“Just a guy in the neighborhood”, right. Please let me see the title of the bridge you are trying to sell me…
Confirming the literary detective work of WND columnist Jack Cashill prior to the 2008 election, author Christopher Andersen says in a newly released book that former domestic terrorist William Ayers helped Barack Obama write the president’s highly acclaimed memoir “Dreams from My Father.”
Andersen, in “Barack and Michelle: Portrait of a Marriage,” writes that Obama was faced with a deadline with the Time Books division of Random House to submit his manuscript after already having canceled a contract with Simon & Schuster. Confronted with the threat of a second failure, his wife, Michelle, suggested he seek the help of “his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.”
Obama had taped interviews with relatives to flesh out his family history, and those “oral histories, along with a partial manuscript and a truckload of notes, were given to Ayers,” writes Andersen.
WND has been on this story for a long time, but it is about to break out from the “fringe”
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/292744.php
If this this story unveils what it appears to be unveiling, Obama will become the lamest of lame ducks overnight.
“Obama-as Milli-Vanilli” is the best line.
The fact that you guys believe this crackpot story with no evidence to back it up and you disbelieve the story about Tag Greason, which is at least based on sworn court documents and which a judge found plausible enough to dismiss without prejudice, meaning that the case can be resubmitted at any time, shows how divorced from reality you guys are.
What “sworn court documents” ? This never went to court, charges were dismissed.
Obama, as does Greason maintains innocence, the difference is now we have a third party saying Obama’s claim of innocence is false. More simply put, we have a third party saying Obama lies.
Depositions were taken. That is sworn testimony. In the Greason case, you have an accuser who gave sworn testimony that was credible enough for a judge to permit the case to be brought again. In the crackpot Obama theory you have an anonymous source whose credibility can’t be weighed and some laughable “scientific” analysis by someone with an axe to grind.
Where do you see depositions ? In your crystal ball ? There is a reference to a “sworn statement” in the article, aka swearing out a warrant…
“credible enough for a judge to permit the case to be brought again”
Untrue, the judge basically said “Bring it back when you have evidence of wrongdoing”. The road ends here as there was none.
“anonymous source whose credibility can’t be weighed ”
Like the Greason story that sucked you in ?
“Andersen, writes… his wife, Michelle, suggested he seek the help of “his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.”
Yup, sure sounds like an anonymous source..
These arguments about sworn testimony and depositions are pointless. Sworn testimony in a deposition is not the equivalent of absolute truth. If an accuser swears that something happened and the accused says it did not happen, how would you impart truth to either statement based simply on the aspect of them being “sworn”? The key is the part where you investigate the matter to see whether the evidence is credible enough to point to one or the other of the sworn statements as truth. What we are missing in all this are the reasons why the court felt the case should be dismissed and why that court tacked on the “without prejudice.” Until you have that knowledge in hand, our own arguments here are a waste of time.
Having said all that, I will offer a personal opinion that the court may have become a bit skeptical about the complaint upon seeing how the accuser, in her deposition, decided to add a considerable number of other individuals to her personal list of those who, in her view, had committed similar sexual harassment offenses. But, then, I don’t know. And neither do the rest of us, including Zimzo.
This story was brought to light 2 months before the election and stonewalled by the left wing media. Wait until Ayers realizes he was screwed out of a shit load of $. Someone within the Chicago Machine will have to find a way to placate Ayers in order to keep him from tossing Obama under the bus or dropping him off at the nearest Dairy Queen to fill out that Asst Manager application.
Zimzo you should actually read this stuff before you unleash your knee and insert your foot.
The only way a Judge is going to dismiss a criminal case without prejudice is if the Prosecutor says, we can’t go forward, we don’t have the evidence. Let us withdraw this claim for now (because this has been continued 9 times already for us to figure out if we have a case.)
The prosecutor probably knew that the Court would not continue it again, that he had no case, and that if he was forced to go forward, he would look like a fool. Prosecutors do not willingly do this (witness the 9 continuances) but do it when the only other option is losing badly and looking foolish in front of a court where their reputation for fairness and thoroughness is important.
You know, Sally, you may well have hit it here. I am beginning to think that this may have been a case of “she said and he said” with no witnesses, no evidence, and nowhere for a prosecutor to go. My only question is about the accuser’s claim that she informed her master sergeant of the alleged incident shortly after it happened. So, what happened with that master sergeant, and where did he come into the prosecution case two years later? Just wondering.
““Obama-as Milli-Vanilli” is the best line.”
I liked that too. Taking credit for the work of others, guess Obama and Biden are cut from the same cloth..
Plenty of serious crimes are prosecuted that have no witnesses. You look to the credibility of witnesses you do have, and other evidence–and connect the dots to make the Court believe a certain scenario.
Apparently Tag had evidence that he was somewhere else on the day that she said this happened, and he did not go to the place she claimed, etc.
If the Prosecutor could not disprove that Tag was not there, then what is a Prosecutor to do? If he believes strongly in his witness, and has some way to explain, then he goes forward.
But if he thinks his witness is a little flaky, has said inconsistent things, lied in the past, got confused in the past, has been unreliable in responding to him, has a reputation that will not serve her credibility, or a history of drug abuse, alcohol abuse, emotional issues, even prescription drug use (lots of possible reasons why a prosecutor might worry about using any particular withness) then he makes a decision about the strength of his case. If he thinks he has no case, after he has done all he can, he withdraws it, and dismisses it as was done here.
I think a telling fact is that it was continued nine times over nine years– that is a lot of continuances in a criminal trial, where a defendant has a right to a speedy trial under our Constitution. I honestly think the prosecutor tried to develop a case with all that time, but could not. Why else would he keep continuing it? And he was pushing his luck to ask for another continuance, so he dismissed it.
This story is nothing new, it was reported many months before the election. It’s just another example of evidence that was suppressed by the media to protect him and his criminal associations.
Most of the information in bHo’s books has been debunked.
I have been told that the audio versions of his books lacked all racial comments and remarks, clever editing.
HE,
Yes my friend, but now it appears there is further corroboration. Over a year ago we raised many concerns with this dipshit.
The difference now ? Millions of people are now agreeing with us, and every day more are defecting from the Obama ship of fools.
The dipshit, and his army of dipshits are losing…