Liar Liar Pants on Fire!!!

Before you watch the video, here are some tips on Non Verbal signs of a lie

The big one…Congressman Sherman says “I’m sure” while shaking his head ‘NO’

• A liar might unconsciously place objects (book, coffee cup, etc.) between themselves and you. In the video he puts on a defensive posture when he moved his hand/arm to the front of podium.
• A liar is uncomfortable facing his questioner/accuser and may turn his head or body away. He kept looking away.
• Gestures/expressions don’t match the verbal statement, such as frowning when saying “I love you.”  On this video, the Congressman keeps smiling the same false smile (smile does not involve his whole face) which does not match his statements or natural emotions on his content.
• Physical expression will be limited and stiff, with few arm and hand movements. Hand, arm and leg movement are toward their own body the liar takes up less space.  The Congressman is very stiff in the video.
• A person who is lying to you will avoid making eye contact.  Notice how this guy keeps dropping his eyes and looking away
• Hands touching their face, throat & mouth. Hands touched his face several times indicating a lie.
• A liar may leave out pronouns and speak in a monotonous tone. When a truthful statement is made the pronoun is emphasized as much or more than the rest of the words in a statement.  The Congressman’s  statement was the definition of monotone.
Eye movements and changes in the eyes are one category of body language that tell a person is lying. If a person was previously using eye contact, and suddenly looks away, it can be a clue to prevarication.
The Congressman’s eye movement to the left…Let’s say your child asks you for a cookie, and you ask: “Well, what did your mother say?” As they reply “Mom said… yes.”, they look to the left. This would indicate a made up answer as their eyes are showing a “constructed image or sound. Looking to the right would indicated a “remembered” voice or image, and thus would be telling the truth.

Think about these tips as you observe the body language of Congressman Sherman.

From WND comes the following statement:

A leading Department of Justice attorney who quit his job after over the Obama administration’s refusal to prosecute Black Panthers who intimidated voters outside polls during the 2008 election claims the administration has ordered the DOJ not to pursue voting-rights cases against black people.

In an interview today, J. Christian Adams, former DOJ attorney and now a contributor at Pajamas Media, told Fox News, “There is a pervasive hostility within the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases.”

Asked whether there is a specific Justice Department policy against pursuing cases where the defendant is black and the victim is white, Adams replied, “Particularly in voting, that will be the case for the next few years. No doubt about it. If you had all the attorneys who worked on this case here, I am quite sure that they would say the exact same thing.” 

From The Hill comes the following breakdown of the Black Panther Voter Intimidation Case: 

Earlier today I had the opportunity to attend the United States Commission on Civil Rights’ hearing on the U.S. Department of Justice and the New Black Panther Party litigation. The testimony by the hearing’s lone witness, former DoJ lawyer J. Christian Adams, was nothing short of extraordinary.

During the 2008 presidential election, members of the New Black Panther Party were caught on videotape brandishing a nightstick and hurling racial taunts at white and black voters as they sought entry to a polling station in Philadelphia.

Following the irrefutable evidence caught on film of voter intimidation, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against three individuals and the Black Panther Party itself for violating Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act — which prohibits intimidation, threats and coercion. When none of the named defendants nor the New Black Panther Party showed up for trial in April 2009, a default judgment was entered in favor of the government.

Here’s where things get interesting. After the government had won its case in the absence of the defense to present itself, the Department of Justice abruptly changed course and sought to voluntarily dismiss the charges against three of the defendants while giving a slap on the hand to another by telling him that he was not able to go to Philadelphia polling stations through the 2012 elections. The big question as to why the Department of Justice would drop the charges on a clear-cut case of voter intimidation startled many; in today’s commission hearing, I think we found the answer that had so far been elusive.
In emotional testimony, J. Christian Adams, until last week a member of the DoJ’s Voting Section — he resigned in protest over the department’s handling of the case — told a stunned hearing room why he felt the case had been dropped. In no uncertain terms, Adams noted that senior officials within the Obama Justice Department had told employees that they were not to bring voting-rights cases where the alleged victim in the case was white. In other words, white transgressor and black victim, bring it on. Black transgressor and white victim? Forget about it.

I will let Adams speak for himself; his words were electric and disturbing. Long ignored by the traditional media, the Philadelphia Inquirer and other outlets have begun to question the Obama administration about its apparent inability to adjudicate justice blind of race or ideology. If Adams’s claim that the Department of Justice has instructed officials to ignore cases in which blacks victimize whites to focus on white-on-black cases, this will be the sleeper issue that could explode to toss the Democrats out of office in 2010 and 2012.

When Fox News asked Adams who has issued that mandate, he said, “There are some things I’m not going to reveal. They know who they are. They said if somebody wants to review these kinds of cases, it’s not going to be done out of the Civil Rights Division. If the U.S. attorney wants to do it, that’s up to them, but it’s not going to happen in the Civil Rights Division. … It’s a political appointee.”

It is clear from this video, DemoRat Congressman Brad Sherman is a Monotone, Shifty Eyed, Face Touching, Head Shaking LIAR.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *