Posted on 02/13/2008 5:15:21 PM PST by pissant
Plaintiff: Larry Sinclair
Defendant: Barack Obama, David Axelrod and Democratic National Committee
Case Number: 0:2008cv00360
Filed: February 11, 2008
Court: Minnesota District Court
Office: DMN Office [ Court Info ]
County: St. Louis
(Excerpt) Read more at dockets.justia.com ...
Hard to believe Obama would run for President with something like this out there. Has anyone here read the case documents? You have to be registered to see them.
I don’t side with him. He is either telling the truth or he isn’t. I want to know. Get busy, media, and find out.
The case is for a violation of his civil rights for investigating hem and supposedly harrassing him and slandering him.
That is separate, though in response to, his original allegations of crack/BJs
In general, homosexual hook-up types (the “play for no pay” group) don’t...uh...spit.
“Uh, The guy has already been discredited”
When and how was that done?
“It is 50/50. This guy is putting it all out on the line. We shall see. He may be delusional, who knows, but he’s not giving it a rest.”
I agree with your comment.
Unless there is a stained blue dress — this is just a he said/she said case. It is debatable which one is she...
Next.
No no no. McCain is going to stomp all over Obama. Take the Bush 04 states and add PA and NH.
Mmmhmm.
Well, I’ll tell you this, and this is the biggest hole in that dude’s story.
He said on the rense show that “he didn’t tell me his name or that he was a senator.”
So, we’re not only expected to believe all the details without proof, we’re supposed to trust this man’s retroactive ID work that this man he had sex with in Chicago 9 years ago is Barack Obama? Get real.
I’m still waiting to read how Larry Sinclair was “discredited”. I’d really like to know.
“this is the biggest hole in that dude’s story.”
“He said on the rense show that “he didn’t tell me his name or that he was a senator.”
That’s like saying that the eyewitness to a crime cannot be believed if he says that the perpetrator didn’t give his correct name and job title. Those little defects make his story more plausible, not less.
That's a very serious allegation.
DearMurray looks like he has the exact same credibility problems that he attributes to the sources of this Obama/Sinclair story. He’s just one more fruitcake with a website.
Hillary! would.
You seem to know Senator Clinton.
Ron Paul Would.
This statement proves you know absolutly nothing about Rep. Paul.
There sure are a lot of noobs here with very poor logic skills.
“Hard to believe Obama would run for President with something like this out there.”
It’s hard to believe Bill Clinton would run with the stuff he has in his background, but he got elected twice.
According to the web guy who is doing the discrediting it is because the story has been spread on the internet. Which of course means everything he says isn't credible. Not to mention it also means almost all human history has now been discredited. If it's on the net it never happened.
“This is the age of the death of reason.”
Michael Crichton calls it “the disinformation age”.
In case you haven’t yet had the treat, look at
http://www.michaelcrichton.com/speeches.html
I rejoice that at least one man who can think clearly is still alive.
“I have been asked to talk about what I consider the most important challenge facing mankind, and I have a fundamental answer. The greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda. Perceiving the truth has always been a challenge to mankind, but in the information age (or as I think of it, the disinformation age) it takes on a special urgency and importance.”
from “Environmentalism as Religion”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.