We need to know the truth about Barack Obama. We need to know where Obama was on November 4, 1999. We need to know where Obama was and what he was doing during his term in the Illinois Senate. When I first read the allegations of Larry Sinclair, I was very skeptical. I am still somewhat skeptical. However, I went to the records of the Illinois Senate for November 4, 1999 and Barack Obama was not present. Sinclair alleges that he had 2 encounters with Obama from November 3 to November 8 1999. The first encounter was allegedly in a rented limo and involved drugs and gay sex. This alone was not a red flag for me but when you couple this information with Obama’s known association with criminals, with racists and hate mongers and his failure to provide his records while in the Illinois Senate, there is a legitimate need to get straight answers from Obama.
Here is what we know about Obama:
Obama received campaign contributions from Tony Rezko and was involved in a real estate transaction involving Rezko and his wife.
Obama had a long time association with racist, anti semitic pastor Jeremiah Wright.
Obama has consistently evaded requests for information, lied about not knowing of pastor Wright’s comments and acted in a hypocritical manner such as when he condemned Don Imus in 2007.
Obama has made hypocritical comments about open access to records:
From the democratic presidential debate in Philadelphia on Oct. 30, Obama said to Clinton: “We have just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history, and not releasing, I think, these records at the same time, Hillary, as you’re making the claim that this is the basis for your experience, I think, is a problem.”
November 3 2007. The Obama campaign sent out a letter pressing Clinton to release her White House schedules before the Iowa caucuses.
“Fully releasing these records is in keeping with the spirit of the process that makes the Iowa caucus so special,”
Lynn Sweet, a columnist and the Washington Bureau Chief for the Chicago Sun-Times states:
“Instead, since I have some reporting history here, I am noting a pattern that has emerged: This is Obama’s third ethical conversion of convenience — taking on a higher standard, but only when it appears to be politically expedient. Obama is making government transparency and ethics a centerpiece of his presidential campaign.”
From a Chicago Tribune interview of November 12, 2007:
“The status of any government records Sen. Barack Obama might still have from his time as a state lawmaker in Springfield has come up as he has repeatedly criticized Sen. Hillary Clinton for how slowly records from her husband’s administration have been released.
In a Tribune interview Thursday, the Illinois Democrat said he had no intention of sharing any of the documents he might still have in his possession.”
Next are the questions asked and responses from Obama. I know that many people have read this, but it is worth repeating:
“Q: It is kind of unknown where some of the records from your time in Springfield are located. Where is that stuff, what do you have?
“We had one district director. I had one staff person, so, you know, we didn’t have some elaborate sort of system. I didn’t at my disposal millions of dollars and potentially multiple staff people to conduct an archive. Now keep in mind, it is apples and oranges. First of all, I’m not the one who has made this an issue. We saw during the debate, Senator Clinton was asked about it and the suggestion was somehow they’ve done all they could. And my simple point was, I don’t think there is some smoking gun in these archives or something, or some damning evidence. The only point that I’ve made is that, you know, Senator Clinton continues to base her claim on experience, in part, in substantial part, on her role as first lady, because if her, you know, experience was just based on her tenure as an elected official, it’s thinner than mine. So, I think it’s fair for people to ask, you know, what exactly was she doing, if that’s a substantial claim that she is making. So, I’m not interested in playing a game of gotcha, where I think there is evidence of something. I’m assuming most of this stuff is pretty mundane, you know, stuff. But what we do know is that she was involved in health care. Based on the questions you just asked me, or [New York Times reporter Jeff] Zeleny just asked me today, there’s this sense of, well, yeah, I was in charge of health care, but the fact that it didn’t work out, wasn’t my fault. That, we’ve at least got a public record that she was involved. From that point forward, we really have no idea what she was involved in. And so, you know, what I think, what I think, is not, doesn’t make sense is to say, to able to take credit for whatever Clinton Administration successes that she wants, and then selectively distance herself from any Clinton Administration failures, and not have some sort of public record that allows people to get a sense of that. Now, my sense is that this is information that, if they wanted to accelerate the process, so that it was available before this election, they could get it out there.”
Q: What about your stuff, though? What do you have?
“I have no idea. I mean [muffled on recording]. I really don’t. Again, I did not have at my disposal. I wasn’t preparing for the Obama state senatorial library.”
Q: You must have kept some stuff. Correspondence, calendars?
“The problem is whatever remaining documents I have are inevitably incomplete. And then the questions going to be, where’s this or where’s that. Once I start heading down that road, then it puts me in a position that could end up being misleading. I don’t want to mislead people. I don’t know the extent of the records that I have as a state senator.””
Read more from the Chicago Tribune:
The following is from Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times on November 11, 2007:
“On Friday, Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported that she had asked Obama at a news conference: “Do your state senate papers still exist? If they do, just where are they? And would you ever intend to make them public to be responsive to some requests?”
Sweet wrote that he replied: “Nobody has requested specific documents.”
