/report-ford-polygraph-expert-says-victims-like-ford-you-believe-them-dont-ask-specific-questions/
As I've said, all a poly does is tell you whether a subject is being "deceptive" or "evasive," which is pretty much what the first story says. Also, polygraphs aren't admissible in court, for the very good reason that they have to be interpreted and that interpretation is subjective.
Smart defense attorneys have ex-FBI, CID, or NCIS polygraphers on speed dial, because the investigative poly will almost invariably come along with the polygrapher, who also tends to be the best interrogator in the office (funny how that works).
Of course, while the poly isn't admissible, anything the accused says *is.* Which is the real reason for the season in terms of polygraphs. -
Looks like the AZ prosecutrix (the AZ does stand for Arizona) came up with 4 new names of witnesses that should be called.
-
Doesn't matter. Women will believe her.Dude61 said:Ford believes Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. Kavanaugh believes he didn't. Only one has any corroborating evidence for their claims, and it isn't Ford.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftQNuv_MsjY
The republicans should have callously dumped him and moved to plan B while working to clear him behind the scenes.
I don't think he's helping himself here because I'm someone who completely believes him and feels very bad for him yet I'm finding his display off-putting and pitiful. -
YKWAZDuck said:Looks like the AZ prosecutrix (the AZ does stand for Arizona) came up with 4 new names of witnesses that should be called.
-
Yes, evidence matters. All Ford's named witnesses denied the party happened, or even know Kavanaugh. Signed statements under penalty of felony. What does Ford have?SarkFanSixtyNine said:
Doesn't matter. Women will believe her.Dude61 said:Ford believes Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. Kavanaugh believes he didn't. Only one has any corroborating evidence for their claims, and it isn't Ford.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftQNuv_MsjY
The republicans should have callously dumped him and moved to plan B while working to clear him behind the scenes.
I don't think he's helping himself here because I'm someone who completely believes him and feels very bad for him yet I'm finding his display off-putting and pitiful. -
Lindsey Graham, he mad
-
-
I think it's time Lindsay got outedPurpleThrobber said: -
The left is getting shredded
-
Where did you get this talking point?Doogles said:The left is getting shredded
-
See?RaceBannon said:
Where did you get this talking point?Doogles said:The left is getting shredded
-
I deserve a flag for asking. But I have so many jokes about her being a expert on sexual abuse.. I'll restrain.AZDuck said: -
This is so bizarre. Running down his yearbook lmao
-
Dems are pressing worse than a Mooster football take. Embarrassing.
-
whys he dodging these fbi questions
-
You can see them deciding if they should rev the engines down or keep pressing. This is not going well.CuntWaffle said:Dems are pressing worse than a Mooster football take. Embarrassing.
-
Because nobody wishes an FBI investigation upon themselves and their friends and associates, which never produces positive outcomes.SarkFanSixtyNine said:whys he dodging these fbi questions
I think he's saying "vote me up or vote me down," but don't delay & drag this out until after the elections. -
Wood?AZDuck said:
