Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Larry Sinclair Press Conference: Sinclair Arrested, Led Away in Handcuffs-(The Obama Strikes Back)
Blogger NEws Network ^ | 7-18-08 | mondoreb

Posted on 06/18/2008 9:27:29 PM PDT by tcrlaf

Larry Sinclair–the gay man who’s accused Senator Barack Obama of sharing gay sex and drugs with him in a Gurnee, IL hotel room in 1999–held a press conference at the National Press Club today.

He began the press conference by handing out press packets which contained little new information. He ended up his DC appearance in handcuffs, led away by the DC Police.

He’s currently being held by the DC Police, according to Larry Sinclair Arrested at NPC Press Conference; UPDATE.

[UPDATE at 6:53: Sinclair was arrested by DC Police after 2 US Marshals showed up and presented a warrant from the State of Delaware for Sinclair’s arrest. Montgomery Blair Sibley, who’s had his law license suspended by the District of Columbia and Florida, and who was previously Sinclair’s attorney, reviewed the warrant and then Sinclair was led away.]

Speculation is that the arrest stemmed from a Delaware warrant, although there is also an outstanding felony warrant out for Sinclair from the Pueblo County (CO) Sheriff’s Department.

(Excerpt) Read more at bloggernews.net ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: arrest; cocaine; crack; gaysex; kilt; larrysinclair; obama; sinclair
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 next last
To: woofie

“I watched the video and Im not sure but the guy looked kinda gay”

Perhaps you didn’t watch the entire video. During the question and answer period Sinclair said that he has been gay all his life.


81 posted on 06/19/2008 7:26:23 PM PDT by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pissant

“I’m about 80-90% certain he is telling the truth.”

I am too. I still do not know what his arrest in DC is all about. He stated in the video about his case in CO and that he will be going to court to provide info and that he knows the case will be dismissed. Who knows? The guy seemed to me to provide enough information that could be checked out. Certainly the media that loves Obama will make sure that Sinclair is trashed.


82 posted on 06/19/2008 7:32:59 PM PDT by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

obumpa


83 posted on 06/19/2008 9:15:40 PM PDT by Dajjal (Who murdered Larry Bland, Nate Spencer & Donald Young?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

My statement was meant to be facetious...I did see the whole thing


84 posted on 06/19/2008 11:09:14 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: pissant
I said he is believable...

_______________________________________________

And there it is in a nutshell. Career con-men are sociopathic, pathological liars. They are never believable, except to the extremely naive....perhaps pissant should change his name to pollyanna.

85 posted on 06/20/2008 4:34:05 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Dajjal
"Obumpa"

LOL

Leni

86 posted on 06/20/2008 4:49:05 AM PDT by MinuteGal (Stay Home or vote Barr for Obamination, more Taxation, Regulation, Litigation and Ginburgization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Then why are Obama’s denials more believable?


87 posted on 06/20/2008 6:35:04 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Then why are Obama’s denials more believable?

______________________________________________

Obama denied Sinclair's accusations? When? Where?

You keep trying to make this a 'believe sinclair or you support obama' referendum. That is childish and disingenuous.

The bottom line here is that sinclair is a career grifter (who has how many aliases, 13?), thief, drug dealer, forger and liar.

Adults know better than to get into bed with the sinclairs of the world. Pissant does not. In fact, Pissant spends his time turning this forum into the Public Relations wing of the Larry Sinclair circus.

88 posted on 06/20/2008 6:51:38 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Once again you show you don’t know the story very well. For starters, Axelrod admitted to a reporter long ago that they were ‘investigating’ Larry Sinclair. That was part of the reason for Larry’s original lawsuit (which got tossed, since he did not know the first thing about how to properly file a lawsuit). And people within the campaign are helping to coordinate the internet takedown of Sinclair. Sinclair has contacted the campaign on multiple occasions, and they are fully, 100% aware of him and his claims.

So no, Obama has not mentioned a word about it publicly. Good political move to be sure. But investigating Sinclair and sending minions after him is certainly a denial.

Some things to keep in mind (things you would know if you paid attention to the story instead of insulting everyone who thinks there might be some smoke on this thing):

The folks who setup the polygraph, Whitehouse.com, was a former porn spam site up until recently, who had its share of legal trouble.

Whitehouse.com issued a non denial ‘denial’ to Sinclair’s allegations that they received $$ from Axelrod.

They also used an ‘expert’ who misrepresented his phd credentials in US Courts and who continues to call himself Dr. Gelb.

Sinclair has the receipts that he was indeed in the area during the time he claims.

A MSM Chicago reporter verified Sinclair’s story about attending the graduation in question. he gave the name of the reporter at the presser.

He has given the name of the limo driver now.

He has given his phone records to the Chicago PD and gave the name of the detective he is working with at CPD.

He has a signed affadavit to the CPD that restates his allegations.

