Debunking Larry Sinclair: Part II - The Limo Driver

DBKP ^ | July 21, 2008 | LBG

[mondoreb]

Debunking Larry Sinclair Part 2: The Limo Driver

[NOTE: In Part I of Debunking Larry Sinclair: Sinclair Allegations Based on Time Travel, DBKP looked at "why" Sinclair claimed he made the decision to "come forth" with his allegations against Senator Obama. Part II looks at Sinclair's story: "how" he allegedly met the then-State Representative in November of 1999.]

We've decided to focus primarily on the "chief witness", the man Sinclair claims was a "personal friend" of Obama's, who fears "coming forward", that he and his family will face the "wrath of Obama": the purported limo driver.

The driver actually "drives" Sinclair's story, as Sinclair has made him into a pivotal character. This man--who allegedly was a "personal" friend of Obama's and who arranged an "introduction" between the two--had the birds-eye view of the alleged tryst involving illicit sex and illegal drugs. The driver has become the mysterious "witness" who has yet to "come forth" to corroborate Sinclair's claims.

We've based our observations on information supplied by Sinclair himself, from interviews he's given on talk shows and Sinclair's blog's, LarrySinclair0926.com and LarrySinclair.org.

"I had hired the limo for three nights during that trip." -- Jim Sumpter Show - 2-18-08

Sinclair claimed he was in Chicago to attend the graduation of a godson at a local Naval Academy. Sinclair stated on the Jim Sumpter Show that he had the "same" limo driver "on all three occasions" during his visit to Chicago:

"I had the same limo driver on all three occasions (nights). I had already informed the service, as well as the driver, that I wanted him to be the driver on Saturday." --Jim Sumpter Show

But, during an earlier interview, Sinclair had a different version:

[mondoreb]

For someone central to his story, Larry Sinclair's details of the limo driver have changed a lot, sometimes in the same interview.

[Ron Jeremy]

You mean, one shouldn’t trust a criminal homosexual who bounces around from state to state every six months? who knew?

[dblshot]

“You mean, one shouldn’t trust a criminal homosexual who bounces around from state to state every six months? who knew?”

Yeah but on the other hand you have a politician. Hard to choose.

[ozzymandus]

Don’t worry, Larry, pissant still believes you.

[ConservativeDude]

Obama has to decide...is he a homo? Or a muslim?

[mondoreb]

hahaha...In America, we all have choices—even the Dem candidate for prez.

[Maverick68]

I still have no proof Sinclair is a less honest person than Obama...

[mondoreb]

Nor do I.

Luckily, Sinclair isn’t running for president.
Unluckily, Obama is.

[ravingnutter]

Why should I bother...you still haven't responded to the post I made on your last thread. You know...the one that debunked your assertion by pointing out a speech about drugs that Obama made to Howard University students in Sep 2007 when you claimed there were none made before Nov 2007?

As for your so-called "different version" comments you act like limo drivers can remember each person they drove around out of all the hundreds of people they drive around each year. He may have been reminding the same limo driver about a previous incident to refresh his memory on who he was.

If that is your only "proof", give me a break. I'm not saying I believe Sinclair, but I certainly don't buy your half-baked theories either. Neither of you have shown sufficient proof to bolster your claims.

[TexasCajun]

They’re picking on poor Larry again bump.

[mondoreb]

I didn't say that Obama hadn't ever referenced his drug use before. We said no such thing. Of course, if you had read the article you would have known that. "We could find no other instances where Obama addressed “young people” about his drug use after August of 2007–other than when he spoke to the New Hampshire high school students in November." What was said was to point out Larry's own admission that he came forward when he saw "Obama last fall on TV talking about his drug use to young people (person)". Read Larry's words, listen to his interviews: in Larry's own words, he repeated that he came forward because of what he saw last fall--not some Howard University speech in 1997, when Larry was in prison in Colorado. While not impossible that Howard U. speeches are broadcast into prisons, he didn't say he saw it in prison. He said he saw it "last fall". He also said (as per our report) "he never read any of Obama's books". Thanks for taking the time to comment.

[ravingnutter]

I didn't say that Obama hadn't ever referenced his drug use before.

Here is exactly what you wrote:

This first part debunks Sinclair's claim that he was moved to come forward with his story after watching Obama on TV talk to "young persons". He says he then emailed and called the Obama camp and press in September 2007. But Obama didn't address any young people about drugs until November 2007--the first time he addressed the issue on the campaign trail.

not some Howard University speech in 1997,

Then you didn't bother to read what I posted. The date on that speech I linked to is September 28, 2007. So yes, it would have been in the correct time frame.

[ravingnutter]

Oh, and I forgot to add, the September 2007 speech is on YouTube as I pointed out in that post.

[ravingnutter]

Or it could have been this one at New Hampshire University from May 2007 where he addressed his past personal problems as well and he quoted a Bible verse that might have gotten Sinclair riled:

There is a verse from the Bible that is sometimes read or recited during rites of passage like this. Corinthians 13:11: "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child. Now that I have become a man, I have put away childish things."

