Washington Post Changes Tune on Polygraphs

The WaPo is bending over backwards to discredit the effectiveness of polygraphs because of the Mary McCarthy firing:

The CIA, the FBI and other federal agencies are using polygraph machines more than ever to screen applicants and hunt for lawbreakers, even as scientists have become more certain that the equipment is ineffective in accurately detecting when people are lying.

Instead, many experts say, the real utility of the polygraph machine, or "lie detector," is that many of the tens of thousands of people who are subjected to it each year believe that it works -- and thus will frequently admit to things they might not otherwise acknowledge during an interview or interrogation.

Many researchers and defense attorneys say the technology is prone to a high number of false results that have stalled or derailed hundreds of careers and have prevented many qualified applicants from joining the fight against terrorism. At the FBI, for example, about 25 percent of applicants fail a polygraph exam each year, according to the bureau's security director.

Interesting that when it was Clinton under the gun and a credible accuser was questioned, they believed that polygraphs were a good gauge of truthfulness or lying:

Former White House volunteer Kathleen Willey passed a polygraph examination in September 1998 in which she said President Clinton had touched her breasts and placed her hand on his groin, according to documents unsealed yesterday in U.S. District Court in Alexandria.

Willey was asked only if the touching occurred, not whether the alleged Nov. 29, 1993, encounter with the president was consensual or, as she alleges, against her will.

The Sept. 15 test was Willey's second polygraph. The first exam, administered six days earlier, was ruled "inconclusive" by federal agents, who said Willey demonstrated a "lack of consistent, specific and significant physiological responses."

In that test, Willey was asked whether she was "making up" any of the information she provided about Clinton allegedly touching her and whether she was "lying" about the president placing her hand on his groin. Clinton has adamantly denied Willey's charges.

Everyone get that? It's okay to use polygraph evidence when defending a Democrat president, but not when determining if someone is leaking highly classified info to the WaPo. The entire crux of the story is about the veracity of lie detectors and the questions asked. They were using polygraph results to cast Ms. Willey in an unfavorable light, while they are now using the unreliability of the same machines to assist Ms. McCarthy.