« Michelle Obama Fires Up GOP Base | Main | Mainstream Media's Coverage of Larry Sinclair - Barack Obama Story »

If Larry Sinclair Passes the Polygraph It Doesn't Prove Anything

Final Update: It turns out that Larry Sinclair has a rap sheet filled with prosecutions for deceit.

Public records and court filings reveal that he has a 27-year criminal record, with a specialty in crimes involving deceit. The record includes forgery charges in two states, one of which drew Sinclair a 16-year jail sentence. The Pueblo County, Colo., Sheriff's Office also has an outstanding warrant for Sinclair's arrest for forging an acquaintance's signature and stealing her tax refunds.

Sinclair's rap sheet is a mile long, and he is currently wanted in Colorado. And judging from the hit logs at this website, there are Republican operatives out there who are still pushing this story as "real".

Makes you wonder who's bankrolling Sinclair's continued efforts and legal fights...

As the series of posts I've written demonstrates, I've thoroughly investigated Larry Sinclair's claims. I have found no basis of fact in any of them.

-Lee Ward
Wizbang Blue
email: [email protected]

Updated Sunday February 24, 2008 @ 3:45pm ET: Whitehouse.com is reporting that the test results indicated deception on the part of Sinclair. A second expert is reviewing the test results as well, but that report has not yet been released.

Dr. Ed Gelb, Former President of the American Polygraph Association was the Polygraph expert selected by Whitehouse.com. He has done over 30,000 polygraph examinations over his long career. There were two polygraph tests administered by Dr. Gelb on Friday. the first polygraph asked Mr. Sinclair on his sex claims. The second polygraph test asked Mr. Sinclair on the drug use claims. There was deception indicated in both tests.

As mentioned yesterday Mr. Sinclair did pass his drug screen so there were no drugs in his system which could have interfered with the test. We have asked Mr. Sinclair on several occasions to put us in contact with the Limousine driver that he named for other news organizations earlier and for us on Friday that was supposed to corroborate his story. As of today he has still not put us in contact with the limousine driver whom he told us he stays in constant contact with.

Sinclair_polygraph.jpgLarry Sinclair, who's made some pretty wild claims about a 1999 encounter with then Illinois State Senator Barack Obama that included gay sex and cocaine use, accepted a $10,000 challenge to take a polygraph test to prove or disprove his claims. If he passes the polygraph test he'll receive $100,000. Details of the offer and conditions appear below.

But first, here's a scenario that should be considered. Consider the possibility that Larry Sinclair did have gay sex and use cocaine just as he's claimed, and all of the facts line up exactly as Sinclair has described, and he passes the polygraph test.

Has that proven Barack Obama was involved? Not in my view.

Suppose the man the limo driver introduced to Sinclair was actually a black male prostitute who called himself Barack Oabama. Would Larry Sinclair know the difference? Since Sinclair was not from Illinois, but was there visiting, I highly suspect that Sinclair had not ever seen Obama, and wouldn't know what Obama looked like.

And in this scenario it's quite possible that Sinclair believes it was the real Obama, and I suppose if he believes it firmly enough he can pass the polygraph test.

So I don't think anything will have been proven by the polygraph even if Sinclair passes it.

Let's take it a step further. Say Sinclair passes the polygraph, and we now put the limo driver on the polygraph machine and ask him if the person he introduced to Sinclair was really State Senator Barack Obama.

Once again, it's conceivable that the limo driver could pass the polygraph test if he believed it was Obama, but that doesn't prove it really was Obama, does it?

I don't see how it is possible to prove Barack Obama was really there without Obama himself taking a lie detector test, and I strongly suspect that Obama will never even acknowledge Sinclair's existence, much less agree to take a polygraph. I say that not to suggest Obama is guilty - I don't think he is - but for Obama to even participate in this farce in any way would only serve to raise speculation further, and give this story legs in the mainstream media.

So, in my view it's possible the polygraph will prove Sinclair is lying, but even if he passes the test it won't prove that Sinclair really had gay sex and used cocaine with Obama.

We'll know more after February 26 - and here's a look at the polygraph offer, and the conditions under which Sinclair has agreed to take the test.

The offer from whitehouse.com:


Larry Sinclair

xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx
Dear Mr. Sinclair:

We have seen your video that you have made in regards to your relationship with Mr. Barack Obama. We are offering you $10,000 to just show up within the next 10 days and take a multi-question polygraph test administered by a professional at our offices which will be videotaped and broadcasted. We will also have to be the first and only entity that you will be taking a polygraph test with on this matter in the past or over the next four weeks. We will get and pay for your air fare and two nights at a hotel while you are here at our offices and you will be paid the $10,000 at the end of the test. If you successfully pass the polygraph test and it shows that you are telling the truth and you indeed did drugs with Senator Obama and had sex with Senator Obama we will pay you and additional $90,000. Please respond to me by email at [email protected] by February 21, 2008 to accept the offer or it will expire.

Very Truly Yours

Dan Parisi

and while they are withholding many details about the test itself and timetable involved, whitehouse.com did release the following information:

We're going to meet him on Tuesday, February 26th at an undisclosed location in New York City. We've picked a polygraph expert, too: a renowned expert who has been involved in quite a few high-profile cases who we're not going to name until the results are not only in, but have been verified by a second renowned expert.

Then, we'll post the results, the names of both polygraph experts, and other relevant information, along with video and pictures, here on Whitehouse.com. Since the outcome of the test will be vital interest to the voting public, our findings will be made available before the presidential primaries in Texas and Ohio slated for March 4.

Ugh. Possible train wreck ahead. Check back for updates.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 2.8/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 2.8/5 (9 votes cast)

Comments (15)

Smarter Than You:

Your blog is incorrect in every respect. A properly administered polygraph, by a world-renowned expert trained in countermeasures (and whitehouse . com has retained two), has the same likelihood of producing a false negative as you finding a Black Swan in your front yard.

The limo driver is alleged to have been a personal friend of Obama. What do you think the chances are that Obama's tryst with crack and cock was a one-off event?

Get some new talking points.


If polygraphs are worthless. Why does the FBI CIA and many law enforcement agencies use them.

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

First off, everybody's smarter than me, so nothing new there, but I'm not running for president

This guy is smarter than me too - I just got this via email, and he's seems to be 180 degrees off of your opinion, STY.

I agree: passing (or failing) a polygraph proves nothing. Polygraphs have no scientific basis and are easily fooled with simple countermeasures. For related commentary, see:


My opinion is that Sinclair can really believe he met Barack Obama even if he didn't, so him passing a polygraph test with the statement that "yes, I met Barack Obama and had sex and coke with him" doesn't prove it happened - it only proves Sinclair believes it happened.

mikem[TypeKey Profile Page]:

Lee makes very solid points about the reliability of such an identification. And once your testimony starts with something like "I was snorting up some lines and distinctly remember...' well, you've lost any intelligent investigator right there.

On top of that, lie detectors are crap. That's why they use them to make suspects nervous but don't allow such nonsense in the courts. People react or don't react differently to the process of lying. Phrenology (head bumps) has greater claim to scientific process.
To claim otherwise is, ahem, "greatly misleading".

Smarter Than You:


World-renowned experts, trained in detecting countermeasures, which include deceptive practices and delusional people, can spot countermeasures a mile away. Look at the Maschke (countermeasure anti-polygraph) v. Burgess (countermeausre pro-polygraph) turned out. Burgess owned Maschke.


Parisi is an idiot. Not that a 10K investment is bad for whatever he's peddling, but he's BEGGING for a public haggling slapdown from a mentally deficient crackhead.

STY, Polygraphs are unreliable. I passed one with flying colors while lying my ass off.

The secret is to act Most Perturbed during the interview and to remain in that mindset during testing by thinking only about how much your getting fucked over.

