Is this for real?
Last edited by a moderator:
Larry Sinclair, Donald Young, Barack Obama, Gay Sex, Drugs, and Murder
- Thread starter Makalakumu
- Start date
Is this for real?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #2
Apparently, Larry Sinclair has filed suit in MN against Barack Obama.
http://bigheaddc.com/2008/02/14/larry-sinclair-v-barack-obama/
Larry Sinclair filed suit in Minnesota District Court on Monday against Barack Obama, along with Obamas campaign strategist David Axelrod and others, regarding issues stemming from Sinclairs allegations that he used cocaine and performed a sexual act with Obama in 1999. Abbreviated excerpt:
http://bigheaddc.com/2008/02/14/larry-sinclair-v-barack-obama/
Larry Sinclair filed suit in Minnesota District Court on Monday against Barack Obama, along with Obamas campaign strategist David Axelrod and others, regarding issues stemming from Sinclairs allegations that he used cocaine and performed a sexual act with Obama in 1999. Abbreviated excerpt:
This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1981, 18 U.S.C. 241 and the First Amendment of the United States Constitutions right to Freedom of Speech. Defendants have and continue to conspire against the rights of citizens in that they are actively engaged in ongoing internet intimidation, claim to be conducting illegal investigations into plaintiffs personal life, actively involved in preventing allegations of illegal drug use and sexual activity involving Defendant Obama from becoming public knowledge.
Plaintiff states that he personally engaged in sexual activity and personally used illegal drugs in November 1999 with U.S. Senator Barack Obama on two separate occasions. Plaintiff states that he attempted to contact defendant Obama in the fall of 2007 to advise defendant Obama to make his 1999 use of illegal drugs public himself and that if he did not do so then plaintiff would have no choice but to come forward as defendants actions were relevant to his running for President of the United States. Defendant Obama ignored plaintiffs attempts to allow defendant Obama to reveal this information on his own.
Plaintiff states that he personally engaged in sexual activity and personally used illegal drugs in November 1999 with U.S. Senator Barack Obama on two separate occasions. Plaintiff states that he attempted to contact defendant Obama in the fall of 2007 to advise defendant Obama to make his 1999 use of illegal drugs public himself and that if he did not do so then plaintiff would have no choice but to come forward as defendants actions were relevant to his running for President of the United States. Defendant Obama ignored plaintiffs attempts to allow defendant Obama to reveal this information on his own.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #3
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message518237/pg1
Jeff Rense interviews Sinclair on his show and he explains what he knows and the legal actions that are being taken. What is going on here? Was Mr. Young Obama's gay lover and was he silenced? Or is this another ******** swiftboating? If so, by who, McCain or Clinton?
Jeff Rense interviews Sinclair on his show and he explains what he knows and the legal actions that are being taken. What is going on here? Was Mr. Young Obama's gay lover and was he silenced? Or is this another ******** swiftboating? If so, by who, McCain or Clinton?
Typical "Arkansas Project" lies and slander.
Remember during the first and second Clinton campaigns how there were allegations that "all" of his former opponents when he was governor were murdered and that had all been covered up? Remember the "Clinton had women abducted so that he could rape them while he snorthed coke" rumors?
It all led back to political operatives in the opposition.
This will turn out to be the same thing.
It doesn't matter if it's true. Just getting that into peoples' brains is enough. "Obama" "Cocaine" "Gay" "Rev. Wright's Church". Get them all in the same sentence and you have sex, the evil homoseckshuls who are hiding under your bed ready to steal your precious bodily fluids, that old tired pastor non-scandal and, of course, cocaine. Cocaine == Scary Negro, so you get the added race-baiting thrown in. The case will never get to court, and the accuser's bills will be quietly paid by philanthropists who just happen to be politically opposed to the Senator from Illinois. In much the same way, Republican donors quietly paid for Paula Jones' cosmetic surgery bills a discreet while after her 15 minutes of fame.
Pssst. I hear Barrack Obama sired two Black children. Film on Fox News at 5,6,7,8,9,10 and 11.
Remember during the first and second Clinton campaigns how there were allegations that "all" of his former opponents when he was governor were murdered and that had all been covered up? Remember the "Clinton had women abducted so that he could rape them while he snorthed coke" rumors?
It all led back to political operatives in the opposition.
This will turn out to be the same thing.
It doesn't matter if it's true. Just getting that into peoples' brains is enough. "Obama" "Cocaine" "Gay" "Rev. Wright's Church". Get them all in the same sentence and you have sex, the evil homoseckshuls who are hiding under your bed ready to steal your precious bodily fluids, that old tired pastor non-scandal and, of course, cocaine. Cocaine == Scary Negro, so you get the added race-baiting thrown in. The case will never get to court, and the accuser's bills will be quietly paid by philanthropists who just happen to be politically opposed to the Senator from Illinois. In much the same way, Republican donors quietly paid for Paula Jones' cosmetic surgery bills a discreet while after her 15 minutes of fame.
Pssst. I hear Barrack Obama sired two Black children. Film on Fox News at 5,6,7,8,9,10 and 11.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #5
Okay, hyperbole aside, what can you really provide that discredits this rumor?
I personally think that Obama will be our next president, but I find if curious that both him and our ex-president share such foibles. All of this is blackmail worthy...
I personally think that Obama will be our next president, but I find if curious that both him and our ex-president share such foibles. All of this is blackmail worthy...
See how you've been sucked in.
You don't ask "Is there any basis for believing this?"
You ask "What can you provide that discredits this rumor?"
Nobody can prove a negative, but you can make a person spend infinite time and money trying to do just that. That's what makes this sort of slander so effective. Throw as much dirt as you want, and say "Well, he never disproved any of it." In the minds of people it becomes a fact that all of it is at least partially true.
That's why the burden of proof is always on the person making the claim.
Take a look at what's going on here. There's a whispering campaign with a lawsuit coming at a critical time in the election. There's no proof, just sensational claims which just happen to be at the right time to distract a candidate from the election and put all the slanders into one neat five second package. It also ties the target to the Clintons, who have high negatives if only in a "see he's just like them" manner.
There's no proof, no evidence, no reason for it except that it's politically useful. And once it's come out you, and many others like you, will have doubts. Maybe he really is as crack-smoking ****** on the downlow. The Party Faithful will pass it around, and at that point an Angel with a Flaming Sword couldn't convince them otherwise.
When there's something resembling evidence get back to me. Until then it's just dirty election politics as usual and true to Swiftboating, Arkansas Project, Harlem for Muskie, and California - Don't Vote Jewish form.
You don't ask "Is there any basis for believing this?"
You ask "What can you provide that discredits this rumor?"
Nobody can prove a negative, but you can make a person spend infinite time and money trying to do just that. That's what makes this sort of slander so effective. Throw as much dirt as you want, and say "Well, he never disproved any of it." In the minds of people it becomes a fact that all of it is at least partially true.
That's why the burden of proof is always on the person making the claim.
Take a look at what's going on here. There's a whispering campaign with a lawsuit coming at a critical time in the election. There's no proof, just sensational claims which just happen to be at the right time to distract a candidate from the election and put all the slanders into one neat five second package. It also ties the target to the Clintons, who have high negatives if only in a "see he's just like them" manner.
There's no proof, no evidence, no reason for it except that it's politically useful. And once it's come out you, and many others like you, will have doubts. Maybe he really is as crack-smoking ****** on the downlow. The Party Faithful will pass it around, and at that point an Angel with a Flaming Sword couldn't convince them otherwise.
When there's something resembling evidence get back to me. Until then it's just dirty election politics as usual and true to Swiftboating, Arkansas Project, Harlem for Muskie, and California - Don't Vote Jewish form.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #7
There are plenty of things that could discredit this Sinclair guy. Plus, there are plenty of things that could distance Obama from Young. How do you think that good detectives ever sort through lists of suspects? It's the same sort of methodology...
With that being said, here we have a serious allegation that is being taken up right now by our legal system.
I hate to sit here and throw dirt on the MSM's chosen savior that so many have chosen to follow, but there it is...
I'll quote Winston Smith, "I hate purity. I want everything to be corrupt."
It always is, especially when you get to the level these people are at.
With that being said, here we have a serious allegation that is being taken up right now by our legal system.
I hate to sit here and throw dirt on the MSM's chosen savior that so many have chosen to follow, but there it is...
I'll quote Winston Smith, "I hate purity. I want everything to be corrupt."
It always is, especially when you get to the level these people are at.
From a recent article on the subject:
OK. The part about the lawyer's kilt wasn't completely necessary. But I just had to mention it
And another one. It seems that he's not exactly an unimpeachable source and has made similar claims in other presidential elections.
OK. The part about the lawyer's kilt wasn't completely necessary. But I just had to mention it
And another one. It seems that he's not exactly an unimpeachable source and has made similar claims in other presidential elections.
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
well, i agree this is most likely garbage, but I think it isnt comming from obama's political rivals as much as it is from the accusers greed.
I disagree that the Rev Write story is a non-scandal.
I disagree that the Rev Write story is a non-scandal.
