In this post we will demonstrate how the lies detailed in The Lies II are in fact lies, were lies from the very beginning and have been repeated, republished without a second thought for 17 plus years (which had they listened to Larry in 2008 when he had no problem making it clear regardless of the reports Ed Gelb wrote and provided Dan Parisi of Whitehouse dot com in Feb 2008 claiming:
He Gelb had conducted two separate polygraph exams on Larry Sinclair related to his public claims that Barack Obama had smoked crack cocaine in Larry’s presence while Larry snorted cocaine; and one on the claims Barack Obama and Larry had engaged in two separate sexual encounters with each other in November 1999
Gelb detailed specific questions asked in each exam as well as noting a scoring of the response to said questions.
Gelb issued separate report for each of the polygraph exams series of questions and on each report concluded the results of both polygraph exams indicated Larry was deceptive in his answers
Gelb claimed in his reports that Gordon Barland a Salt Lake City UT examiner (whom Gelb had requested he conduct “blind studies” on two polygraph exams he intended to conduct) had conducted blind studies on each of the two polygraph exams of Larry Sinclair concluding Gelb’s finding correct. Problem with that claim especially if people had simply bothered to read Barland’s reports, was/is that Barland NOT ONLY DID NOT CONDUCT blind studies (a blind study is when an examiner reviews the polygraph charts without having any knowledge of who the subject of the exam is, has no knowledge of the circumstances or events which brought about the performing of the polygraph exam or any other information about the subject being examined or the reasons why) Barlands reports clearly make any claim of his conducting a blind study immediately proven to be a lie in itself. Barland clearly referred to Larry by name, as well as acknowledged the circumstances and allegations made by Larry which were the subject of the Polygraph exams to begin with.
Gelbs report listed specific numerical values in his scoring method which, taken on their own would not raise any concerns or suspicions to the average person.
Gordon Barlands reports also were issued individually as to each individual polygraph exam and series of questions.
Barland notes in one of his reports the poor quality of the Polyscores charts for one of the exams and having requested Gelb provided him with better quality charts to examination. Gelb failed to provide Barland with the requested charts in a better quality condition. Barland further notes that while Gelb had supplied a poor quality polyscores charts for one exam, he did not provide Barland with any polyscores charts for the other exam originally or upon request for them.
Barland as Gelb detailed his reports to address specific series of questions, assigned a numeric score value to them and while showing some differences as to the numeric score values between he & Gelb Barland had followed Gelb’s conclusion of deception indicated.
However Barland decided to test and examine the polyscores charts he had the best he could under the quality lacking in them. Polyscores are scoring of a subjects response which are not subject to any personal biases that a human examiner might have toward the subject, but instead are based on the unbiased reactions recorded to the responses. When Barland tested the polyscores chart he found the polyscores found Larry truthful with only a 0.01% chance of being deceptive. Despite this finding as shown in Barlands report, Barland issued an explanation that it is unusual for the polyscores and the human scoring results to differ so widely as they did here, but that it does happen yet not that often. He went on to claim that in a situation where the polyscores differ from the human scores it is the establish protocol that the findings of the human scorer be those which are given precedent. Barland went on to write that this practice is documented in a Polygraph Examiners guide of some sort which is applied across the profession but that turned out not to be the case. NOW it needs to be made clear Larry having had the opportunity to speak with Gordon Barland on multiple occasions including in 2011 after the video recording of his polygraph exams recorded by Gelb without anyone’s knowledge were obtained. To Larry Gordon Barland was chosen by Ed Gelb when Gelb and Dan Parisi had agreed on Gelb conducting the polygraphs on Larry because Gelb felt comfortable manipulating and strong arming Barland to concur with whatever findings Gelb determined.
Lets go back to the Polyscores for a moment. Interestingly in Gelbs reports he made no mention of the polyscores results in either of his reports on Larry. That was immediately seen as very unusual by people familiar with Gelb and the polygraph field because Gelb has been one of the most outspoken proponents of polyscores findings. So much so that Gelb has a number of polygraph exams he performed where he dedicated a great deal of space to singing the praises of the polyscores and the benefit of cutting out human score bias which might not be clearly evident even though it exists.
Now fast forward to August 8, 2011 US District Court for the District of Columbia Parisi vs Sinclair et al a $35 million defamation libel suit brought by Dan Parisi and Whitehouse dot com against Larry, Jeff Rense, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Borders Books, Books a Million, Ingram Books Distributors etc. Filed in may 2010 just one year after Larry’s book Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder? was released and some 9 months after Larry began receiving repeated threats that the book was going to be taken out of circulation and never available before he knew it. The gist of Parisi’s claim were centered on two small parts. The first was a section where Larry wrote about two phone calls he received from two Maine phone numbers at his home after returning home from having the polygraph exams done. The caller was a male and clearly stated he had no intention of identifying himself, but that he felt it necessary to call Larry and inform him that the caller had direct knowledge the Polygraph exams arranged by Dan Parisi with Ed Gelb were a set up and had been arranged through Parisi and Obama campaign manager David Axelrod. The caller specifically informed Larry that Parisi was paid $750,000.00 to arrange the polygraph with Gelb who was known to guarantee the results the client was seeking at the right price.
Larry having been meeting a Chicago Tribune reporter who once worked with Axelrod mentioned the calls to the reporter. Larry provided the reporter both phone numbers the calls came from and agreed to the reporter calling to see if the caller would speak to the reporter. The reporter confirmed via email that he did in fact make contact with the man who had called Larry, and that the man had told the reporter the same information he had shared with Larry. After that Larry emailed Dan Parisi and directly asked him to either confirm, deny or otherwise explain best he could the statements which had be made to larry via two phone calls from an unknown male saying Parisi had arranged the polygraph exams as an agreement with Axelrod. Parisi did not respond at all but instead immediately posted on Whitehouse dot com that the site was removing all content pertaining to Larry, would not be publishing any further material relating to him and was doing so after Parisi had become the victim of massive harassment and threats against him by supporters of Larry in addition to Larry accusing him and Whitehouse of setting him up working with Axelrod.
The other claim Parisi made was that Larry was administered two separate polygraph exams by a respect examiner with an impeccable reputation, that Larry was given a say in the examiner who administered the exams, as well as having the right to have individuals he chose present to witness the exams. What Parisi failed to mention to the court was how Parisi went behind Larry’s back when he found out Larry was trying to get Jack Trimarco to conduct the exams and made sure jack would when contacted by Larry inform him he was not available to do the exams which is exactly what happened. Parisi forgot to mention to the court how he and his employee Robert Braddock harassed and threatened Larry into accepting their choice or how they not only assured larry directly as well as publicly posting that Larry could have any one he chose media or friend present as a witness of the exams and as soon as Chicago Tribune Reporter John Crewson advised them he would be present they told him he could not at the office during the exams. Parisi took issue that in the book Larry again restated the exact same thing he publicly stated when Gelb and Parisi published claiming Larry had been found to be deceptive in the polygraph exams, which was Paris, Whitehouse dot com and Ed Gelb have deliberately published false claims as the results of Larry’s polygraph knowing that contrary to the claim by gelb Larry was deceptive, Gelb knew that to be untrue as did Parisi.
Parisi argued the alleged phone calls claimed by Larry never took place despite a respected journalist having confirmed they did, Parisi claimed that the findings of Ed gelb were factual and truthful while repeatedly refusing to release the videos from not one, not two but three different camera angles which Robert Braddock recorded both exams from beginning to end with. Cameras which recorded the computer screen and the responses displayed as they registered, cameras which recorded Ed Gelb repeatedly inflating the blood pressure cuff so tight on Larry’s arm trying to trigger a physical response by cutting off circulation that it is clearly visible on the Gelb video where the color in Larrys hand & arm continued to alter between white and red.
What the Gelb video did show was clear Larry had been 100% correct from the beginning. First the video shows Gelb with Robert Braddock acknowledging the polyscores on the exams found Larry to be truthful, but Gelb can be clearly heard saying he was not going to bother with that scoring; given that the video shows Gelb acknowledge the polyscores he did not provide to Gordon Barland also found Larry truthful alone make Gelb’s hand human scoring of the exams irrelevant. Then as if the polyscores weren’t enough, Gelb launches into a vivid, vulgar explicit undeniably clear rant showing his deep seethed biases toward Larry going so far as to call Larry all kinds of liars, pieces of shit, scumbags, and more. That display alone would under the very procedures, protocols and standards established by the very Polygraph Examiners professional association and standards Gelb proudly boast of being a past president of, voids any human scored polygraph findings by Gelb as to Larry.
In addition after the gelb recorded video was provided in August 2011 Larry contacted Gordon Barland asking if he had a few minutes to talk, Barland said he did and before Larry began Barland informed Larry he had wanted to reach out for sometime but wasn’t sure if it was ok to do so, He explained that he had been thinking of Larry all those years because he realized Larry knew something was not right with the polygraph performed in 2008 by Gelb. Larry then informed Barland he had obtained a video recording of the complete polygraph exams recently and wanted to ask him a couple of questions. The first was on the polyscores score and the explanation Barland had used in his report. Barland stopped Larry and began to explain, the explanation in Barlands report clearly was seen for what it was, bull shit. Barland explained that after he contacted Gelb asking for the polyscores charts from the other exam Gelb became aggressive demanding to know why. Barland had explained to Gelb he believed the polyscores of the exam which Gelb had not provided charts for might as did the scores for the exam he did have charts for, find Larry truthful. Barland said he expressed to Gelb that he wanted to be able to be certain one way or the other because if polyscores on both exams had the same finding there was no way he could agree with Gelb’s human score saying Larry was being deceptive. Barland then told Larry Gelb claimed he no longer had any of the charts from either of the exams on Larry because they had been turned over to Dan Parisi as part of the agreement to perform the polygraphs. barland had no hesitation in expressing his opinion Gelb lied through his teeth to him saying Gelb is notorious for never parting ways with his work product to anyone.
Larry then interrupted Barland and asked if he knew why Gelb had reported barland had conducted a blind study of the exams findings when it was obvious from Barlands reports he did not conduct a blind study especially given his reports referred to Larry by name, his background as well as the allegations which were the subject of the polygraphs. Barland told Larry that Gelb had originally contacted him asking him to conduct a blind study of the polygraph exams. Barland advised Gelb he had no desire to conduct any blind studies and that the only way he would participate in the examination of charts was him having all the available information about the subject, the purpose of the exams, the circumstances or allegations and the personal history and background of the subject of the exam. Barland told Larry the one thing that he had continued to find hilarious about the 2008 polygraphs is how to that date, and honestly even this this date, everyone so concerned with having something they could push as proof Larry was lying that not one journalist, or anyone that he ever heard of even noticed the outright lies by Gelb in his report claiming Barland conducted a blind study.
Larry then informed Barland as to the nasty vulgar attacking rant Gelb went into on the video with Braddock calling Larry every scumbag, SOB, Piece of shit, lying etc etc… to which Barland immediately responded had he been aware of that in 2008 he would never have issued the reports he did. Larry asked what he meant by that. Barland explained that the report explaining away why the polyscores were ignored and the human scores of Gelb given precedent was not because he wrote it. He explained that Gelb had real issues over Barlands position that if he was going to dismiss the polyscores which have zero chance of human bias in them he was of the position he would issue a report taking the position that given the lack of having polyscores chart for one exam with the polyscores chart of the other resulting in Larry being found truthful with such an extremely low probability of his being deceptive, he would determine the results to be inconclusive on both exams rather than find Larry to deceptive on both as Gelb was determined to get. So The explanation on the polyscores conflicting with the human scores was Gelb’s doing not Barlands. Barland further explained to Larry that was one of the reasons he had wanted to reach out to him for so long. He said he just found himself constantly thinking about Larry hoping he had survived the onslaught.
After larry had obtained the Gelb recorded video of the polygraph exams he contacted the director of Anti-Polygraph.org. Larry had spoken with George a couple of times and to be clear, George was an Obama supporter in 2008, he was never asked by Larry for any thing other than a professional unbiased opinion on things dealing with the polygraph situation. Larry contacted George to inform him that Parisi had filed video recordings of Larry’s polygraph exams from 2008 recorded by Gelb. Larry wanted to know if George and his team would be willing and interested in reviewing the video recordings from an outside unbiased perspective and if they determined the videos provided any information worthy of reporting, would they be willing to write a detailed report and analysis of what they found in the performance of the two polygraph exams. George agreed providing Larry ship the original disc he obtained through the court filing to his office which Larry agreed to and did do.
In Anti-polygraph’s review and analysis of the polygraph exams it was discovered that Gelb and an employee within Gelb’s office are on video reviewing scores to one of the exams, After the two confer back and forth they both come to agreement on the scores numeric values to certain questions in the series clearly stating what those score values are and Gelb is seen writing them down. At the same time Anti-polygraph compares the 2008 written reports of Gelb to the video recording of the exams. It was through this comparison anti-polygraph discovered the written reports released by Gelb and published by Parisi and Whitehouse were written with different scores attributed to the series questions which were not only different from the scores determined and agreed upon on the video, but were reported on the written report at a more damaging score than what Gelb and his co-worker are clearly seen on video determining to be the score. It wasn’t enough for Gelb to deliberately produce a written report where he knowingly lied to the entire country if not the world swearing Larry had been shown to be deceptive in the polygraph results when he knew the very scoring method he prefers to use found Larry Truthful, but he had to make the written report appear to be even worse than the biased score he had already determined to be correct with a co-worker in agreement.
The Video Tells it All
This LINK to video clip from the Polygraph exam videos is to highlight the dishonesty of Gelb, Whitehouse Dan Parisi & Robert Braddock everyone chose to ignore. Funny how the people who call you a liar, lie and pay a liar to say you lied, while on video themselves admitting their intent to lie, along with a guy supposedly a respectable professional expert in determining the truth lying about polygraph results not yet known as he discusses with a democratic campaign consultant acting as a camera man for a defunct internet porn site, the plan they have to lie about polygraph results until they published the false results online the following Monday. Who is supposed to be the liar here?
It was decided to post the Polygraph exam videos which Anti-Polygraph uploaded to their YouTube because they also included analysis and along with links to detailed written analysis & findings from the videos compared to the 2008 written reports of Ed Gelb.