The Computer Says Cain’s Telling The Truth And Sharon Bialek’s Lying
Interesting. An expert ran Bialek’s accusation and Cain’s denial through voice recognition software, and the CBS station in Atlanta reports it wasn’t difficult to tell who’s being truthful…

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman…..”
Like there was any doubt someone paraded out by Allred wasn’t on the up and up.
Cain did use the word inappropriate. He did not deny the actual action.
I’ve worked with a few people from other areas of the South where anything other than vaginal intercourse is not considered sex to them. If they had some other form of sex and said that they hadn’t has sex, they would not be lying. Dumb as a box of hammers, YES, but still not lying by their own definition.
The guy didn’t do anything to Sharon Bialek, whose own friends say she’s a gold-digger with no credibility.
It doesn’t mean you support Cain if you recognize the elites are trying to destroy him on a fraudulent basis.
All that I’m stating is that if the right words are used by the person giving the statement, they could skew such an analysis. In all seriousness, if Clinton grew up just like some of those who I have worked with (from Western Tennessee and highly successful) that BJ’s were not considered sex and thus no lie could be detected. Wording actually does mean something. Cain has a crackerjack of an attorney.
Does that mean that Cain lied, NO. Could Bialek have lied, YES. Could the others have lied, YES.
Who is to say that it is the “elites”?
I’m wondering if this technology is accurate enough since I am really ignorant of it use. No news reporter or private eye is going to convince me one way or the other.