Breaking News – I had the opportunity to interview a fellow named Larry Sinclair about his claim to having had a relationship with Barack Obama when he was a State Legislator in Illinois. Since President Obama is suddenly releasing prisoners on to Americas streets, criminals who just happen to be Crack Dealers, hardened criminals, I thought it appropriate to re-explore the Obama Larry speaks of in this interview. I don’t have the audio, so you will need to read it – but it speaks volumes considering the headlines of today’s news. Enjoy!
INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT:
07/04/08: Larry Sinclair Interview with Roger Fredinburg
(transcription courtesy of Heidi)
01:47 Roger:[cuts in with Alan Keyes info and personal] Our guest tonight after revealing in his very revealing and fascinating You Tube video, this drug and sex relationship that he claims to have had with Barack Obama has found life not to be quite the same since he broke the story or “kissed and told”, as some people might say. And so, to tell that story tonight, and to help up get a clearer view of this first African American Presidential Candidate’s, selected by a major party in history, Larry Sinclair joins us. Larry, welcome to the radio show.
02:39 LWS: Thank you very much [clears throat].
02:41 Roger: I guess, Larry, my first question would be to you, what… who are you and why do we care about what you have to say?
02:48 LWS: Well, “Who am I” is nothing more than an average US Citizen. Ah, why should you care about what I have to say is because you…ah, the country is about to have another presidential election in November, and this country is in more trouble now than it has been in quite some time, economically, ah…spiritually, racially, because of this election, and, you know what…a number of wars, you know, overseas. And to cast your vote on who’s going to direct this country for the next four years, it’s my firm belief that you need to know everything about that individual and not just what they’re promising to do, or what they’re claiming they have done in the past, but you need to know everything about that individual or these individuals who are asking for your vote, based on their personal experiences, what they have done in their lifetime and not just the part they want to highlight to put in front of you. And that includes the bad as well. When I first came out with my statement on You Tube, I made it very clear from my very first contact with any media personnel, which was Jeannie McIntosh with the New York Post, and the first words out of my mouth were, “I have past criminal convictions for felonies and served time.” And I gave her a list, ah, of those convictions and those charges and where I served time and how long. I’ve always been one hundred percent open about everything about me and yet this has become about me. I have become more vetted than the presidential candidates have been and this isn’t making any sense. I’m not the one running for office.
04:35 Roger: Well, you did jump in under the magnifying glass from that video on You Tube. 04:38 LWS: Well no, I mean, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that I’m upset that people
are looking at my past. What I’m saying is this: I’ve always been honest about my past from
day one when I…even before I put up the You Tube video. But for the pro- Obama supporters, The Mitch and Nan Show, who have ah…posted your call in number and encouraged their supporters to call in tonight …It’s up to you. I will decided whether to answer their question or not, if you decide to open up your phone lines. But these people have made a number of claims. They have claimed that I have gone by 11 or 12 different names, which not the total truth. Yes, there are aliases listed on my criminal record, but those names…nobody bothers to explain. Those are not names the authorities are saying I have ever lived under or gone by. Those are names that the individuals gave them in one contact or another in referring to me. And most of those so-called aliases are nothing more than misspelled versions of my actual legal name at the time.
05:47 Roger: Hold it right there. We’re gonna take a short break. We’ll be back on Neighborhood 21. I’m Roger Fredinburg, your host. Now call the number, write it down, 877- 528-0255.
06:23 Roger: Okay, welcome back, Ladies and Gentlemen, to Neighborhood 21. [edit non Sinclair information]
08:19 Roger: Alright, back to our program. Larry Sinclair is here. Larry, I appreciate the time you’re taking to speak to us tonight. And I know this is one of those things where you’re probably a little bit perplexed as to why you’ve started this now, I’m guessing.
08:31 LWS: No, you know what, Roger? Actually, I’m not perplexed by that at all. What I am perplexed about is how this has been turned into, ah, an Internet war of attacks, of lies, of attacks on innocent people, of attacks on a 67 year-old woman, who is my mother, who has absolutely nothing to do with this, other than supporting her son and believing her son. Ah, attacks against people who, ah, I made it very clear the first time they tried to, ah, connect this lady to me, that, you know, that this was not my mother, but in fact a woman who was married to my father, attacks against my dead father, phone calls to my relative’s house, phone calls to innocent individuals’ homes, that these people have just… based on their flawed research said, “Oh, well this person is a friend of Larry’s”, or “it’s his cousin” or “it’s his nephew” or “it’s his aunt”. I mean, this has gotten ridiculous. I have had date-specific or time-specific, place- specific death threats made to me, my mother and one of my attorneys. They were reported to the Duluth Police Department, they were reported to the DC Metro Police…
09:44 Roger: Why…why…why would anyone want to threaten you for telling a story that could have a really important impact on American citizenry. Let me ask you this, Larry, let’s do something, let’s go to the back to the beginning of this thing. Tell me how and when you met Barack Obama?
09:58 LWS: I met Barack Obama November, 1999, specific date, November 6th. I met him through an introduction from a limousine driver working for Five Star Limousine Service, which was a friend of Barack Obama’s. The introduction was made after I had hired the limo service, prior to that evening, ah…to take me and my godson out, um [coughs] after his
graduation from the Great Lakes Navy Training Fa..uh, Center. On the 6th of November, he
received orders, his, ah, pass or whatever you want to call it, being able to leave the base was rescinded because once they graduate, it depends, they could have their transfer orders the minute the graduation ceremony’s over and they can’t even leave the base with their
family or friends after graduation. We were…he was able to leave on Friday the 5th, he was
not able to leave on the 6th. Ah, this driver introduced me to Barack Obama, specifically called Barack Obama on his cell phone, specifically introduced me face-to-face to Barack Obama, by name, and made it very clear that him [sic] and Barack Obama were friends. Now, I have some information that was not released at the press conference and it wasn’t
because I’m still trying to get a second verification on it, but it turns out…I’ve always made it clear that this guy was a friend of Barack Obama’s and I’m convinced of that and I’m not backing off of that. Now people are…have taken the name and twisted the name and brought up information saying, “Well this person is …it couldn’t be this person” or they’ve accused the limo driver of being someone that I illegally smuggled into this country. That’s not true. Um, I have it on great authority the limo driver and the limo company owner at the time not only were in fact friends with Barack Obama, but were actual business associates with Barack Obama and Tony Rezko. Now I haven’t specifically made that allegation, because as I said, I am waiting for a second source of verification, but the first source is very reliable.
12:01 Roger: Alright. So what was the purpose of you meeting Barack Obama?
12:05 LWS: It was nothing more than that I wanted to enjoy the night out and I wanted to enjoy it with someone who was from Chicago, who knew Chicago and who enjoyed partying. Those were the three specific requests that I had made to this driver. At no time did I make any reference to wanting any type of sexual activity with anyone.
Now the act on November 7th when Barack Obama showed up unannounced and uninvited at my hotel in
Gurnee, Illinois – now that was initiated by him.
12:43 Roger: Alright. At what
sex act and why did you pursue it?
12:49 LWS: Well, here we were getting high, drinking in the limo. I started rubbing on his leg and…and…you know, he got excited and one step…you know, one thing led to the next. But like I said, nothing was pre-planned, it was nothing I had specifically requested, in fact, it wasn’t really even discussed until after it happened.
13:08 Roger: What …oh, okay…were you snorting coke or what were you doing?
13:12 LWS: I was snorting coke that was rested up against his left knee. Um, when I began to perform oral sex on him, he pulls out a second packet of cocaine that is in rock form, crack cocaine’s form, and a glass pipe out of his pocket. I had no idea that he even had it. I had no idea that he even enjoyed smoking it.
13:36 Roger: Wow, can you imagine a president who could smoke crack? That’s a mind blower.
13:42 LWS: Well the sad part is, Roger, is there’s a large portion of this country that say it doesn’t matter to them. They do not care. I mean, I am being attacked by pro-Obama surrogates and supporters saying, “It does not matter whether he smoked crack in November of 1999” in one breath, and in the next breath they’re saying, “You’re a lying SOB. He never did that.”
14:07 Roger: You know, Larry. It really does matter. And, you know, it’s all scandalous and, my God, we were in the back of a limo and we had oral sex and we were doing drugs. I mean, it’s a story a hundred million people can tell, okay?
14:24 LWS: But you know what? A hundred million people can tell it, but a hundred million people haven’t turned over their phone numbers and Chicago Police Department don’t [sic] have a hundred million other people …
14:35 Roger: But…but I can tell you right now, that people who’ve engaged, and many of us have who might otherwise forget, if we had the choice, but fact remains is this is a man who wants to be the President of the United States of America. This is the darling of the Democratic Party. (LWS: Um hm.) This is the now chosen candidate of Democrat [sic] Party,
19th [inaud] President of the United States. If the man, uh, you know, is involved with crack
cocaine, which could definitely screw up your judgment as a president, it’s obviously affecting his political mind from my perspective, um, you know, this is not somebody who should be running the largest, most powerful country in the world. The thought of somebody with a crack pipe and the button in their right hand scares me.
