Posted on 02/20/2008 7:15:31 AM PST by Pinetop
Barack Obama now faces a new challenge - one that is sure to be much more scandalous than anything he's seen so far. If the allegations are to be believed, it's also a scandal that his campaign has tried to cover up. A Minnesota man has come forth, claiming that he took cocaine in 1999 with Obama, the then-Illinois legislator, and participated in homosexual acts with him.
Larry Sinclair, the man making the claims, said his story was ignored by the news media. Still not willing to let this one slip quietly under the rug, Sinclair made a YouTube video in which he made his case. It's had over half a million views already, but the story has still been largely ignored by the news media.
Sinclair's next step was to file a suit in Minnesota District Court, in which he alleges threats and intimidation by the Democratic presidential candidate's staff.
Still out to prove that he is telling the truth, Sinclair said he is willing to submit to a polygraph test. A website (WhiteHouse.com) has come forth offering him $10,000 for the right to record the polygraph test, and another $100,000 if he passes it.
Sinclair lives in Duluth, Minnesota, and in his filing, charges that his civil rights have been violated by Barack Obama and the Democratic Party. Obama, David Axelrod of AKP Message & Media in Chicago, and the Democratic National Committee have been named as defendants in the case.
Sinclair, who describes himself as gay, claims they met in an upscale Chicago lounge. They left in Sinclair's limo, where the drug use and sex allegedly took place for the first time. Sinclair says that Obama smoked crack cocaine, and that he snorted powder cocaine provided by Obama.
Sinclair, 46, says that he no longer uses drugs. He claims to be physically disabled, but says that he was not physically impaired in 1999 when they met.
Regarding the claims, Sinclair said:
"My motivation for making this public is my desire for a presidential candidate to be honest. I didn't want the sex thing to come out. But I think it is important for the candidate to be honest about his drug use as late as 1999."
Polygraph tests are bogus and not even admissible as evidence in court. If they were, they would be widely used in all criminal cases.
They aren’t even worth the paper they are printed on and it is a waste of time to even hint that the results they produce are valid.
Please provide a link to prove your assertion that he is “crazy” or just motivated by money. Or are you just making an accusation without any proof.
Remember, it is up to you to prove he is crazy and a liar, he doesn’t have to prove he is not.
This report, if true, may repulse a few voters, however it is a RESUME ENHANCER to most DEMOCRAT voters!!
Dems must really be stressing with excitement now, whether to vote for an alleged carpet muncher or a butt burglar...
And if anyone would sue for something like that, it’d definitely be a “liberal”.
Would be devastating! Remember Klintoon and the Chinese who had recordings of his phonesex with Monica.
In this case, a Barcoke Ohomo will be talking to the Mullahs, seated under their desks with the extra pressure to give them more than he will ever want to give.
Another excellent observation,
The Democrats will protect Obama’s right to privacy like they did Clinton’s and don’t forget Barney Frank and several others like him. After the news came out, they advanced in the party and gained popularity.
Hahhahahahahaaaaaaaaaa
Too many replies on this thread....
...paging, Larry Craigs Lawyer....Larry Craigs Lawyer...
where’s Johnny Cochran?, now that you need him....
the whole thing does smack of a Hillary hitjob however...
if this “scandal” does in Obama, I would guess that many
HIllary supporters will become ex-supporters, and Obama
supporters will go crazy ‘gainst Hillarious....
if it wasn’t so serious, this would be a true example
of the “bonfire of the vanities”
Bring on the popcorn.
This Sinclair looks suspiciously like Larry the Cable Guy - maybe Obama is making a play for the Gay redneck vote???
YEs, but it is unhelpful in a national election. That is why Clintoon had staff to deal with the bimbo eruptions.
He’s proving it for me. Geez...
It ain’t the same unnerstandin’of gravity no’mo. Gravity
is not “gravity” i.e. attractedness of masses....no, mo,son...
it is the curved space around the mass, that alters the
path of the second smaller mass...huh? it ain’t that eider?
GUILTY!
Like MLK is the icon for the Blacks, Obama is the “Savior” who will make the “Dream” real. IT will only anger them to do nasty things towards the Clintons.
The MSM knows the true potential of what this would do to the Democrat party. They will avoid it like the plague.
“hell be the darling of the party, a drugged out homo.”
That’s rather ambiguous.
Not quite sure which politician you are referring to.
: )
Why didn’t this guy come out during Obama’s Senatorial run?
I was going to tell you that I didn't agree with you because this was a disgusting homosexual act, but then I remembered, we're talking about liberals here. The more depraved the act, the more they like it. ;o)
“It is virtually impossible in the US for a public figure to win a libel suit.”
How many celebs have successfully sued the National Enquirer? [or similar gossip rags]
Tom Cruise is a the top of the list and I do believe Jennifer Aniston hit them too.
http://injury-law.freeadvice.com/libel_and_slander/public_figure_lawsuit.htm
http://www.allbusiness.com/libel-slander/4973390-1.html
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-libel.html
It happens more often than you think and the courts are starting to enforce suits regardless of the “celebrity status” loophole.
If OB wanted to, he’d have a strong case.
Of course, as the old legal adage goes, the ultimate defense against libel is truth.
Either you have it or you don’t.
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.