But the Chicago Tribune has reported that it “requested documents from his time in Springfield and never received a response.”
And Sweet wrote of her own paper, “The Chicago Sun-Times has also been asking about Obama’s papers.””
“RNC spokesman Danny Diaz said of Obama’s reticence on records: “Barack Obama is a rookie senator with few accomplishments. Perhaps he’s reluctant to inform the public about his activities in Springfield because they demonstrate a lack of leadership at a state level as well.””
“An Obama spokesman, Ben LaBolt, last week declined to say where Obama’s records from his years in the Illinois State Senate are located. There is no law mandating the state to archive the records. The records from Obama’s office — if he kept them — would potentially show appointments with lobbyists, policy memos, meetings, etc.”
“Obama’s campaign has refused to identify the biggest bundlers, people who are raising at least $200,000 for him and are given membership in his National Finance Council. Obama, as all major candidates, declines most of the time to disclose details about most fund-raising events.”
“Sometimes Obama has come late to the game. He did not stop taking rides on subsidized corporate jets until the week he was tapped to be the Democrats’ chief spokesman on ethics in January 2006. In 2005, Obama took 23 such private aircraft flights, some to attend fund-raisers he headlined. In 2006, Obama led the fight to ban lawmakers from taking cut-rate private air travel.”
“Obama has supported more earmark disclosure to bolster government transparency. Last June, Obama disclosed the earmarks he requested for Illinois and national interests. However, his office, after repeated requests since June, has yet to disclose earmarks Obama sought in 2006, before he was running for president.”
Read more from Lynn Sweet here:
Tim Russert interviewed Barack Obama on November 11, 2007. During part of the interview Russert asked Obama about supplying records. Here is that segment:
“MR. RUSSERT: You talked about Senator Clinton having records released from the Clinton Library regarding her experience as first lady, and yet when you were asked about, “What about eight years in the state senate of Illinois,” you said, “I don’t know.” Where, where are the—where are your records?
SEN. OBAMA: Tim, we did not keep those records. I…
MR. RUSSERT: Are they gone?
SEN. OBAMA: Well, let’s be clear. In the state senate, every single piece of information, every document related to state government was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is available and has been gone through with a fine-toothed comb by news outlets in Illinois. The, the stuff that I did not keep has to do with, for example, my schedule. I didn’t have a schedule. I was a state senator. I wasn’t intending to have the Barack Obama State Senate Library. I didn’t have 50 or 500 people to, to help me archive these issues. So…
MR. RUSSERT: But your meetings with lobbyists and so forth, there’s no record of that?
SEN. OBAMA: I did not have a scheduler, but, as I said, every document related to my interactions with government is available right now. And, as I said, news outlets have already looked at them.
MR. RUSSERT: Is your schedule available anywhere? Are—the records exist?
SEN. OBAMA: I—Tim, I kept my own schedule. I didn’t have a scheduler.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Durbin, your colleague, publishes his schedule each day. Would you do that?
SEN. OBAMA: Well, you know, these days I have a public presidential schedule that I think everybody has access to.”
To read more of the Tim Russert interview click here:
Obama said, “I didn’t have a schedule.” What kind of evasive answer is that? Everyone has a schedule.
Larry Sinclair’s allegation means almost nothing in a vacuum. However, when you look at the big picture, the picture that appears from all of the puzzle pieces, a scary picture emerges. Barack Obama is running for President of the United States. He has to be held to a high standard. It is time for some answers and information.
Obama must provide records.
Where was Obama on November 4, 1999?
you are fortunate to live in a country that has free speech. otherwise your distorted and unfactual rantings would never be allowed. suggest you answer your own question.
Please be specific:
What is distorted?
What is a rant?
I agree, we are fortunate to live in this country.
Please, deal in facts. I will respond to facts.
The infamous quote by Donald Rumsfeldt comes to mind with respect to Obama’s cloak:
‘There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know. ‘ [Donald Rumsfeld]
Until the MSM starts addressing some of the most obvious of Obama’s known knowns (contraditions, flip-flops, embellishments et al), and known unknowns (state records, schedules, financial ties etc) the unknown unknowns (??) will remain in the closet — or will they? Me thinks the MSM has lost its relevancy — the velocity and complexity of information is too much for “the repeaters” . The Larry Sinclair story has got to to the biggest story never told (by the MSM), and yet there’s barely a soul breathing that has not heard the claims. As a good citizen (albeit a skeptical one) of the planet, I have listened to all of his radio interviews, and I have to admit, the dude sounds/comes across as extremely credible. He has subjected himself to literally hours worth of questioning and not once has he contradicted himself. Given that the veracity of his claims and his supporting evidence has NOT been debunked at all, one can only conclude that there is some truth to the claims.
Very well put!
There have to be a lot of people out there thinking similar thoughts to you & I.
No one aspect about Barack Obama has been a
However the body of facts and suspicious circumstances does raise many red flags.
The analogy I use is assembling a large puzzle.