15:24 LWS: And this is also a man, that [sic] is subject to blackmail. Let me just go over a short list of undeniable, easily-verifiable facts, okay: one, Donald Young, openly gay choir director, Trinity United Christian Church, communication [sic] with me over a four month period, okay; acknowledges being intimately involved with Barack Obama; murdered last year, December 2007, okay; knows everything about what I’ve asked the Obama campaign to acknowledge and admit to; knows pretty much who I’ve contacted about it. This guy’s dead, alright? No response from Obama whatsoever. FBI actually finds the individual making death threats on the Internet to me, confirms to myself and my attorney, Montgomery Blair Sibley that they did, indeed go to this person’s home, found him to be a 22 year-old male, living with his parents in the DC area, scared the hell out of him but decided not to reveal his identity (Larry’s phone ringing in background), or prosecute or press any charges against him.
This is on June 16th of this year, okay? (Roger: Wow.) I’m arrested minutes after a National
Press Club press conference, when in reality; I could have been arrested months before, on this so-called Delaware warrant, according to the documentation from Delaware. They claim this warrant has been out on the NCIC system since February, when, in fact, it did not show up until late April.
16:59 Roger: What is the warrant for?
17:01 LWS: I am accused of, and this is the funny thing, I hired a second attorney today and he pulled the records directly from the court as well. The only thing that the indictment says is, as far as the court record is concerned, is that it says, on or about October 16th of 2007,
Lawrence Sinclair did, ah, steal or take control of or, um, deprive the owner of Rodeway Inn out of property or US currency, ah, valued at $1000 or more. And that’s it. No specifics,
they’re not saying how I stole, when I stole it, nothing. And even today, when I showed up in court, there is still nothing in the court record that specifies any specifics of this charge.
17:49 Roger: But you did bring the towels back, right?
17:51 LWS: Oh yea, I brought the towels back. [both laugh] Okay? Second…fourth, every bit of the paperwork, okay, that has any relation whatsoever to my arrest in Washington DC, and my extradition to the state of Delaware, are totally inconsistent, inaccurate. They have NO charge on them or the WRONG charge on them.
18:14 Roger: Well, they’re harassing you. (LWS: Oh yea.) Hang on, we’ll get to that in a minute. And folks on the line, calling in, be patient. I’ve decided I want to get a little more information. [edits out more ‘be patient’ and phone info].
18:44 Roger: Larry Sinclair, ladies and gentleman, and boy has he stirred up some dust. Whew! Larry, it’s nice to have you back. (LWS: Thanks.) Larry, let’s … let’s get, let me go back to that night when you and Barack Obama first met in the limo and you’re getting high, drinking, and you, ah, you start rubbing his leg and he gets aroused you go in for the kill, so to speak. I don’t want to make it sound insidious, but I mean, oral sex, people know what it is. And I guess a couple of things on my mind here, that might help those people, who really know Barack, clarify in their own minds whether or not you’re telling the truth, for their own sake. And I guess first, what do you talk about with a guy like Barack Obama in the back of a limo, when you’re getting high? What are you visiting about?
19:27 LWS: Actually when you’re drinking and getting high, you’re really not talking about anything other than what you’re doing at the moment. I’ve made it very clear. Our conversations were very limited, very casual. Most of the conversation was what I was doing in Chicago. Ah, we were talking about my godson and the fact that I had gone to Chicago because I promised him I would not miss his graduation, because I actually missed his high school graduation that May. That May, the May of ’99. And I was explaining to Barack what I was doing for a living at the time, the fact that I was extremely exhausted, ah, that I had actually been on the road for quite some time, back and forth driving between Colorado and South Carolina, um, moving narcotics. I mean, this is the thing. I’ve been completely honest about all of it. You know, his comments about himself were nothing more than, ah, to be honest with you, I thought he was actually a Chicago native. I had no idea that he was not born and raised in Chicago, ‘til what, ah, 2004. Um, but the conversation was very casual, um, pretty much, ah, oh, God, what would you say – “normal party talk?”
20:40 Roger: Okay, it was just chit chat. 20:42 LWS: Yes.
