Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

National Enquirer Story Update: Retracts Hotel Surveillance Claim

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:00 PM
Original message
National Enquirer Story Update: Retracts Hotel Surveillance Claim
"....someone out there is “offering more than $1 MILLION to witnesses to reveal what they know about the ALLEGED hush-hush affair.” WHY? "


" The National Enquirer, which published a report this morning that “investigators are attempting to obtain a tape” that proved an illicit rendezvous between President Barack Obama and former US Senate campaign staffer Vera Baker, has updated their story this afternoon to retract the claim that there is video evidence of the affair with the alleged testimony of an anonymous chauffeur.


Looks like the National Enquirer Obama sex scandal is unraveling rather quickly. The latest from the paper is that “An Enquirer reporter has confirmed the limo driver’s account of the secret 2004 rendezvous.” The limo driver allegedly in the know about the affair is not a new piece of their puzzle– that claim was there last night– but in the absence of the video evidence of ambiguous age, which was the center of their report and would have been the one thing to lend them any credibility, the limo driver is the core of the story.


This clarifies that they are trying to uncover a 6-year-old maybe-affair with a testimony from the same time period, and that, rather than having footage, they just have one first-hand account of someone driving Baker to a hotel, where the President may or may not have been. The Enquirer has not made clear the changes other than adding the word “update” to the body of the report.

This also shifts the weight of the article from the story of the affair itself to the fact that, apparently, someone out there is “offering more than $1 million to witnesses to reveal what they know about the alleged hush-hush affair.” Why? If it indeed happened six years ago, and no one brought it up during Obama’s presidential campaign, what use is it now, halfway into his first term? The obvious go-to answer is that this could energize the far-right in time for the 2010 elections, but once it is revealed who perpetuated the rumors, true or not, about a story so aged, the tactic could easily backfire.


more

<http://www.mediaite.com/online/national-enquirer-obama-story-update-retracts-hotel-surveillance-claim/>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. nice try, murdoch
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. YES! It smells like the SAME OL' Clinton smear tactics of the past.
All they have is a limo driver who's licking his chops and thinking of getting his mitts on that $1 million dollar story bounty. Give me a freakin break.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. umm, except Clinton WAS (and always has) having affairs. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. I think THEY would loved nothing better than to stigmatize a 'same-as-Clinton ' imagery for their
base and using this trigger as a beating bat against Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unc70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
19. Why would you think it Clinton? Realize Clinton's falsely blamed for much
Why do you think this is in any way about the Clintons or their supporters? They were blamed for stuff that was setup by others, including some by the Obama operatives. Same for the Edwards campaign. Those in and around the Obama campaign have now admitted that they were pushing some of those stories themselves. No surprising, or even unusual.

As for why things were not used against Obama during the campaigns, that raises several interesting questions, some of which lack adequate explanations. While most of the questions being raised about Obama were discredited by association with the birthers obsession with his BC, there remained a lot of puzzling questions regarding his life and career.

Some of those questions were minor, others fairly significant. But few were ever covered by the press. Even when the LA Times or someone similar would do an investigative story, no one else would pick it up. Without the AP or the mainstream TV picking up the story, it would just disappear.

Does it matter that Obama and his mother were living in Seattle by the time he was a month old? Or that a single "retainer" completely paid Obama for over a year after he lost that IL election, with a single letter apparently his only work product? Who knows!

There were quite a few rumors around about Springfield and even DC. Those kind of rumors are common when you are only going home on some weekends. I have no idea if there is anything to such rumors, but I have learned not to be over-confident in denying any rumors associated with elected officials. Way too many have proven true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #19
29. Your post is filled with garbage
No one accused Clinton of anything here. You misread the comments. The op was suggesting that the media framed Clinton - though Clinton, in fact, had affairs.

Is your nonsense of Obama and his mom living in Seattle a birther accusation? He was born in Hawaii and mostly raised there. His mom's family had moved from the Seattle area to Hawaii years before. 2008 is over and Hillary lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unc70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. Probably misread who was accused of smear; Seattle is from area newspapers and Wiki
Edited on Sun May-02-10 01:51 AM by unc70
I appear to have misread who was being accused of doing the smearing. There have been so many posts at DU, even recently, blaming the Clintons and their supporters of racism wrt Obama that I misinterpreted. My mistake, somewhat distracted by Times Square story.

No, Obama being in Seattle during his first year is not something from the birthers. While many of us knew that Ann Dunham grew up near Seattle and not in Kansas as his campaign often implied, most of what has been reported about Obama living there appears to be more in the "civic pride", "local connection" type reporting. "Obama's mother was a local girl", that kind of thing.

In several articles in the Seattle local press (barely noticed elsewhere), Ann's high school classmates describe her and her baby being back in Seattle after one year in Hawaii, that she was enrolled at University of Washington, trying to make it as single mom, but eventually returning to Hawaii in the spring because it was really hard on her trying to do it all.

Since the inaugeration, I happened upon a little story about a woman to says she lived near Ann and Barack in Seattle, and that she had sometimes been his babysitter. Most of these stories seem to fall into the "I knew him when" category. There were similar stories regarding where Obama had lived in NYC during college and while he was working in the low end of the financial industry before moving to Chicago.

Before the election, I joked about knowing where Obama was living when he was six months old, but I mostly kept it to myself and a few people at DU by private message. Not interested in making too much of it at that time, though it did seem a bit curious.

I have not personally looked at documents from that time such as phone books, directories, alumni records, or anything else to verify this information, but I have not seen anything that would contradict them having lived there at that time. Have not seen this info from the birthers, but I have not looked very closely at their claims. I have thought it was to Obama's advantage to keep that issue stirred up and not provide them with any documents that might defuse the issue for most.

EDIT: Just looked at the Wiki for Ann Dunham. It has been updated to include most of what I describe above, along with various articles and other documents that confirm this information. Check it out; doesn't appear to be any way related to the birthers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unc70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. Still think Obama first year in Seattle is a birther accusation?
Have you checked out the version of Obama's first year in Seattle as I described it?

Your thoughts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
20. Actually this is not a murdoch rag
and they have about a 500 batting average.

Remember they did uncover oxy boy's drug abuse issues, as well as a few other scandals... a certain Presidential Candidate that has a love child comes to mind. (And I still don't give a hoot and that was a tragedy)

In fact, they were TARGETED by the Anthrax killer and "bagged" one of their reporters.

Yes, please do hand me over my tinfoil hat on that one.

I'd say somebody who is a private citizen... the Congressional Staffer, lawyered up and they have no story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarLeftFist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
23. Sarah Palin's affair:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
av8rdave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Ah, yes the National Enquirer
Their reputation for unimpeachable fact is legendary.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Actually - Name One Major Thing They've Gotten Wrong In The Last Two Decades nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
av8rdave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. OK, you got me there
I recall the infamous Carol Burnett story/lawsuit, but guess that was more than two decades ago.

OK, OK..I'll start reading it. I'm sure this story is true as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. I recall they ran with the Larry Sinclair bullshit
Had to backtrack then, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Merlot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. They never actually proved bushco was having an affair with condi
or that laura was living in a separate residence away from the white house.

and that's the only headline that I can recall from my days of standing in line at rite aid.

they got edwards affair right.

throw enough stuff at the wall, something will stick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarLeftFist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
25. Bat Boy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kber Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. Vewy interesting...
It seems likely to me that, if there were really evidence of an affair, that it may have come out during the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Lest we forget this little National Enquirer Story Gem. I guess we should assume its also true?
Edited on Sat May-01-10 08:21 PM by Segami
SARAH PALIN LOVER REVEALED!

< >


In a world exclusive The NATIONAL ENQUIRER names GOP VP Candidate Sarah Palin's secret lover!

No less than three members of the man’s family including one by sworn affidavit have claimed that Sarah Palin engaged in an extramarital affair with hus band Todd’s former business partner, Brad Hanson.

<http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/65481>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Ding! Ding! Ding!
This is their last ditch effort to railroad the change that is occurring and that is coming.

It worked on Clinton so why not reuse the same tactic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. As I said in the first thread, Larry Sinclair Redux
It's bullshit. The story was out there during the runup to the election and it was bullshit then, so it stands to reason it's still bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andy823 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. If it was supposed to have happened in 2004
I would think that if it had any merit at all it would have been used during the 2009 elections, don't you think? The primaries were pretty tough, yet I never heard about this, and I really think that McCain would have used this if there was any proof to back it up, he really wanted the job as president!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
12. For crying out loud.
Don't any of you ever look anything up?

mediaite.com is not an accurate website. They have a track record of publishing things that they have to retract later. Please get some reputable look-up sources and use them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Segami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Fox News And Other News Channels Won’t Air Obama NE story
"....Anti Obama Conservatives are on their heels from the moment the National Enquirer revealed an alleged affair of US President Barack Obama with an African American lady named Vera Baker.

......None of the major media giants are publishing this news or the fact that this story exists. Fox News and other news agencies are reportedly ignoring such issues and choose to focus on more important and less controversial issues instead of this Obama affair.

<http://uktodaynews.com/4042/fox-news-and-other-news-channels-wont-air-obama-cheating-scandal/>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #17
31. Sources.
uktodaynews.com = more fluff.

I'm doing a couple of cut and pastes about mediaite without the location only because you need to learn to look things up for yourself.

"Mediaite is an online news, commentary and blog hub created by Dan Abrams, formerly an MSNBC legal analyst

A unique feature of Mediaite is the site's “Power Grid,” which purports to objectively rank media professionals in different categories (such as "TV,"<2> "Online,"<3> and "Print"<4> ) based on their "real-time relevance." The Power Grid rankings come from "metrics," including print circulation and number of Twitter followers.<5> A Washington Post column reviewing Mediaite explained the ranking system as, “The rankings are not a journalistic assessment, but rely heavily on online buzzThe TV hosts and anchors are graded on their number of viewers, Google hits and Twitter followers.”<2>

If you find the source for this you will see that FOX (not a reliable source) is on their board and that mediaite is in fact a company that was "founded to link corporate representatives to journalists and other media experts." Think about that a little bit.

There are other reliable sources but I'm choosing not to give them away with via cut and paste. You need to find them for yourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
14. What a load of horseshit. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. exactly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZeitgeistObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
16. Here is the story being trashed in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HipChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. The Daily Mail is a anti-Obama Right Wing Tabloid site..they should rename it the daily hate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZeitgeistObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. They trashed the story. Pay attention.
And it's a British paper, not an American one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HipChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. You missed the point...Daily Mail has an Obama bashing lean..

I should know...I grew in Britain..it leans right, anti-Obama..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZeitgeistObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. They are more concerned with Brit matters
than with a foreign country.

And MY point is, even the Daily Mail trashed the story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unabelladonna Donating Member (483 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-01-10 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
26. who gives a damn
somehow, i was more offended when i heard about john edwards and his bimbo (probably because he was a self-righteous, lying little turd). the prez doesn't nor has he ever told anyone how to live their lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 04:54 AM
Response to Original message
32. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
33. Why does this matter? Who cares if Obama had an affair? Why does
everyone get hot under the collar about this? Presidents are not saints. Honestly, I don't think we had had any president who didn't have an affair. Big deal. Sex and power go together and they always will. It really doesn't matter if this is true or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-10 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. What a disingenuous response! Your premise accepts the rumor as true
And then you follow up with questions about why it should matter. Edwards cheated, but that doesn't mean that all men are as sleezy as he is/was. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-02-10 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
34. Is the limo driver supposed to have seen them having sex? If not who cares what he says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC