Can we just get something straight, please? All those reports of Christine Ford having passed what’s been described as an “FBI polygraph” are patently false and based on a misquote of the original Washington Post article:
Ford took a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent in early August. The results, which Katz provided to The Post, concluded that Ford was being truthful when she said a statement summarizing her allegations was accurate.
In other words, someone (who?) read Ford a statement (what?) summarizing her allegations (which version?), and then asked her if the statement was “accurate”. That’s all the Washington Post is claiming — period.
That this is the strongest claim the Post was willing to make after seeing the full polygraph results is simply mind blowing.
I can’t be the only one who noticed this, but it’s been ten days now, and I’ve yet to see anyone raise this point.
True, some have questioned the accuracy of the results — which no other media outlet has been permitted to examine — along with the objectivity of a polygrapher whose credentials remain unverified.
Others are asking who paid for it — as if that were particularly relevant and not painfully obvious. (NO ONE has suggested Ford actually paid for a polygraph out of her own pocket.)
But the fact that no one has decried the Washington Post’s deceptive wording and the ensuing game of telephone is truly astounding.
Then again, consider the number of social media users who don’t bother reading past the headlines.
If Ford isn’t about to testify, can we at least pin down what it is she’s accusing him of? Because it’s gone from groping to attempted rape and murder.
It also might be nice to establish how many people were there the night that nobody else seems to remember (4 or 5?) and just how many of these people actually tried to rape and kill her (4 or 2?).
Especially Dianne Cheinstein.