Posted on 02/20/2008 7:15:31 AM PST by Pinetop
I'm paying better attention than you think, Senator Byrd.
IIRC, there was independent corroboration of much of her story (timeline, location, etc.) from one or more Arkansas state troopers. As for the sordid details, wasn’t it Jones who claimed that Clinton’s johnson had a “distinguishing characteristic”, later revealed to be Peyronie’s Disease? And didn’t Clinton settle Jones’ lawsuit for almost $1 million after two judges on a Federal appeals court express a willingness to allow her case to go forward? Taken together, that’s more than Sinclair has revealed thus far. Maybe other shoes will drop, however.
Agree on post 101, anything is fair on THIER side. Maybe there will be a scandal about some of his relatives that may have posed nude for National Geographic.........
One thing I find interesting is that the Obama campaign tried to cover up the allegations. Were they untrue the wiser political move would be to confront them head on and work to disprove them.
There may really be something to this story.
bttt
bttt again
Has Drudge posted anything about this yet?
Has Drudge posted anything about this yet?
No, Drudge and MSNBC are busy running unsubstantiated stories on McCain and a lobbyist—very murky on the details-—as a way of avoiding the Obama/Sinclair story. The McCain story has less substance than the Obama story. Terribly unfair stuff coming out of MSNBC and NY Times. Just a suggestion, but no evidence.
Ah....Al...(Franken) ...NOT the best time to come clean on this one...
Absolutely right. A good portion of his constituency are crackheads so he’ll just cement that core group.
Drudge is a real disappointment lately. It’s hard to believe he won’t touch the story about Obama doing cocaine with his gay lover, Larry Sinclair. That kind of stuff is what made Drudge Drudge. Now he’s just another (washed up) blogger.
All right libs,you wanted him you got him.Bend over,here comes Bareback Obama!
Oh yes, NYT would be so proud of him.
John
Geez...In other words you have no proof. If “He’s proving it for you”, please point out what that proof would be.
I don’t know if the guy is telling the truth or not, for the sake of argument, I’ll stipulate that he probably is not; however, it is one thing to say the guy hasn’t proven his claim and that Barry is innocent until proven guilty, it is another to make hurl an equally unprovable allegation about Barry’s accuser.
If you’re going to make such internally inconsistant arguments, on FR, you should expect to get called on it.
That is a ridiculous reply.
“If you’re going to make such internally inconsistant arguments, on FR, you should expect to get called on it.”
You’re funny - LOL! Again, my proof is HIS video that HE made which proves my point that HE is just a guy with a camcorder, a script and time on his hands who is looking for $.
Lets spend our efforts on legitimate reasons to defeat Obama in November rather than to cling onto this flimsy (at best) material.
There, I have answered your supposed “call” and I now call you out to join us in finding provable, substantive reasons as to why Obama should be defeated in November.
“HE is just a guy with a camcorder, a script and time on his hands who is looking for $.”
I see the proof that he does indeed own a camcorder of some sort. However, I’m still waiting on an explanation of how the very existence of the video is somehow proof that he was lying or that he was motivate by money?
Let me predict your response. “It’s obvious...,or, everyone knows..., or clearly....” The sad fact is that you are guilty of making the same kind of unsubstantiated allegation that you accuse this guy of making and you simply can’t back up your assertion.
As for Obama in November, may the best liberal win I guess, I don’t really have a dog in that fight any more.
This guy is a drug addict and he has his own limo?
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.