20:43 Roger: Did he ever reveal anything about himself?
20:46 LWS: The only thing we had discussed about him personally, as far as when I first met him, before we ever left the bar was, like I said, he said that he was in public service. I did not, ah, I didn’t pursue that other than to ask him if he was a cop and he assured me that he wasn’t a police officer.
21:03 Roger: Wow. So, um, let me, let me, I’m going to do to you what I did to Paula Jones the first time I met her. [LWS laughs excitedly] I’m the one who exposed Bill Clinton through Paula Jones by a asking a simple question: Were there any distinguishing characteristics…
21:19 LWS: Well just remember, some questions I’ll answer and some I won’t. Depends on what they are at this point.
21:22 Roger: Were there any distinguishing characteristics about his physique that might, that might…
21:27 LWS: I’ve always…I, I’ve said that I, I COULD identify his ah, his personal area. I do not recall any, ah, people asked me is there something like a freckle. I do not recall a freckle.
21:42 Roger: Is he circumcised?
21:44 LWS: I can tell you that, but I won’t answer that question. 21:45 Roger: You’re not going to answer that. You’re saying…
21:47 LWS: Yep. Because anytime I’ve put anything out there, they have attacked and [inaud] and actually, I’ve been advised by my attorney not to answer that specific question at this point.
21:58 Roger: No, that’s fine. I’m just trying to … (LWS: Okay.) I’m just trying to find out somewhere along the way you’re being challenged. And the challenge now has become harassment.
22:08 LWS: But see, the challenge, Roger, has not been challenging me…[corrects self] or the story, or the actual facts of the story. Instead, what they’re doing is the person TELLING the story. It’s become: “Well, you can’t BELIEVE him. Look, he…he…he committed fraud, he wrote bad checks, he signed his name to someone else’s credit card…” All true. I don’t deny it.
22:34 Roger: Killing the messenger has always been a favorite ploy of the elite, um, especially if they don’t like the message. So they don’t like your message and you’re right to be fearful of your life because your life’s in danger.
22:48 LWS: You know, it’s interesting. I’ve received emails from two specific people over the course of the last four days, since being here in Delaware, ah, looking to retain counsel in this Delaware matter and they have been so cryptic, you know? Like, “We can protect you. We can offer you full funding for your legal representation, even both criminal and civil. We can make sure this comes out, but you can’t know anything about us. You have to answer all of our questions when we ask them. You can not disclose that we are even contacting you.” And they when I tell them, “Until you actually tell me WHO you, are I have no intentions of having any connections with them [sic].” (Roger: Right.) Then today, I…
23:35 Roger: Then you need to take whatever things you’re holding back as your last resort evidence and you need to get those in the hands of someone you trust and know…
23:45 LWS: Exactly and that’s exactly what’s taking place at this moment, because this morning I opened an email that told me that I needed to start worrying about more than Obama supporters. That this was not…that I needed to realize once and for all that this is not a game and that, you know, that people are gonna come after me… (Roger cuts in: Now let me…) and this is crazy.
24:07 Roger: Now let me share with you a couple of incidents. I’ve been on the radio a long time. I notice you were on the Jeff Rense show quite a bit. Jeff and I are good friends. I know Jeff. But I’ve been in this a long time and I used to interview a fellow named, Danny Cassalero. That name probably doesn’t mean anything to you, (LWS: No.) but we broke a story back in the early nineties, I guess even before that, about a group of interesting folks were running a scam, called “The BCCI Scandal”. It became affectionately known as that, which led to the savings and loan debacle, which led to the [edit out story about Ed Meese and software encryption stuff]. Anyway, Danny Cassalero broke this story and ended up, you know, slicing one wrist and drowning in a bathtub, okay?
25:07 LWS: That’s not gonna happen. I am not going to do that to myself.
25:09 Roger: Later, I was able to interview a fellow who became quite good friends with a fellow, whose name was Webb, Gary Webb. He was with the San Jose Mercury News. Gary broke a really important classic story about the CIA [edit story about CIA inventing crack
cocaine and getting into the inner city to target black America.] He [Webb] actually shot himself twice in the back of the head and died. It was a suicide. (LWS: With two gunshots to the back of the head?) Yea, okay? So when I talk to someone like you, as I did when I was first contacted …I was the first person to put on a fellow named, Larry Nichols, during the Clinton campaign. Larry Nichols was really close to the Clinton folks in Arkansas [edit out more conspiracy stories about the Clintons killing people who were outing them] So yes, you need to be damned certain, my friend, that you cover your butt here, because these people will kill you. They’ll think nothing of it and they will kill anyone who gets in their path. And that is just the way it is. So take that from someone who’s been out here a long time fighting these bastards, Larry, that I don’t want to see that happen to you and that’s why you’re on the show.