The first few pieces reveal nothing, but little by
little a picture emerges. The picture that is coming into focus for me is disturbing.
Citizen Wells, as a law student I can tell you the reason why the MSM is not picking the story up (and trust me every news network has its own legal team) is because they probably have researched the story and have found nothing credible. As far as where Senator Obama was on November 4, 1999 … The fact that he was not present at work means he was probably NOT EVEN IN CHICAGO OR THE STATE!!!!!!OR MAYBE HOME SICK AND TAKING CARE OF HIS CHILD WHO WAS ONE YEAR OLD AT THE TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now that I am calm again, when people miss work it is usually because they are either on vacation or home sick, NOT OUT HAVING GAY SEX WITH MENTAL PEOPLE!@!@!@
And another thing, it is so disingenuous for you to act as if all the pieces of the puzzle and falling together to show that Larry Sinclair maybe telling the truth. That is bull and you know it. Anyone who has worked a day in their life knows the reasons people miss work and for you to suggest that Senator Obama missing work on the day that Sinclair “claims” that they had one of their “encounters” is so irresponsible and unbalanced that you really should stop. As a highly educated individual I am insulted by your posts and as a member of the legal community I am insulted by Sinclairs accusations and those who support his nonsense that has no legal foundation. I wish someone would accuse you of something and then see how it feels. Get a life and some education will ya!
Emotional, alleged law student.
Have you prepared a motion?
Have you filed a motion?
Have you opposed a licensed attorney in court?
Have you won against a licensed attorney in court?
Do you know the meaning of the words alleged and allegations?
Maybe Obama was at home on November 4 1999.
That should be easy to prove.
Show us the records.
First of all I am not an alleged law student. I am a law student at one of the top universities in the country. As far as the motions are concerned go to the US district court for the district of columbia and look at the calendar and see if you see any motion hearings for Larry Sinclair’s “motion on the calendar or assigned to Kennedy. After you do your research then give me a call. Another thing, as a law student I have access to Lexis Nexis. Lexis is a search engine of all, ALLLLLLLL, cases filed in the ENTIRE COUNTRY. I did a search under “larry sinclair” and “lawrence sinclair” and NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING came up. You see my dear, there are people who have access to information that you as common people do not. AND MAYBE THIS IS WHY THE NEWS OUTLETS ARE NOT CARRYING THIS STORY. They probably have access to Lexis also.
Well, you certainly have the arrogance to be a
Regarding the MSM.
I assume you recall the many questions from the likes of Tim Russert, The Chicago Tribune, etc
regarding Obama’s records when he was serving
in the Illinois Senate. He was also asked about
his schedule outside of the senate. He gave, perhaps, the most evasive, suspect answers I have ever heard. He sounded like a criminal.
The more people like you react to my questions in an emotional manner with personal attacks, the more convinced I am that Obama is hiding something.
I apologize if I came across as arrogant, that was not my attempt. Poor choice of words, “common people”. What I am trying to get across is that you and everyone who chooses to believe Larry Sinclair’s “story” to be true are doing something that you cannot fully appreciate. Imagine for a minute that someone who doesn’t like you or just wants to get publicity decides to tell a story about something you did in your past that you cannot defend because it is your words against the person. Imagine that the persons story cuts against the core of who you are and what you have worked so hard to achieve. Imagine that even if you could go to a court of law and win that the win doesn’t matter because the bad publicity has caused people to second guess you and then you lose your job or some other status in public because of this allegation. Imagine that the person makes these claims and you were home sick at the time. Imagine that you have no proof to show that you were home sick. No matter what your political affiliations are, we should demand that Larry Sinclair offer up his so called “proof” before we convict Senator Obama on the web. This goes against everything this country’s wonderful judicial system is built on . One is innocent before proven to be guilty. I hope that something like this doesn’t happen to you.
Anyone can file a case. If I wanted to I can file a case against you tomorrow filled with allegations. I don’t have to offer up not one single shred of evidence to support my allegations. That is where is motion for summary judgment would come it. If Senator Obama had airline tickets proving that he and his family were in Hawaii, at a motion for summary judgment that would end the case and that’s it. However, Senator Obama is in a very sticky place. If he responds to Larry Sinclair, then the MSM will be all over the story and in this country once it is on the news it will stick. And between the time he files his motion for summary judgment and the time the court actually hears the arguments and rules, the primary would be over and he would have lost because everyone would have convicted him in the media. Forget about how his wife and family would feel about this person making this allegations against Senator Obama. This is why Larry Sinclair is on the web, using the web to convict Senator Obama. Please don’t fall for it.
Thanks for getting back.
I have been consistent in my wording.
I have always referred to Larry Sinclair’s claims
I have a strong business background and have worked with and been around attornies and accountants all of my adult life.
My first job was with a top accounting firm.
I understand records and record keeping.
A recent example that comes to mind is the opinion of 2 major law firms and their recommendation regarding the length of time
for real estate professionals in NC to keep records. Most of the minimum legal requirements are 3 years. These 2 prominent law firms are recommending 10 and 12 years.
I was in business for myself almost half of my former life career spanning over 30 years. I kept appointment books and mileage records and I still have some from 1993 and probably older.
There are too may red flags about Obama’s past and responses. Obama has not been forthright in responding to requests for his records.
As I have repeatedly stated, I hope that the allegations made about him are false.
Okay, so I worked for six years before coming to law school. Every year once I was there for three years, I dumped everything that was older than two years. Now you are talking about a young male Illinois Senator who didn’t have a secretary. That is a fact. If I had to guess, I would imagine that his schedule keeping was sloppy and he probably didn’t think it was important to keep after all he wasn’t the president or something. So can you just try to imagine that the Senator is probably telling the truth that he may have just dumped daily schedules once he became a US Senator. When I left my job for to come to law school that is exactly what I did. I dumped all my schedules and paperwork that was not necessary for someone who would be taking over my job. Why can you not understand that. Why does it have to be something sinister and shady. My god, is that where we are in this country! We always have to assume the worse. I dump my schedules all the time and this is a dude. He ain’t caring about schedules that is what a secretary is for and he did not have one. Cut the man some slack.
I understand and appreciate the fact that Obama
is in an awkward position. He put himself in that position. If he had been more cooperative and more proactive in providing records about his activities during the span of time when he was in the Illinois Senate, the allegations would never have grown in importance and mystique.
What I mean is a resonable accounting for his life, in the senate and away from the senate. He was not in the senate on November 4 1999. There should be a record of his activities. That is only one day out of many. Forget the Sinclair allegations for a moment. What was Obama doing the rest of the time?
Obama has just as many credibility issues as Sinclair. He has also chosen to associate with many questionable personalities including criminals.
Okay so I am what one call a pretty decent person. I found a ring on the ground once and turned it in to the lost and found for my neighborhood. So my sister got married and my brother in law and I are good friends and I helped him start his own plumbing business. Turns out that my brother in law got arrested for cocaine use. True story. I am not lying. Do you think that I am questionable because I did business with my brother in law, a criminal. Is the business that I helped him create a criminal enterprise because of his drug use. Or is it that Senator Obama did legal transactions with someone who turned out to have a criminal side to him. Let’s not think the worst of the Senator.
A. When I was his age I kept records.
B. He was an experienced attorney.
C. I am not running for president.
D. He had some political aspirations.
E. There should be a record or recollection of missing the important first day after the summer break.
F. My opinion: if he didn’t keep records he was
incompetent or if he disposed of them he was incompetent.
I am out of town and using dial up.
As you know, the degree of scrutiny applied and documentation necessary, depends on the job being applied for. Obama is applying for the job of President of the US.
Point of law: Accessory before, during and after the fact.
Guilt by association: at the very least social stigma. Criminal background checks go into many details. If there is a hint of mispropriety, an applicant can be dismissed from further consideration.
Regarding your situation: you are not running for president.
Citizen Wells, good luck. Honestly, we are coming from to different points of view. I choose to by default believe in the good of Senator Obama. I choose to believe that Larry Sinclair, whose case against Senator Obama was unequivocally dismissed in the Minnesota district court (go and look it up in Pacer), is seeking publicity. I choose to believe that a judge seeing all the evidence that Larry and his lawyer brought forward believed that no reasonable person on a jury could find in his favor. That is the judicial standard for a case to be dismissed so early. I choose to believe that Senator Obama will be a great President. Now its your time to choose. I truly hope you will choose not to believe the worst about Senator Obama.
I seek the truth.
All of the candidates must be held to a high standard.
I have many concerns about Obama. These concerns have come about from reading factual data from a broad variety of sources. Some allegations gain credence in the context of known facts and unanswered questions.
One of my darker skinned friends phrased it well a few weeks ago. “We really don’t know Obama.”
Right. And you want this noob to be President of the United States of America? LOL!
You can’t have it both ways!
Female Law Student– I hope you do better in school than here. If you checked the case in MN, you would see that in the 17 pages, the judge in no mentions any evidence presented, etc. Further, there is no mention of Mr. Sinclair having an attorney for that case. The case was dismissed on the fact that it failed to state a claim or cause of action.
You should be studying for finals now, so I hope that you do better on the finals than you’ve shown here. Remember to use the IRAC approach to the essay questions.
I am glad you realize that all of your “facts” are speculation. As a lawyer he may have kept a schedule because he would have kept an assistant. However as a state senator, who makes around 60,000 a year and has a family to provide for, might not have the time or resources to keep a schedule. You also mentioned 11/13/99 where was Obama then you failed to mention? Also if Mr. Sinclair failed polograph test and hs no evidence why would you promote the possibility. Are there holes in your schedule where one might make suggestions about your whereabouts? Oh, but your job does not post your attendence as a part of public record. I too believe in seeking truth, but I will not do it at the expense of someone else. Gather all the real facts then ask the important questions.
Sorry you said Nov 3 to Nov 8. So let me ask that question again Where was Mr. Obama on all of those days? Also where is Mr. Sinclairs schedule and where is his evidence that he was where he says he was?
One last thing. Anyone who claims the skin color of his or her friends is suspect. I have never refered to any of my friends as one of my white friends.
I have done a lot of research.
I have listed a lot of facts, some allegations and some beliefs.
Please read all of my blog before you jump to conclusions.
Do you want to know the truth or is it Obama no matter what?
I do not like racist comments, I don’t like the terms black and white to refer to humans.
That is why I used the term darker skin color.
I have friends of all skin colors and these friends are in my house and I am in theirs.
Mr. Sinclair is not running for president and has been forthcoming when asked for his records. Sinclair today has much more credibility with me than Obama. I am in regular contact with Sinclair and he always answers my questions. Obama may be violating the Illinois FOIA and is at the very least holding it in contempt.
Obama had more income than his State Senator salary.
I was self employed for quite a while and required to keep records. I had no secretary.
When Larry Sinclair arrive d in Chicago on 3rd November 1999 he intended to stay until 6th.
He then extended his stay to 8th.
Confirmation of his arrival, departure and request for an extension has been provided by the legal department of Choice International the company that owned the Comfort Inn, Gurney, Illinois where he stayed. The documents have been posted on LS blog.
He met Barack Obama on 6th in a lounge in downtown Chicago and went with him for a drive in the limousine Larry Sinclair had hired for the duration of his stay.
The limousine dropped off LS at his hotel on the night of 6th before taking BO back to wherever his car was parked.
BO returned to the hotel uninvited and unexpected on 7th.
If my memory serves, BO was missing from the senate for personal business on 4th and also on another day about that time.
On 6th he had his own glass pipe which he used to smoke crack. I understand crack is very addictive. Speculatively, if he were in a drug-taking mode at that time it could have begun on 4th and continued for several days. And there may have been a hangover effect after his last meeting with LS on 7th.
This doesn’t need to be posted, or it could be.
Just a quick question, while I am reading all this: shouldn’t the date referred to toward the top of the article regarding BHO’s campaign letter to Senator Clinton [pressing her to release her White House schedules prior to the Iowa caucuses] be 11/03/2007?
I am pretty sure I pulled that directly from MSM.
I will correct it.
I think the FIX is in on this story, and the MSM is simply waiting for the right moment to bing this story into every living-room across America. What’s sad about all of this is the very real possibility that Obama, if under the influence of drugs, may not even honestly recall his whereabouts, which may be the chief reason he continues to ignore this story. Mrs. Obama may know more about his whereabouts during the first week of November in 1999, and she may not wish to come to grips with the possibility that her husband could have been unfaithful with a woman–let alone another man. For all that Axelrod and Obama did unto former Illinois US Senate candidate Jack Ryan, karma may just be coming back to them. If Mr. Sinclair’s assertions prove true as this story continues to unfold, that collective deafening silence all across this country will be the hour that the Obama crowd will be left speechless and in shock.
I have heard this theory and you may be right.
Many believe the MSM is afraid to go forward or
do so too early because of fear of being perceived as racist.
Thank you for the sensible remarks in your post. I, too think the FIX is in and the primary is in a holding pattern. (hopefully til the fallout begins, I actually want it sooner, not later & As long as it happens) Hillary is in it for the long haul. There may be a method of madness actually being utilized here. Who knows?
I don’t see how anybody reading about this Larry Sinclair thing can think of him as anything but a lonely, possibly mentally ill man looking for attention by making false accusations. Maybe you can give me a different perspective.
Some questions that come to mind:
What was LS doing in Chicago during that period?
What was the name of this “upscale lounge?”
How did he meet BO there? Did anybody else see them there?
Given LS’s past, where did he have the money to rent a limo? And what was his purpose of renting a limo for just himself?
If the lawsuit was dismissed simply because something had been filed incorrectly, why hasn’t it been resubmitted in the proper format?
Also, if these events occurred in 1999, why are they only coming to light now?
If BO was doing blow and having gay sex with LS, he was probably also doing it with other people. Why has nobody else come forward?
Further reading: http://www.wikio.com/politics/election_2008/democrat/barack_obama/larry_sinclair?wfid=53237196 . Does a better job than I do.
I’m bringing this here because in the comments I’ve left on Larry’s blog he’s shown a complete unwillingness to be reasonable, and just seems to want to assert his authority by posting my IP address and then rant about the people spamming his blog. The whole thing is a mess. I’m hoping some of his supporters are more sensible than he is.
I have been following this story for a while and started out as a skeptic.
It sounds like you need to read the chronology from Larry’s blog. He has been very forthcoming and cooperative. He has always answered mine and other’s questions. Perhaps the way you asked the questions was the problem. I know for a fact that Larry & his family have received many personal attacks.
Larry has been far better at supplying records than Obama has. I have heavily researched this.
I also suggest you read my blog starting at least a month ago.
There have been other allegations. You can read them on my blog.
If you read Larry’ s blog and mine, you will have most of your questions answered.
There are many documented facts that add credence to the allegations.
My schedule this week is demanding, but I will answer further questions.
Thanks for asking.
Citizen I to have been following this situation too it appears many others are also intrigued, refer to how many hits on Larry’s Y/T and Blog.. At first my reaction was another phoney hit piece. But as time went on, in my opinion Larry’s story gainned more substance. His basic story has not changed since he first went public on Y/T. As more people have become aware of Larry’s story I have noted the fierce attacks upon Larry and his family-this is very scary. I find it strange that those who dennounce Larry the most, are devoting time and funds to discredit his story. This rings a loud bell to me.. What I would like to know is in your narative you speak of the murder of Donald Young and a second choir member at Trinity-what has happened in this area, ie CPd what if any progress? Mr. Young’s family, has anyone interviewed, were they members of the church? Is any blackmail going on here..I have been following Rezko trial, witness Levine stated that There were drug parties at the Purple room, Special K. Crack-meth, Cocaine, Rezko is Mr. Obama’s financial supporters, does this tie in to Mr. Obama’s story with Sinclair?? Would appreciate your response
First of all I commend you for spending the time to find the truth.
Secondly, some of the same people that have tried to discredit Sinclair have tried to discredit and belittle me.
Larry’s blog has been, let’s say, “adjusted/monitored” by WordPress and now it appears mine has as well.
One of my latest concerns is a WordPress and CNN link.
Back to your question.
I have been intrigued and concerned by the gay murders of men around Obama for some time.
Donald Young, Larry Bland and Nathaniel Spencer were all gay and murdered late last year.
If you read more here you will find out that a former Chicago restaurant owner and chef heard regular rumors from the gay community that Obama was Gay.
Of course Larry Sinclair alleges that Donald Young contacted him shortly before he was murdered.
I have begun revisiting these murders the past week. It is hard to get information.
You may have noticed that I contacted the Illinois Attorney General’s office some time ago and got an email and written response.
Keep checking back and keep investigating.
Good luck and best wishes.
I’ve read the chronology and the FAQ as well as your blog entries. The questions I posed in the above post were in response to reading those web sites. None have been answered by LS or any of his supporters.
I strongly disagree with you about LS’s demeanor. I’ve not known him to be forthright at all, especially since as an accuser he has the burden of proof here. You mentioned something in this blog about wanting access to BO’s cell phone records to corroborate LS’s story. That would require a search warrant, and LS has offered nothing more than circumstantial evidence: nothing that would even remotely hold up in court. Right now it’s he said/he said, and considering that right now LS has offered no proof that he isn’t more than a lonely attention seeker, there’s no reason for BO to even give such allegations the light of day. LS keeps making the case that Obama has the burden of proof, that simply because LS has stated such allegations with no proof beyond a hotel receipt that he should respond to them.
The fact is this: the mainstream media is hungry for blood. They always love to see the best and brightest fall. Nothing would be better for their ratings than a gay sex/drugs scandal involving BO. I feel that if there was an ounce of truth to this, it’d be all over spring sweeps. I mean, we all saw how the media brought down Howard Dean for a *lot* less than this. It’s all about ratings, and if you learn anything from America’s obsession with reality TV, it’s that they love to draw blood, they love scandal, they love drama. And what’s more dramatic: sniping about whether Americans are truly “bitter,” or a good old fashioned sex scandal? The fact is that at present, LS has shown less evidence than what the NYT gathered about McCain. If he could get even that kind of evidence, it’d be everywhere.
Additionally, am I the only one who finds it fishes that LS alleges that the supposed limo driver is willing to testify? I think that if I had driven the two of them in a limo in 1999, I certainly wouldn’t remember it in 2007 or 2008. How many people has that driver driven around since then? The guy must have a better memory than the majority of us. Just a thought.
Instead going through the necessary motions to make his case believable to more than conspiracy theorists, he is continuing to see his credibility spiral to the ground as he continues to lower to the level of people who spam his guestbook. He’s shown himself at best to be exceptionally childish and at worse to be emotionally unstable. He claims to have a lawyer, but I can’t think of a single lawyer who would advise him to act in the manner he has.
So right now he’s stuck doing interviews on a show with a guy who’s a fellow conspiracy theorist. Who else is he going to get an interview with? Art Bell?
It all seems fishy, but it seems that a lot of you believe the guy. Maybe I’m missing something? Help me out here. Answer my questions above. No rush: the election’s not until November.
1. You may want to go back and read this blog a little slower. I would also recommend you research the Illinois FOIA and position on records access. His cell phone records are not out of the question.
2. If I had been the limo driver and witnessed what Sinclair alleges, I promise you I would remember it!
3. The MSM has generally done a poor job of asking Obama questions and insisting on answers except for the recent ABC debate and Tim Russert.
4. Obama is afraid of something. He has bowed out of another debate.
5. I still refer to Sinclair’s claim as allegations but he has acted with much more credibility than Obama.
6. Where there is smoke there is fire.
7. The attention being paid to Sinclair from antagonists has been escalating. Why are they spending so much money and resources?
8. The Attorney General of Illinois is taking my
9 . Did you read my post about the lawsuit against the Governor of NC?
You think you can get BO’s personal cell phone records through the FOIA? You might be able to get his Senate office’s phone records out of that, but could you imagine the can of worms that would open if a judge allowed personal cell phone records under that jurisdiction? If LS can get those by saying he blew BO and produce a receipt from a cheap hotel outside of town, then anybody could get any elected officials personal phone records at any time, basically. If it’s that easy, why hasn’t, for example, Larry Craig’s cell phone records been posted for the world to see?
I saw your post about the NC governor and about your claim to the Attorney General. If there are problems with his official government records, that’s a different issue entirely. I don’t see how you’d find anything about LS in there, unless BO is dumb enough to call people for discreet sex on his government phone.
If I’d been the limo driver and I saw what LS alleges, I would have kicked those guys out of the limo. So we’re just speculating here. Hell, I’ve never been *in* a limo, so I don’t know if the driver would have been able to see anything other than people getting in and out. Isn’t there some sort of tinted shield? Seriously, I don’t know.
Beyond that, you’ve put out a bunch of opinion. The media’s done a poor job asking Obama question? They’ve done the same job they’ve done with Hillary, and they’ve been far more critical with those two than they’ve ever been with McCain. However, that’s just my opinion.
And he bowed out of a debate because he’s a afraid, or because he’s done 20+ other ones. How many times can people talk about the same things over and over?
Also…one of your nine points is a metaphor? Ok, let me counter: sometimes when there’s smoke, there’s fire. Sometimes when there’s smoke, someone has turned on a fog machine.
BTW, you’ve ignored any question of mine with any substance. I’ve asked the questions about LS’s story because it doesn’t make sense on a logical level, and he refuses to address such questions. I guess you all are on the same page.
An Observation on MT’s comments
The MSM selects the stories it wants to cover. We can go all the back to FDR, the MSM almost never commented on the fact that FDR was a cripple, during his 4 terms as president, I believe they rarely showed FDR being supported while standing. Than there President Kennedy’s womanizing. The press knew and never reporte Kennedy’s affairs. MLK and his affairs with various women-never reported on..There are many other examples..So MT’s statement regarding MSM not reporting is taken with a grain of salt
I addressed the cell phone issue earlier on this blog with a quote from a knowledgeable source.
Remember the recent call girl scandal. Yes I believe Obama is arrogant and stupid enough to leave a trail.
You are a die hard look the other way Obama supporter. Diversions don’t work with me. They’re starting to not work for Obama.
In regard to Sinclair’s story, stay tuned.
Steve: the media in the time for FDR and JFK was a totally different animal. 24-hour TV news changed all that.
Citizenwells: So anyone who dares challenge Obama has to be a hardcore Obama supporter whose opinion can’t be changed? Yes, I support Obama now, but I’m investigating allegations like this to make sure I’m making the right decision. I feel that all politicians are scum; it kind of goes with the definition. So far I’ve found Obama to be mildly less scummy than the rest, but I’ve felt it was time to look beyond the surface and perhaps see *all* of who I plan to support before I make that vote. What the LS people seem to be showing is that they are capable of little more than name calling. Larry’s colonoscopy post of today just made me shake my head. His lawyer must be *screaming!*
You obviously are unwilling to have a discussion, and to help me understand your opinion. You just want to call names and ignore questions that make you uncomfortable.
So now I understand why you are a Larry supporter; you work just like him.
I’m no longer going to waste my time. Good day.
First line, replace Obama with LS. Trying to type this between commercial breaks in the basketball game…sorry.
I am on the road for a major family event.
I have been trying to check on the blog and respond.
Let me put it to you this way:
1. I have never seen anything like Obama as a serious candidate in my life.
2. I have never been a Hillary supporter. She looks really good compared to Obama.
Don’t say the MSM is a different animal today..They chose what they will run with-when they are given their scripts. Did they report on the Rev Wright issue?? No-not till it appeared on internet. Are MSM covering the Tony Rezko case, no. Even through there is much interesting info comeing out of this trial. The media is way to jaded- CNN, MSNBC are sounding boards, acting like female cheerleaders for Mr. Obama.. Yes the MSM is a different animal-they are not true unbiased reporters seeking the truth.
I still would like clarafication on the murders of Donal Young and there more? Has Larry contacted Mr. Young’s family? Has the CPD released any press release regarding this case? I have heard the stories of corruption Chicago politics. Mr. Young’s murder occurred in Dec, 2007-Is there any way to get some type of invesigation into this matter.. Can phone records be traced so that Mr. Sinclair’s claims can be verified? I think that media coverage could force CPD to really launch qa serious investigation.. There just seems too many concidences that ring alarm bells to this story. What type of investigative body be brought in to
issure a serious inquiry instead of a whitewash..Which has happened way too many times in American history. What is the status of LS story at this time…
Female Law Student (FLS) posts on many blogs. She keeps repeating the same thing. Her first great “gotcha” on LS is that his first law suit was dismissed by the court. She announced this all over the place sometime after LS had announced it on his blog. So it was hardly the product of a forensic legal mind.
She was corrected by LS and many others on the net and informed that he had entered the law suit without the aid of a lawyer and that it was not dismissed on the merits but because he had failed to seek damages and he still had the option of opposing the dismissal by attending to the technicalities pointed out by the judge.
I notice FLS now adds in those two facts in her comment to you. However, she is still presenting it as the product of her research.
Stranger still is her new insistence that LS does not have a law suit before the courts.
After he realised that he really needed a lawyer he found Montogomery Sibley a well-known lawyer whose practice is in Washington DC (and elsewhere). After studying all LS evidence – and there is more despite FLS denial – he took the case on a contingency basis.
His first advice was not to seek the reinstatement of the first law suit in Minnesota but to file a different kind of law suit in the federal courts in Washington DC.
What I find odd about FLS is she is now trying to convince people that there is no law suit in DC. LS has invited her to check with the lawyer. I have corresponded several times with the lawyer as have others. I have a copy of the law suit. It has been reported in the press. Recently Justice Kennedy of the DC district court authorized discovery through subpoenas.
But FLS says it does not show up in Lexis Nexis which only privileged people like her have . I have it, too. It does show up. It also shows up in Pacer which, if she is a law student, she should know about.
Her claims are strange. Even if she were the head of a major law firm she wouldn’t be justified in citing here status as a lawyer to contradict a citizen or lecture others on the facts. But she is no more than student, if she is that.
Why does she not pick up the phone and speak to Montogmorery Sibley, if she has a thirst for the truth.
My conclusion is she is a propagandist for Barack Obama. She believes that simply repeating her false assertions will browbeat people into believing them.
The manner in which she empathizes with Obama emotively suggests that she is not objective.
Yes, Victor, I found out about FLS & crew weeks ago, discussed it with Larry & posted on his blog.
We must not let up from exposing Obama and his
You’ll never find unbiased reporting anywhere; it is absolutely, 100% against human nature. Everyone has a bias; everyone has an angle. That goes for everyone reporting the news and everybody watching it.
It always makes me laugh to read the letters to the editor in a local newspaper, or (more recently) the comments on some news site, local or national. I’ve seen many occasions where one person writes a letter talking about the “blatant conservative bias” of a certain story, complete with examples to back them up, and the next letter is somebody else whining about liberal bias in the very same article, with their own examples, sometimes the same examples the other guy used.
Sure, each media outlet chooses what to run; that hasn’t changed. When you choose a source (or sources) for you news, you are saying that you believe that source is making the best choices. I won’t argue with that. The difference between now and the times of FDR and JFK are far beyond that. It goes toward the values of society at that time. In those times, the privacy of public officials was, for better or for worse, occasionally valued. It wasn’t important whether or not JFK was a sex addict, or if Martin Luther King Jr. was a rampant adulterer, or if FDR was in a wheelchair, or if Eleanor Roosevelt was a lesbian or whatever. Given that the news came from a daily newspaper, or from a 30-60 minute daily news program, the media felt that there were better things to worry about…like the issues.
Today we have many channels trying to fill their broadcasts with news 24/7 along with the Internet news, always needing to have something fresh. Information is at everyone’s fingertips, so everyone needs to know *everything*.
Our reality TV society wants to make sure that nothing about anybody is beyond their reach: the more sensational the better. Nobody is safe. Nobody is above the news. So when Larry Sinclair comes out with such sensational accusations, the kind of stuff that the media kills for. Stuff that’s at least ten times more scandalous as what Eliot Spitzer did, what Larry Craig did, maybe even what Mark Foley did. So when he comes out with such allegations and the only people that interview him are a sleazy tabloid and a guy that believes in chemtrails, that indicates to me that his story is worth scrutiny, that something’s not right with it. The fact that nobody wants to answer questions about his story and just wants to direct me to websites that don’t answer my questions, that’s a red flag right there.
Quite frankly, I wouldn’t put the actions LS has described above *any* politician, but something about his story just doesn’t smell right, and unless anyone can bring forth some decent corroborating evidence (that is, something more than a hotel receipt and conspiracy theories), then I’m not going to believe it.
Pingback: Blagojevich trial, Obama Levine ties, Stuart Levine must testify, Rezko trial, Politician A, Politician B, Springfield IL, Illinois capital, Purple hotel, Drug parties, Obama records « Citizen WElls
It seems that we’re pulling down Democrats at a faster rate this month with Hillary and Menendez,we had to be content with one a month in Jan.and Feb. with Silver and Williams.Will the big guy be next?