Free Republic

The Bancroft Prize was awarded in April 2001 by the Trustees of Columbia on the recommendation of a committee of 3 historians, chaired by a Columbia historian.

The Trustees revoked the Bancroft Prize in Dec. 2002 and asked for its $4,000 back.

Yearbooks at Columbia at the time didn’t necessarily have pix of everyone.

Several profs and students remember him at Columbia in classes.

More crucially, to get into law school, Columbia would have had to send a transcript to the Law School Data Assembly Service, which computed and reported College GPAs along with LSATs to Harvard. If he hadn’t graduated, he wouldn’t have gotten in and there is no way to fake this.

What a coincidence!

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_06_01-2008_06_07.shtml#1212598400

Does it seem at all plausible that anyone would go into a 30-plus minute racist rant during a "Woman's Luncheon" at the Sheraton Hotel, moderated by two mainstream local TV news reporters/anchors from the Chicago ABC affiliate? Consider also that Michelle Obama was listed only as a "Special Guest," not even listed as speaking (the Keynote Speaker for the luncheon was Jesse Jackson).

Here is the program for the luncheon:

12:00p.m ~ 2:00p.m.

SHERATON BALLROOM 1-7 Womans Luncheon

M.C.’s: Cheryl Burton and Karen Jordan, ABC 7

Keynote Speaker: Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Special Guests:

Shoshana Johnson, Retired United States Military

Michelle Obama, University of Chicago

And then somehow this supposed rant was for sale on the Trinity United website. I think that the most common version of the story (put forth by Hillbuzz) is almost certainly false.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_06_01-2008_06_07.shtml#1212598400

Does it seem at all plausible that anyone would go into a 30-plus minute racist rant during a "Woman's Luncheon" at the Sheraton Hotel, moderated by two mainstream local TV news reporters/anchors from the Chicago ABC affiliate? Consider also that Michelle Obama was listed only as a "Special Guest," not even listed as speaking (the Keynote Speaker for the luncheon was Jesse Jackson).

Here is the program for the luncheon:

12:00p.m ~ 2:00p.m.

SHERATON BALLROOM 1-7 Womans Luncheon

M.C.’s: Cheryl Burton and Karen Jordan, ABC 7

Keynote Speaker: Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

Special Guests:

Shoshana Johnson, Retired United States Military

Michelle Obama, University of Chicago

And then somehow this supposed rant was for sale on the Trinity United website. I think that the most common version of the story (put forth by Hillbuzz) is almost certainly false.

The Katrina comment was never reported by anyone who claimed to hear the recording. It was an excuse made up by a blogger to explain why her words might sound like “Whitey.”

VOLOKH update:

http://volokh.com/posts/1212598400.shtml

UPDATE: There are some anomalies in the story so far: according to the rumors, the Rainbow/Push conference was supposed to be held at Trinity United, yet schedules posted at Hillbuzz and elsewhere do not show the event as taking place at the church. Further, the schedule shows Michelle Obama as a “Special Guest,” not a speaker. Last, if it wasn’t at the church, why would the DVD have been on sale there? I remain highly skeptical that this story will amount to anything.

VOLOKH update:

http://volokh.com/posts/1212598400.shtml

UPDATE: There are some anomalies in the story so far: according to the rumors, the Rainbow/Push conference was supposed to be held at Trinity United, yet schedules posted at Hillbuzz and elsewhere do not show the event as taking place at the church. Further, the schedule shows Michelle Obama as a “Special Guest,” not a speaker. Last, if it wasn’t at the church, why would the DVD have been on sale there? I remain highly skeptical that this story will amount to anything.

These items you list are 1-hour TV shows.

These items you list are 1-hour TV shows.

I don’t see any listing for the Jun 26, 2004 - July 1, 2004 Rainbow/PUSH Coalition Annual Conference at which Michelle Obama spoke.

You might look for another page of recordings of conferences, panels, or speeches.

From the Volokh Conspiracy:

http://www.volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_06_01-2008_06_07.shtml#1212598400

Trying to debunk the internet rumors about Michelle Obama.— As many of you know, there has been an ever-shifting intenet rumor launched publicly by an extremely unreliable pro-Clinton blogger, Larry Johnson, that there is a video recording of Michelle Obama saying some intemperate things at Trinity United Church. The way that this story is being spread leads me to think that there is little or nothing to the rumors, which is why I haven’t posted on the issue here until now.

Until today, the rumors have been too vague to be debunked, but they have now become specific enough that the currently most prominent version of the rumor could potentially be determined to be false. A specific conference for the remarks has been specified: the 2004 Rainbow/PUSH Coalition Annual Conference starting on June 26, 2004.

