Deception Analysis: David Hogg
Gun control activist David Hogg on Rep. Greene interviewed on MSNBC. Below is a brief deception analysis of statements he made. Brackets [ ] added to highlight for discussion points below.
From 1/30/2021 “Greene was talking about how she had a concealed weapon and was [basically] stalking us through the halls of Congress for y’know the 10 or 15 minutes proceeding that video [actually] being taken.
NOTE: Video shown here shows Greene walking behind Hogg, trying to talk to him. No chase, no gun. He states there is another video. I have yet to see that one.
From 2/4/2021 “[Frankly] when that video was being taken, for example, what I was thinking about wasn’t so much myself, it was the safety of my staff and friends that I was around. Y’know, there was [this] woman chasing us. …and there’s [a ]woman chasing us, a threatening us, [essentially threatening us] with a gun.
****BASICALLY stalking (not actual stalking) Withholding information.
****FRANKLY is a word used in attempt to beef up credibility. It’s in the same group as “honestly, to tell you the truth, in fact”. It usually means the opposite of what they intend.
****ACTUALLY being taken . People often use this word to compare two thoughts. Example: “Did you buy a new phone?” “Actually, I bought a watch instead.” Most of the time when people use the word “actually” you will be able to see what the person is comparing (phone vs. watch). When the word “actually” is used and no statement has been proffered we then have some undisclosed information.
****THIS woman and A woman. When there is a change in articles, pay attention. THIS women refers to a specific person. A woman is any woman. In David’s statement he already introduced Greene as “this woman” then changes to “a woman” A credible statement would keep the same article throughout.
***ESSENTIALLY THREATENING – not actual threats. See Basically above.
##
If you liked this post please Like, Share, and Post a Comment. As Managing Director of Concealed Statements, I specialize in exposing lies through verbal and written statements; and for a little levity to balance I am also a stand-up comedian and wedding officiant – Lies, Laughs, and Love!
I’m very possibly and probably or even actually guilty of using some of these words and statements either correctly or incorrectly depending on the subject matter. ?
Thanks Laurie for your thought provoking article.
You bring up an important point, Christine. Just because certain words or phrases are used, does not indicate deception. There always needs to be more than one deception marker to determine credibility. Context is very important, as is baseline. If someone frequently uses a phrase – that’s their baseline. It doesn’t mean that person is always lying. I had a good (honest) friend who frequently said “To tell you the truth…” That preface *is* a red flag, but for this person, it was her baseline, therefore no deception is indicated.
It doesn’t take long to establish a baseline. Consider when one is administering a polygraph (the machine). They are asked a series of mundane questions to establish a baseline. The same is true with statement analysis. One of the perks of all the video available these days, it’s easy to establish someone’s baseline merely by reviewing previous footage, as well as manner of speech in the same video. It’s the CHANGES that are pertinent.
Thanks for the extra important info. I wasn’t expecting that. ?