During the interview, pre-test, when the importance of relaxation is conveyed, just say, "I'm mercurial".

I knew biometric Consistency was the key and had heard of the Dull Pain method of throwing things off but the High Dudgeon method seemed a more multi-pronged and safer approach, i.e. Asshole during interview, Asshole while hooked-up. Instead of trying to over-think things.

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

"Being an asshole while hooked up to a polygraph"

-- I think I've discovered a new hobby which I should be able to really excel at...

I've listened to approx two hours of radio interviews with Sinclair, and watched about 20 minutes of him on camera, and he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who could fake his way through a polygraph - just my $0.02. He never seems to get openly hostile or angry and I question whether he could pull off a highly belligerent attitude.

But can you tell us, BryanD, why you had to take a polygraph test? and what was the lie?


"He never seems to get openly hostile or angry and I question whether he could pull off a highly belligerent attitude."

Controlled belligerence was just my way of harnessing to my benefit any nervous energy. Let the adrenaline perform its magic automatically.

As for Sinclair, if he's a pathological liar and has convinced himself, then he could pass it just by being Larry. If he's jumpy, he won't.

As for why I took the test? I was part of a landscape crew assigned to a gated community whose schedule contained 2 days of work (mowing 40 mini lawns and a commons area), and 3 days of piddling around. And by piddling, I mean lots of getting high in the maintenance shack. We had just smoked our lunch one day to emerge into the sunlight, only to see the boss (big boss=owner) from across town, suddenly Here! where he's not supposed to be! Heading straight for the smoky shack! (Shit!)

Long-short, he sent us to the shop, then home on notice that we would have to submit to a polygraph the next day. Instead of firing us outright, I think the fertilizers and herbicides stored in the shack may have made him doubt himself, or he didn't trust his nasal passages, or because the crew was presentable and the rich old folks liked us and most of his other employees looked like convicts and had to be sent to mow parking lot islands and traffic medians out of sight.

Anyway, I went first and by passing, forced the administrator to basically pass us all if he wanted to at least APPEAR competent. Oddly though, comparing notes back at work, the 2nd testee was chewed out (according to him) by the admin (a big imposing guy) for be "shifty" and "evasive"! I think the admin knew I gamed him by then!


Man sure sounds like you are preparing for Sinclair to pass the test. I personally think he's full of crap but if he passes the test then he is not so you better prepare for that and denying it won't work for you or Obama. If he passes this test on tuesday then Obama will still win the primary but will lose the whitehouse. He better hope Larry fails.

So you're basing this on "Them black folks all look alike to us whiteys"?

Lee Ward:

No, I'm basing it on the fact that it happened 8 years ago and, as I said, it's unlikely someone from outside of Illinois would know what Barack Obama looked like back then - especially some coked-up druggie like Sinclair.

So perhaps some guy said his name was Barack Obama and Larry Sinclair believed it (assuming that's what happened) - my point is that even if Sinclair passes the polygraph it doesn't prove it was Barack.


Keep reaching.......hahahahaha. Dude if he passes the test there will be A LOT of explaining that will need to happen. Obama will not be able to just ignore it, it is about to hit the MSM....the tabloids are already picking it up. Well all the tabloids but the New York Times!


Oh, God, this is so funny. You know you've been drinking way too much Obama kool aid when go to this length but let me tell you explain that to mr and mrs average american and see do they believe this crap. Should Larry pass this thing then God himself may as well have spoken in the mind of ordinary Americans. And that's not even talking about the Republican mean machine coming into play on this thing. Dream on Obamabots.


Members of Obama's cult are so adamant in their claims that lie detector tests are meaningless. Yet, if Mr. Sinclair happens to fail the test, I have a strong feeling that those same people will use that as "proof" that all of this is false. According to your arguments, if Mr. Sinclair fails the test, then nothing has changed and the allegations still stand. Why is it that these tests are only worthwhile when they serve your purposes?

What does it mean if Larry Sinclair fails the polygraph test, though?


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.