He goes on to say:

The first lesson came during my first year in college. Back then I had a tendency, in my mother's words, to act a bit casual about my future. I rebelled, angry in the way that many young men in general, and young black men in particular, are angry, thinking that responsibility and hard work were old-fashioned conventions that didn't apply to me. I partied a little too much and studied just enough to get by.

And once, after a particularly long night of partying, we had spilled a little too much beer, broke a few too many bottles, and trashed a little too much of the dorm. And the next day, the mess was so bad that when one of the cleaning ladies saw it, she began to tear up.

[mondoreb]

It might have been.

However, that’s not what Larry said motivated him—and he has repeated it numerous times.

In fact, Sinclair stated that “To be honest with you I probably would have supported him (Obama) if he had come out last fall when he was confronted with this.” —Right Perspective Interview - Feb 2008

As stated, the “last fall” part is one of the few things Larry hasn’t changed about his story.

Thanks again for the comment.

[mondoreb]

Sorry. One addendum:

Sinclair also said when Obama was “confronted” “on TV”.

In none of the above links was Obama “confronted”. This is one point, his premise. Maybe, Larry will repair his story at a later date to include “the Howard University speech on YouTube”. He’s pretty good at repairing his story when confronted with unpleasant facts that get into the way.

Again, I wish he was telling the truth. It would make it easier. We started out by giving him the benefit of the doubt—and were the first to debunk a fake WashPo “editorial” that was circulated by Obama supporters (via email) when he first came forward in an attempt to discredit him.

Ah, well.

[ravingnutter]

He’s pretty good at repairing his story when confronted with unpleasant facts that get into the way.

So are you it seems, you keep adding to the story every time I debunk one of your posts. Nowhere on your website does it say he was confronted "on TV", where did that come from? However, you clearly state on there:

We could find no other instances where Obama addressed “young people” about his drug use after August of 2007–other than when he spoke to the New Hampshire high school students in November.

That is BS as I have pointed out, he spoke about it in September. And I do have to wonder why you are defending Obama so vigorously on a conservative forum.

[pissant]

Well, I see lots of speculation, but little in the way of debunking.

[mondoreb]

debunk, n.: to disprove. I'm still waiting for you to disprove anything. You've provided a couple links to possible events that Larry could've seen, if he had been searching for that info. You totally discount what Sinclair himself has said--in short,it's like talking to Larry himself. That is BS as I have pointed out, he spoke about it in September. And I do have to wonder why you are defending Obama so vigorously on a conservative forum. Defending Obama and exposing Larry Sinclair are not synonymous. This is such an easy story to expose: Sinclair's almost a pathological liar; in spite of Obama's many untruths, half-truths and lies, he's a piker when it comes to Sinclair. Conservatives who place their hopes and energies in a conman preying on the gullible are going to get what they fear most: an Obama presidency. Sinclair and Obama: they both have the con in them, Sinclair's just a pro. If you choose to believe Larry Sinclair, that's your privilege. By week's end, we'll be finished with him and will go back to concentrating on exposing Obama. Have a good one.

[ravingnutter]

I know what debunk means, you are apparently the one with reading comprehension problems. Here is your post:

This first part debunks Sinclair's claim that he was moved to come forward with his story after watching Obama on TV talk to "young persons". He says he then emailed and called the Obama camp and press in September 2007. But Obama didn't address any young people about drugs until November 2007--the first time he addressed the issue on the campaign trail.

1 posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 8:29:22 AM by mondoreb

Are you now telling me you did not post this? I posted a link to a September 2007 speech where Obama mentioned his drug use while talking to students at Howard University, which certainly debunks your claim that he "didn't address any young people about drugs until November 2007--the first time he addressed the issue on the campaign trail." I also provided a May 2007 speech link as well, which is way before Nov 2007. Since it is clear that the reason Sinclair came forward was that he was upset that Obama was lying about his drug use while in political office, I pointed out that Obama quoted a Bible verse in that speech that might have gotten Sinclair riled:

There is a verse from the Bible that is sometimes read or recited during rites of passage like this. Corinthians 13:11: "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child. Now that I have become a man, I have put away childish things."

You also claim that Sinclair said Obama was confronted "on TV", but I see no proof that Sinclair said that, he only said Obama was confronted. And since he admitted that he confronted Obama via e-mail and by phone, that was more than likely what he was talking about...he never mentioned the phrase "on TV" in relation to the confrontation statement as you said he did. Therefore you are adding words to what he claimed to bolster your own story.

In addition, I have also provided a disclaimer to you that I didn't necessarily believe Sinclair either (post #9 on this thread) so you are wrong on that too:

I'm not saying I believe Sinclair, but I certainly don't buy your half-baked theories either. Neither of you have shown sufficient proof to bolster your claims.

And that still stands. You can spin it all you want, but yes, I did debunk your claim on the speech dates and your claim that he said he saw the confrontation "on TV". As I said, your eagerness to defend Obama on this issue is curious. Personally, I am willing to let the chips fall where they may, but I won't stand by and watch falsehoods be posted either.