By the way, let me name the witnesses for you - Mary Lee Fray (Paul's wife) and Neil McDonald (another campaign worker). Neither were polygraphed, but neither was Clinton
Keifer said Hubanks relied on a controversial questioning technique that isn't endorsed by the FBI but that it appeared there were no other options in this case to establish a benchmark for measuring Fray's physiological responses. He credited Hubanks for conducting a "professional exam."
Hubanks asked two similar questions to determine if Fray was being truthful about whether Hillary Clinton made the anti-Semitic remark. The questions were: "Did you hear Hillary call you a "f---ing Jew b------?" and "Did you hear Hillary call you a "f---ing Jew b------ in 1974?" Under the FBI's scoring system, Keifer said, Fray's combined answer to two questions about the slur would be evaluated as inconclusive but the rating system used by Hubanks indicated Fray's response is truthful.
So the technique was questionable but possibly the only path and the FBI would grade the result "inconclusive". I do not see the smoking gun here. Yes there is some evidence but a questionable polygraph and a statement from a wife and cohort are not proof. I am not nor ever did say it didn't happen I only point out that the proof is non-existent.