27:43 LWS: I appreciate that and I will tell you, I am definitely, one hundred percent convinced that that’s exactly what they want to happen.
27:53 Roger: Well, you’re going to have to be very, very careful and people are going to have to find ways to support you. I would say to you, in all honestly, we need to find a way to send you underground for awhile. Um, give you an opportunity to continue to tell your story, but we’ve gotta get you where they can’t find you, because they WILL find you. Now you can go out to the next life, and they’ll say, “oh, that guy was right” or you can stay in this life and be glad…
28:24 LWS: Believe me, I do understand where you’re coming from and personally, as far as who I know, and that’s the one thing. I’ve been very careful. I am not trying to get to know any of these new people, who are making offers and coming out, um, offers through the Internet, because I know better.
28:44 Roger: The people that are going to find you and kill you, if they can, are the same folks who took Jimmy Hoffa on a long vacation plan, okay? They are the same people who got John F Kennedy elected when Richard Nixon actually won the election. These are the same people who can make thousands and thousands of dead people vote in every election and no one argues the point with them. (LWS: Kind of like what happened this year, huh?) Yea, these are dangerous people so we can say, “Well, you know, they’ve always been there” and since prohibition, they probably have. So the machine that is behind Barack Obama is probably the same as [cuts out]. You’re pissin’ in their garden, man. You understand?
29:45 LWS: That I do.
29:47 Roger: So we need to find a way, I’m not really clear how exactly we do, to hide you out somewhere. And we need to get this out to more people. This story is, um, just the thought of a presidential candidate, serious candidate, smoking crack on the White House roof, you know, scares me. I mean, we’ve got enough crackpots in government already. That doesn’t mean…I’m not against Obama. I’m not for his politics. I don’t like his politics, but I’m not against him, but if the man’s got these other things… You know, the sex thing. Again, the sex thing’s a private thing. People have sexual proclivities. You know, some people are twisted in bed. I don’t know. That’s the way life is.
30:42 LWS: You know, Roger, people have thrown that at me over the last few months saying “Well, you’re gay so why does it matter whether he’s had sex with you?” It doesn’t matter. I didn’t tell the sex part because, you know, I said it was bad or it was a reason not to vote for him. I said the simple fact is you can’t tell a story, you can’t tell what happened and leave parts of it out, and then they come back later and go, “Well, how do you know…How do you know this happened and what was the circumstances?” And then you explain these specific details and you come in and say, “Well, you know, he started smoking crack while I was going down on him.” And then they stop and say, “Oh, see? You’re a liar right there because you didn’t tell that part of the story when you first came out.” So when I came out on You Tube, I told the entire story, exactly what happened, sex and drugs, period, and left it at that. But I’ve been attacked over…I’ve been accused of “Oh, well you said the gay sex because you wanted to get people to say he was gay [inaud].” The funny thing is, I’m not asking you NOT to vote for the man. In fact, I was somewhat leaning towards him until I realized that Donald
Young was killed. Well you know what, now I AM definitely against this candidate because here’s a person who’s supposed to be representing the average person, like me, according to his own words and yet, the average person is being threatened, is having his Social Security terminated based on false information, the exact day the, ah, DC police decide they want to start, ah, working with the National Press Club to get an arrest warrant to arrest me at the NPC. I mean, something’s not right here. So yea, I am definitely against this man now, and his politics, because his politics is nothing more than when and whatever costs and screw, and kill, and hurt, and harm, and attack anybody that gets in your way.
32:46 Roger: Well, if you get to a place of power and privilege in society, the people have the right to know the kind of man they may or may not elect into the White House and I think your personal morality, I mean, not details of your sex life personally, but personal morality as it’s viewed by the average American. Most Americans are not real cool on homosexual sex. It’s not that Americans hate homosexuals. It’s that most Americans are raised in the tradition of a Christian belief system that finds homosexuality, the activity, the actual sex part of it to be a sin.
33:24 LWS: No, I understand that. The funny thing is, I’ve been gay all of my life through childhood and the funny thing is, all of these attacks…I’ve never really experienced it. I have always been open. When I meet somebody new, my entire life, I’ve always been open about being gay. And the funny thing is, my best friends are straight. Most of them are male. We can socialize. We can party together, no uncomfortable…no problem. But I understand, you know, that society, itself, on a whole…[Roger interrupts.]
33:55 Roger: So you do understand chemistry.
33:58 LWS: [continues] …it’s more the sexual act and I do understand that.
34:01 Roger: Well people have chemistry. You’re in the back seat of a limo, getting high, you can sense if somebody’s feeling it, right? (LWS: Exactly.) So it’s just normal life, [inaud] sexuality in general. So, um, obviously there was an attraction there between the two of you, um, I mean, are you still attracted to him?
34:20 LWS: [chuckles] Not at all. Not at all. In fact someone made a ridiculous question at the press conference saying, “Well, were you in love with Barack Obama?” And I answered her, I told her, “No. I did not fall in love with Barack Obama.” And she said, “Well how can you have sex with someone you were not in love with?” And I said, “Excuse me, ma’am, nothing personal and I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but in your entire lifetime…are you sitting here trying to tell me that you’ve never had a one night stand, also known as a ‘quickie’ with anyone?”
34:50 Roger: Wow. It’s terrible. Hang on. I’m going to go ahead and open the phone lines up and let some people talk to you, okay? So hang with us, we’ll be back with Larry Sinclair on Roger Fredinburg’s Neighborhood 21 radio show.
35:15 Roger: [edit welcoming back] Larry’s an average guy from the Chicago area. 35:22 LWS: No, actually I wasn’t from the Chicago area.
35:25 Roger: Where were you from?
35:26 LWS: I was actually living in Colorado at the time. (Roger: Oh, my apologies.) Okay. 35:31 Roger: Well you an affair with Barack Obama, according to you.
35:34 LWS: Well if you want to call it an “affair”. A two night stand.
35:41 Roger: Well, he’s a married man, I’ve got to call it an affair. (LWS: Okay.) Okay? If he wasn’t married, I guess I’d call it a “quickie”. From my regard, he’s a married man, he has a wife – that’s an affair. [edit out semantics] So, from that, you came public because you felt
like people needed to know that this guy was a little different from what he was being perceived as in the media.
36:06 LWS: Actually, I came public, Roger, and yes, you’re right, I came public after spending approximately six months, waiting for him to publicly announce and correct his statement about his drug use.
36:17 Roger: Oh, I got you. Let’s get a few callers in here. Marie in California, you’re on the radio with Larry Sinclair.
36:25 Marie: Hi, Larry, I’ve got a question for ya. (LWS: Okay.) You have, um, is your second attorney a public defender?
36:37 LWS: Ma’am, I will tell you right now that no, I hired and retained a private attorney today and when he makes his formal appearance, by filing the necessary paperwork next Monday, that information will be available through court records.
36:53 Marie: Okay, that’s fair. Thank you very much for answering the question, because I’ve been undecided about the story about the detractors and I just want to get as much information as possible.
37:13 LWS: Can I ask you a question, Marie? (Marie: Yea.) Are you the individual that sent me the message saying that, um, the cesspool is claiming that I stole all the money that they contributed to the retainer fee and went with a public defender today? (Marie: No, I didn’t.) Okay, I was just asking because I’m fixing to post an answer to that as we speak, but just to make the information perfectly clear, I did retain a private attorney today, that actually is going to cost me more in retainer, in the end, than Richard Wier originally charged.
37:48 Roger: People, don’t donate money to a cause and then put strings on it. You can donate money to help Larry out…
37:57 Marie: No, no, no, I’m not about donating money. I’m just about discrediting these attacks.
