Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Larry Sinclair: Obama Accuser Goes After Whitehouse.com

"Let me assure you that I'm not going away, this story will get out, Mr. Obama will, in fact respond, and you guys are doing the job that he wants you to do because as long as you keep attacking and keeping it out,you know, he's not going to take legal action against me. That's something all of you need to understand. You keep saying, why hasn't he? Because he's not a fool. He knows if he does he is going to be exposed for the liar and the junkie that he is." Larry Sinclair, February 28, 2008, Youtube

He's still at it, Obama Accuser Larry Sinclair, pedaling his accusations that he had a night or two of illicit sex and illegal drugs back in 1999 with then State Representative Barack Obama.

Sinclair's First Youtube Video

Those accusations have become a "side" issue as far as Sinclair is concerned. He's got a new target, Whitehouse.com, and its owner, Dan Parisi, and 20,000 reasons to pursue it.

Obfuscation 101

Sinclair is alleging on the sites, Larry's Space, MySpace.com, and Big Head DC, that the owner of Whitehouse.com, Dan Parisi, will face criminal charges over a $20,000 check issued to Sinclair.

Why will Parisi face criminal charges? Over at Larry's Space, which Sinclair warns no one can copy from the site or face copyright charges, Larry has his new crusade, (against Whitehouse.com) in full swing.

Full of charges and countercharges, Sinclair claims Parisi reneged on a $20,000 check Parisi evidently cut Sinclair after Larry submitted to two polygraph exams. Sinclair has posted in large, bold letters on his Larry's Space site that Parisi will face "FRAUD" and "THEFT" charges for putting a "Stop Check" on the $20,000.

Parisi also cut two checks in the amount of $5,000, both of them were to two charities in Sinclair's hometown of Duluth, Minnesota, and both were exactly what Sinclair asked Parisi to do.

The original Whitehouse.com deal with Sinclair was simple: take a polygraph and we'll pay you $10,000, pass or fail. If you pass, then we'll pay an additional $100,000. If this is beginning to sound convoluted, then it is, and it works in Sinclair's favor. All this balderdash over the checks has obscured Sinclair's original accusations against Senator Obama. Now we have the "Perils of Poor Larry" having to fight not only against the Obama campaign and the all-powerful Senator Obama, but now he has to go up against Whitehouse.com and Dan Parisi.

In the interim, we cleared some of the smoke and mirrors from the room and looked at what "evidence" Sinclair has provided in his original claim, that back in November of 1999, he met Obama, then a State Representative of Illinois at an "upscale lounge" where Larry had gone in his very own "rented" limo.

It's been over a month since Larry posted his first video on Youtube where he claimed Obama went out to Larry's limo, that Obama "procured" crack cocaine and powder cocaine for the two, and that Obama and Larry had sex. Sinclair then goes on to claim he and Obama met for a second night of passion at a Choice Hotel in Gurnee, Illinois.

Since the video Larry has only provided what he considers are two key pieces of evidence: a "receipt" from Choice Hotels that he claims on Larry's Space he obtained from Choice Hotels which purportedly shows a stay in Gurnee, IL. back in November of 1999. He also says he has a copy of the bar bill from the "upscale" lounge.

That's it, proof someone stayed at a Choice Hotel in Gurnee, IL, back in November of 1999 and a copy of credit card charges from a bar during the same period.

Since most of us have been raised on CourtTv, we'd find these two pieces of "evidence" do not prove beyond a reasonable doubt as to whether Senator Obama was there. This so-called evidence proves nothing. None, zip, nada. It doesn't even prove Senator Obama was even in the same time zone.

While Larry trotted out his "evidence" he's also been kicking up a fuss with Parisi and Whitehouse.com..

A source has informed DBKP that Sinclair may have been soliciting funds to help with his "legal fees" in fighting Whitehouse.com and Parisi.

We wondered why Sinclair would need "funds" to fight Whitehouse.com. Sinclair claims Parisi will face criminal charges. This means the police would be involved. As far as we know, regular citizens rarely need money when the police decide to file charges against someone else.

By Sinclair's own admission, Whitehouse.com did cut two checks in the amount of $5,000 each which were addressed to two separate charities in Duluth, this was what Sinclair instructed Parisi to do, way back before the two polygraphs and their relationship went sour. Two five thousand checks equals $10,000, the amount Whitehouse.com said it would offer Sinclair to take the polygraphs. It was Sinclair's decision, not Whitehouse's to stipulate the monies should go to charities.

We're not sure where the $20,000 came in, again, we know for a fact that Whitehouse.com's initial offer to Sinclair was $10,000 to take the test, pass or fail, an additional $100,000 if Sinclair passed.

Whitehouse.com never released the full results of the two tests. They had posted on their site that both tests administered to Larry showed "deceptions." It was shortly after this period that Sinclair began to make allegations against the polygraph expert, Ed Gelb, claiming Gelb lied about his credentials.

Aside from the Sinclair-Whitehouse.com saga the fact remains that Mr. Sinclair made some very serious allegations against Senator Obama, of illicit sex and illegal drug use. Mr. Sinclair hasn't provided any evidence other than a Choice Hotel stay and a bar bill. Mr. Sinclair hasn't been forthcoming on where he's lived or employment records. Whitehouse.com did pay Sinclair the $10,000 and now it's been rumored Sinclair has asked for "donations" to help him fight both Obama and now Whitehouse.

All we can say is "a fool and his money are soon parted".


Image - Gay on the Range
Source - Larry's Space


Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.
Source - Youtube

No comments:

Post a Comment

Leave your name/nic.
We've changed the comments section to allow non-registered users to comment.
We'll continue like that until it's being abused.
We reserve the right to delete all abusive or otherwise inappropriate comments.