Obama was in the area as well during that time, even being documented as absent from the Senate on at least one of the days Sinclair was in town, and giving an address to some group on another of the days.

Obama has been asked by the media many times (including by Tim Russert) to give up his records of his Il Senate career. Obama claims he kept no record of meetings, minutes, or his schedule.

And it is not ‘believe Sinclair or you support Obama’. It is your notion that a criminal cannot POSSIBLY be telling the truth because of his past, and on top of it, making the accusations sound as if they are so outlandish that it couldn’t possibly happen. Given Obama’s associations with the gay druggie party animals in the Chicago political machine (See Rezko trial), it is certainly NOT beyond the pale to keep this story alive until it is either proven true or false.

If this testimony and these circumstances surrounded a GOPer, the media would be all over it like a wet suit. My goal, and it should be yours too, is to get to the bottom of it.

I’ll gladly eat crow if it is shown that Sinclair is lying about this.


89 posted on 06/20/2008 7:47:27 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

BTW, the Whitehouse.com ‘expose Larry as a liar’ press conference that followed Sinclair’s press conference was a total bust. They had technical difficulties with the equipment, cut the conference short, and left without taking questions.

So your job is to watch the Sinclair video I posted yesterday (in FR’s Smoky Backroom) then tell me after watching it that he has zero for credibility.


90 posted on 06/20/2008 7:54:29 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: pissant
So your job is to watch the Sinclair video I posted yesterday (in FR’s Smoky Backroom) then tell me after watching it that he has zero for credibility.

____________________________________

Shove your 'job'. Sinclair has zero credibility to anyone except those too naive or too invested in his game.

Anyone with LE experience, and most discerning adults, know that cretins like Sinclair do not wake-up one day, after decades of living a criminal life, and turn honest, respectable and trustworthy.

A con-man can convince the average person of his integrity when face-to-face, that's how they pay the bills. You are kidding yourself if you think that he can't turn on the sincerity for the cameras.

You may choose to believe him, I've seen too many of his ilk to give any of them the slightest benefit of the doubt.

And, all of the evidence that you tout is meaningless without third party corroboration.

And, you posted earlier that Obama responded to these charges. I'll ask again...Where? When? What exactly did he say?

91 posted on 06/20/2008 9:46:30 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Well, sally, 3rd party corroboration is what we are looking for. For example, the CPD should be able to tell us if Sinclair’s phone records show calls from phones belonging to Donald Young. Easy to do. Now why hasn’t the media inquired ‘bout that. Maybe they will now.

Should be relatively easy to track down the Multani’s (brothers?, father/son?) who worked for Five Star Limo.


92 posted on 06/20/2008 9:58:15 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Sally?

Typical. Can't support any of your own assertions so you act like a sixth grader.

Still waiting for you to back up your claim that Obama responded to your boy's accusations. You haven't provided any support for your own statements...

Why is that?

Nevermind, we know why.

Hey, maybe when your hero gets out of jail you can have a joint conference for the press. Tell all you know then.

93 posted on 06/20/2008 10:53:18 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Well, sally, you apparently did not read my othere post when I told you that a reporter confirmed months ago that Axelrod admitted to investigating Sinclair, and that the Obama camp has its hands in the internet attacks on Larry. I guess you could call that a ‘no comment’ as opposed to a denial if you want.


94 posted on 06/20/2008 10:56:18 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Axelrod admitted to investigating Sinclair, and that the Obama camp has its hands in the internet attacks on Larry.

----------------------------------------------------

Let's see, Larry (as you call him - pretty friendly) sues Axelrod so Axelrod investigates him. Yep, that's proof. Sinclair is telling the truth.

btw...what exactly is an 'internet attack'. Did they ring his inbox and run away? Or is posting unsubstantiated accusations of casual, anonymous gay sex with drugs involved more like it?

95 posted on 06/20/2008 11:51:20 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

WHo said anything about proof?

Chicago PD has an open case of an unsolved murder, a guy who has given them his phone records & affidavit stating he had calls and texting from the deceased. Easy to check isn’t it? Do you even want to know if Donald Young called LS? Would any reporter want to know?

And just for the record, the lawsuit included the accusation that Axelrod was having him investigated (using a quote from an MSM reporter), so you need to get your timelines straight.


96 posted on 06/20/2008 11:59:27 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: pissant
WHo said anything about proof?

_________________________________

Exactly. Thank you.

97 posted on 06/20/2008 12:01:57 PM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Than why argue against a claim no one has made here.


98 posted on 06/20/2008 12:02:53 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: pissant

I find it staggering how many trolls showed up on this thread who want to give that homosexual, crack-smoking scumbag Obama the benefit of the doubt. Personally, I think Larry Sinclair has more credibility that Barry Hussein Obama.


99 posted on 06/20/2008 12:04:18 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Why pimp here for a known criminal (your friend larry) when, after months of bullshit, there is no proof?


100 posted on 06/20/2008 12:06:00 PM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson