Rosenbaum’s Revelation, part 2

Posted on February 13, 2008 by nuke

Remember the story from Ron Rosenbaum, about the LAT sitting on a “potentially devastating sexual scandal involving a leading Presidential candidate?”

Most of the speculation at the time centered around Hillary Clinton and and her girl Friday, Huma Abedin.

Fast-forward 4 months, and take a look at this exclusive report over at Cao’s.

Now have a look at this.

Finally, check out this video.

Is it possible that this is Rosenbaum’s revelation?

Update:  More at Smoking Gun

Filed under: Election 2008, News and politics, obama | Tagged: , , , , , , ,

« The short, short list for VP Thursday Open »

7 Responses to “Rosenbaum’s Revelation, part 2”

  1. swampie, on February 14th, 2008 at 9:04 pm Said:

    I dunno….I thought that Obama would be attracted to somebody flashier.

  2. Robert D, on February 14th, 2008 at 9:06 pm Said:

    But he pulled his teef and everything to be a true homo. Sick bastid.

  3. swampie, on February 14th, 2008 at 9:23 pm Said:

    Well, dang. Sounds like a country song in there somewhere.

  4. Robert D, on February 14th, 2008 at 9:27 pm Said:

    Yup, I’m hearin some banjos playin. :lol:

  5. velvethammer, on February 15th, 2008 at 7:47 pm Said:

    I saw this over at Cao’s too.
    Seriously what do y’all think about this?

    What a bomb to drop.
    Talk about your ‘gay bomb’
    If true. w0w O w0w!
    If not …I wouldn’t want to be in his loafers.

    Nuke
    The connection you made to…
    LAT sitting on a “potentially devastating sexual scandal involving a leading Presidential candidate?”
    …came across my mind.
    And a doozy of a scandal it would be. It blows Huma-Hillary right out of the water.
    lol

    Swampwoman
    “I thought that Obama would be attracted to somebody flashier.”
    Me to. Go figure.

  6. jheregboss, on June 25th, 2008 at 1:18 pm Said:

    Larry Sinclair has thus far failed to produce a single viable piece of evidence. Is it any wonder nobody in the mainstream media wants to risk their career and credibility covering this farce?

    Legally and morally, the burden is on Sinclair to prove his allegations, not on Obama to disprove them. Larry Sinclair knows this, but he is banking (quite literally) on the fact that the court of public opinion operates quite differently than a court of law, and isn’t making any substantial effort to prove his accusations. He knows that it’s hard to prove you DIDN’T do something, and is rallying the ignorant under this pretense to send him contributions (and any other number of other ‘fundraising’ activities of questionable legality).

    I’ve been trying to get Mr. Sinclair to response to questions on his blog (simple ones, like “If you think Obama’s phone records would prove you right, why don’t you provide your phone records, they should work just as well, right?” ), but the blog is so heavily moderated that not one single real question can get through, and apparently even his own worshipers are now having a hard time posting due to overaggressive comment deletion.

    I know several people who’ve tried to ask questions of Mr. Sinclair, but that is apparently not allowed on his blog, despite the fact that his blog clearly states “You may comment on any post, regardless of your position. However, please note that any and all abusive, threatening and vulgar comments and emails will result in your user name, email address and IP address being posted regardless and without the posters permission. You have been warned.” .

    Small wonder, huh? The guy who wants to force Obama to answer his questions will not answer anyone else’s :)

    I personally would love it if someone in the media just exposed this guy for the fraud he is. I’d watch that episode for certain, and I’m sure the advertisers would be well pleased by the number of viewers ;)

  7. nuke, on June 25th, 2008 at 2:24 pm Said:

    I don’t think there’s much doubt that Sinclair is a fraud.

Leave a Reply