In an attempt to get the information necessary to put this matter to bed, I drove over to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition National Headquarters, which is in the opposite corner of my Hyde-Park/Kenwood neighborhood. I spoke with Robert (Bobby) Lewis, Director of Studio Services, who apparently handles the recordings of events. He said that the recording of events from 2005 and earlier was farmed out and most or all of the existing recordings (listed on the website) had not been conveyed in-house to the National Headquarters. He said that he did not know if the organization had a recording of the 2004 conference. In response to my more specific question, he said that the one-hour Saturday broadcasts on the 2004 Annual Conference (June 26, 2004, and July 2, 2004), which are listed on the website for purchase, are not available, since they come from the earlier outsourced period.

I was very surprised when he informed me that I was the first person to have contacted them about this matter. Given the furor on the internet, I suspect that many of you are skeptical about this claim, but he really seemed in the dark. He wanted to know the name of the website that had the story about the conference. And at first, he thought I was talking about an event where Barack, not Michelle, had appeared. In manner, he was gracious and he didn’t seem to be particularly guarded or defensive.

As I write this, I am aware that it seems unlikely that Barack Obama’s campaign would not have scoped this out with Rainbow/PUSH long ago. Either the Obama campaign neglected to do so, or Rainbow/PUSH picked the right person to persuade outsiders that no inquiries were made, or — more likely — there was nothing to scope out.

I suggested to Mr. Lewis that he try to find a copy, since he was likely to get inquiries. He said that he planned to get on it right away, since I was probably only the first of many more requests.

I hope that if Rainbow/PUSH locates a copy they release it as soon as possible to prevent this rumor from snowballing. In its limbo state, this rumor does damage to all three candidates, as well as to the political process.

Do a Google search. Several people (girlfriend & security detail) report that Bill used the N word several times in the 1990s, eg, referring to an Arkansas critic.

Don’t assume that it’s Republicans with a tape (if it exists). The people pushing this story are mostly Clinton Democrats, so if there is a tape, it’s probably they who have it.

As someone posted on another website:

IF this tape exists — and it probably doesn’t — it is likely that it will be clear whether Michelle Obama said “Whitey” or “Why’d he” by considering the next word.

If the next word is “DID” or another word in the past tense, then she was saying “Whitey DID that,” not “Why’d he DID that.”

But if the next word is “DO” or another word in the present tense, then she was saying “Why’d he DO that?”

You can do the same analysis with most other verbs suggested by Obama supporters:

“Why’d he leave” v. “Whitey left”

AND (less clearly)

“Why’d he attack” v. “Whitey attacked”

If it exists, there shouldn’t be any ambiguity.

As someone posted on another website:

IF this tape exists — and it probably doesn’t — it is likely that it will be clear whether Michelle Obama said “Whitey” or “Why’d he” by considering the next word.

If the next word is “DID” or another word in the past tense, then she was saying “Whitey DID that,” not “Why’d he DID that.”

But if the next word is “DO” or another word in the present tense, then she was saying “Why’d he DO that?”

You can do the same analysis with most other verbs suggested by Obama supporters:

“Why’d he leave” v. “Whitey left”

AND (less clearly)

“Why’d he attack” v. “Whitey attacked”

If it exists, there shouldn’t be any ambiguity.

As someone posted on another website:

IF this tape exists — and it probably doesn’t — it is likely that it will be clear whether Michelle Obama said “Whitey” or “Why’d he” by considering the next word.

If the next word is “DID” or another word in the past tense, then she was saying “Whitey DID that,” not “Why’d he DID that.”

But if the next word is “DO” or another word in the present tense, then she was saying “Why’d he DO that?”

You can do the same analysis with most other verbs suggested by Obama supporters:

“Why’d he leave” v. “Whitey left”

AND (less clearly)

“Why’d he attack” v. “Whitey attacked”

If it exists, there shouldn’t be any ambiguity.

As someone posted on another website:

IF this tape exists — and it probably doesn’t — it is likely that it will be clear whether Michelle Obama said “Whitey” or “Why’d he” by considering the next word.

If the next word is “DID” or another word in the past tense, then she was saying “Whitey DID that,” not “Why’d he DID that.”

But if the next word is “DO” or another word in the present tense, then she was saying “Why’d he DO that?”

You can do the same analysis with most other verbs suggested by Obama supporters:

“Why’d he leave” v. “Whitey left”

AND (less clearly)

“Why’d he attack” v. “Whitey attacked”

If it exists, there shouldn’t be any ambiguity.