Posted on 10/29/2008 12:30:53 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
This is pretty funny. A $175,000 reward/bribe is now being offered for a Los Angeles Times reporter to actually report the news, namely to release the Khalidi video that the Times refuses to let the public see. It started out with a mere $25,000 offer made by Ace of Spades (emphasis mine):
Well, I don't know if one will step forward. I can guarantee, though, that if the goods are delivered the blogosphere can contribute $20,000. In a matter of hours.
Maybe more. More would depend on the tape.
This offer includes is particularly directed towards Los Angeles Times employees. Maybe ones that just got fired. Or will get fired in the next couple of weeks.
Guaranteed.
Anonymous.
That's how we roll.
Pretty pathetic that we have to try to bribe "newsmen" to release newsworthy tapes.
If your conscience is troubled, They should have released it anyway.
Plus that $25,000. You know what helps an aching conscience? Rubbing it with crisp hundred dollar bills, that's what.
Yeah it just went up five g's. If I can get $5 grand in a donation drive, I'm pretty damn sure I can get $25,000 for the tape.
And no, not a stunt. One little blog gets $5 k in a donation drive. Something like this, with every blogger linking the donation button, would easily get in excess of $25,000.
After this offer from Ace of Spades, the reward was dramatically increased to $150,000 according to Dirty Harry's Place who published a letter from Aston Grimaldi II, Chief Investment Officer of Dune Capital Holdings, making the offer. Following this, Dirty Harry received an offer of another $25,000 from a Freeper to make it a grand total of $175,000:
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
PING!
If the Michelle tape would really fetch 3 million, I don’t think our $175,000 would provide enough incentive.
Money talks, other stuff walks.
Wouldn’t it be hilarious if the tape got leaked right before the Obama-thon tonight. Talk about being overtaken by events!
It’s a shame OJ is in jail now. He could have picked up this tape as easily as he retrieved his signed football gear, and once on the Internet, the prosecution wouldn’t have been able to cover up Obama palling around with one of his terrorist buddies (Ayers - whom he claims to have barely known).
“Gee.....Should I report the news?”
“Or should I keep my job and my invitations to the in-people’s cocktail parties?”
“Heck, the editor would spike it, anyway.”
These news people are too smart for that! They know the $175K payment will put them over the amount that Obama said he was going to tax. They won’t see most of that money...
I’m more than a little perplexed by the LA Times’ claim that they can’t release it because they got it from their source only on condition that they not release it, and apparently they’re interpreting that to mean not even releasing a transcript and description of what it contains. So what did they take it for? Is there an embargo date on it? E.g. only allowed to release it after Election Day? If so, why would the source have given it to the LAT earlier, and why would the LAT publicly acknowledge having already taken possession of it? Something isn’t adding up here? Is the source using this situation to control Obama somehow (”say ____, or I’ll give the LAT permission to release the tape”)?
UPDATE: Reward For Video Of Ayers/Khalidi/Obama Now $175,000
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2118687/posts
FreeRepublic Memeber to Add to OBAMA/KHALIDI/AYERS TAPE reward, now $175,000
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2118680/posts
$150,000 REWARD OFFERED FOR OBAMA/KHALIDI/AYERS TAPE
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2118638/posts
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/the_public_must_never_see_this.html
http://dirtyharrysplace.com/?p=5302
Just got off the phone with an individual who has agreed to throw in another $25,000. This person checks out and has identified him/herself as a Freeper who uses the handle joinedafterattack.
With Obama’s campaign pulling in $150MM per month (and who knows how much from illegal contributors), what do you think they’ve already paid to squelch stuff like this video? I’d say it’s already bought and paid for.
Why is it we can get a copy of a porn by that guy that was on “Saved By The Bell” for $25, but somehow American can’t handle seeing this Obama video?
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.