38:05 LWS: Well, Marie, I will tell you one thing, something about my detractors. The people who are attacking me, who claim that they have the truth and who are posting timelines and who are saying, you know, “Larry said this” or “Larry said that”. If you go over every interview I’ve done, everything I’ve ever written and you compare that to what these people are claiming, ah, I think you will find that these people are…are full of something and it’s not something that smells sweet, because I [cuts out]… have to be honest and say, and probably justifiably so, there’s a fair amount of paranoia on both sides. Ah…
39:06 Roger: Okay we have to take a short break. We’ll be back with Larry Sinclair on the other side of the break. You can call in here and visit with Larry and ask questions, but if you’re going to ask stupid questions, don’t waste our time. We’ve got stuff to talk about here, okay? So try to ask a good question. [edit phone number announcement] It’s not whether or not it’s true…
39:45 Roger: Well, welcome back, ladies and gentlemen, to the Neighborhood 21 radio show. I’m Roger Fredinburg, your host. Welcome to the neighborhood. We have some interesting commentary this evening. Look, for the first time in the history of America, we have two candidates for the major parties who might not even qualify to be President. It’s questionable, that Barack Hussein Mohammad Obama, that’s his real name, on his birth certificate, Barack Hussein Mohammad Obama, may actually be an Indonesian citizen. His parents did not meet the criteria for citizen when he was born. He may not even be a true, naturalized American, which means he couldn’t legally run for President anyway. [edit more Obama cover ups, Hussein Mohammad stuff, McCain born in Panama, etc…] So Larry Sinclair comes out and says, “Hey, I had an affair with Barack Obama, I went down on this guy. We did cocaine and drank and partied and had fun together.” And all of the sudden, the machine, this turned
up the volume on Mr. Sinclair and even as recently as…not too…when were you arrested in Washington, Larry?
41:52 LWS: I was arrested at the National Press Club on June 18th. [Roger and LWS talking over each other]
41:59 Roger: …for some bogus charge out of Delaware…
42:01 LWS: … with no warrant produced at the time and that they said they were arresting me, even when they claimed it was in their vehicle, um, in the loading dock, they did not produce it, nor did they produce it at the police station, nor did they produce it at court.
42:13 Roger: So, let’s talk about Joe Biden. Good old Joe Biden makes a call to somebody in Delaware and you’re cookie dust, right?
42:23 LWS: Pretty much. Because this … this Delaware thing, according to the dates on the documents, they’re claiming that these things were actually issued on February 5th of 2008, but when people were attacking me in March and April, they were … the pro- Obama
supporters and surrogates were putting out on the web and, through their networking, ah, I had outstanding warrants for abuse or child sex assault or something in Tulsa, Oklahoma, which was not true. (Roger: You and David Koresh…) Yea, but, but they put it out there. When that fizzled, when they were told to put up or shut up and we called Tulsa, Oklahoma. The police chief in Laredo, Texas happens to personally know me, and he did my mother a favor, and looked into their allegations, and started investigating them for even putting the Laredo Police Department in it and nothing. This stuff I’m dealing with never showed up and, all of the sudden, I guess someone’s saying now, the earliest they saw it was in late April, after it was announced that the Chicago Police Department contacted me, in regards to the, ah, sworn affidavit on the Donald Young murder was, ah, received and that they wanted to discuss it with me.
43:44 Roger: Alright, let’s go to the phones now. A man named, “Bigears” is on the radio. Hello, Bigears.
43:50 Bigears: Heya, what’s up there, Roger? Mr. Sinclair, you know, I think people need to know, ah, that ah, the important thing NOW that’s happening, not in 1999. That was drugs and sex, but right now, the Obama campaign is utilizing the judicial system, the attorney generals, detectives and police to try and shut this man down, if not more. Ah, I’m sure Mr. Sinclair is aware or not, tell me if I’m wrong, but, ah, Senator Biden, his son is the Attorney General of Delaware and Mr. Sinclair…
44:30 LWS: You’re absolutely right, Bigears, and not only that, this, ah, Delaware charge, the closed grand jury that issued this indictment was called by Joe Biden III. It was requested by Joe Biden III. And apparently, from what we’ve gathered so far from records in Delaware, it
was based on a conversation held between myself and [cuts out](2)7th and 28th, which the
detective ruled off the report that “Mr. Sinclair had not committed any criminal act.” And let me say something else.
45:23 Roger: Hold on. Let me take this break. It’s a short break and we’ll be right back. [edit calling info and talkstar.podcast.com]
46:15 Roger: Alright, I’m Roger Fredinburg, your host. Ah, it’s a huge story, ladies and gentlemen, and it should be breaking on every major news media in the country. A gentleman has exposed and accused, first on You Tube, then in other ways, his homosexual relationship, short-lived as it may have been, two occasions, partying, cocaine, crack cocaine, oral sex, um…Larry, any other kind of sex or was it just oral sex?
46:47 LWS: No, it was just oral sex.
46:49 Roger: Both ways?
46:50 LWS: No, actually I performed, he received.
46:53 Roger: He’s not a performer. He’s a receiver. Okay. 46:56 LWS: As far as I know.
46:58 Roger: Okay. And so, um… (LWS interrupts: Can I…) [Roger and LWS talking over each other at this point.]
47:02 LWS: I need to answer this door real quick. (Roger: Go ahead.) Alright.
47:07 Roger: [laughing, filling time] The man had his own crack pipe. I mean, you’ve got to just imagine, you’re in the back of a limousine, and you’re with a guy, and…and you’re doing some lines, and drinking a little hot booze and all of the sudden, the guy, a slick-dressed dude, ah…ah, political servant to the people, whips out his crack cocaine pipe, as Larry has suggested that Barack Hussein Mohammad Obama did, and that is just, to me, an amazing thing. That, whether true or not, ah, I have no reason to disbelieve Larry Sinclair. If you’ve ever been on You Tube and watched the video [faint sounds of LWS having a conversation with houseguest in background], um, if you’ve ever watched the video, you’ll…you’ll…you’ll, you know, “Wow!” I believe the guy, frankly, but it’s irrelevant, except for the fact that now, to try to silence Larry from telling his story, all this weird stuff is happening, right Larry?
48:09 LWS: Yea, not only is this weird stuff happening, Roger, here’s what’s interesting: ah, the first act of trying to silence me was a rigged polygraph test. Now people have repeatedly asked me, ah, well why did, you know, accuse me basically of saying, “Well, you failed the polygraph and then you come out a few days later saying that it was a payoff.” [Coughs] It
was a payoff and I was contacted, I’m telling you, I was contacted, what, on the 25th of February, by a gentleman whose phone numbers unfortunately, ah, Mr. Sibley forgot to list in
the press statement that was released, ah, at the press club. But these were actual, um, these were actual telephone calls to my home, as well as to my cell phone. They gave specific information about communications between David Axelrod and Dan Parisi of Whitehouse dot com. And those tips, if you want, I will give those phone numbers out as to where those tips came from, because somebody’s got to start investigating this stuff, rather than just saying, “Well, oh, Ben Smith of Politico says Larry’s a crim… (Roger: Sure, go ahead, Larry.) a career criminal …” (Roger: [talking over Larry] I have no problem with it…give them out.) Area code 207-252-2796, area code 207-899-0872.
49:37 Roger: And who do you claim these belong to?
49:39 LWS: I don’t know the gentleman’s name. These are the phone numbers, in which [sic] I received phone calls, ah, February 25th, at approximately 12:48 am (telling) me to cash the Whitehouse dot com check immediately before it was stopped and that David Axelrod and
Dan Parisi, of Whitehouse dot com, were having an argument, of Axelrod and the Obama campaign being upset that Parisi had not posted the, um, polygraph results and the information, stating that I was lying on the polygraph, fast enough for them. And Parisi was saying he wasn’t posting any further information about people accusing me of lying until he was finished being paid. And Axelrod advised Mr. Parisi that he would not receive another penny until Whitehouse dot com had everything up calling me a liar and verifying it though a fraudulent PhD, named Edward Ira Gelb.
50:40 Roger: And why were you getting a check from Whitehouse dot com.
50:42 LWS: Whitehouse dot com apparently made this offer. I had posted something on the Internet, on the Friday, um, I want to say around the 13th… 12th or 13th of February, but I’d have to check the days (to) be more specific. I had posted that I had contacted a gentleman
by the name of Jack Trimarco. I had looked him up on the Internet. Apparently, he is an expert polygrapher [sic], ah, a former FBI polygraph examiner and I had stated in the You Tube video that I was willing to take a polygraph. So, I was actually contacting Mr. Trimarco to see what it would cost and if he would agree to perform a polygraph on me. I advised him that I needed someone who as apolitical, who could not decide if the political aisle [sic] of having … you know, a political motive, to say I passed or I failed. Ah, on that very day that I
posted the comment, that I contacted Jack Trimarco’s office, apparently this ex-porn site, called “Whitehouse dot com” posted this $100,000 challenge on their Web site. And they FedEx’d over a similar letter, stating that they would pay $10,000 for me to submit to a polygraph examination, paid for by them, and that they would pay an additional bonus of
$90,000 if I, in fact, passed the polygraph. Well, I wanted the polygraph done, so I contacted them and told them I would accept their offer, under certain conditions, and those conditions being that: I had approval, final approval, that the polygrapher [sic] had to be someone of my choosing; that I was able to vet and prove that the polygrapher [sic] had no political connections, whatsoever, and no reason to try to produce a result for any reason… any side of the political spectrum. Ah, they agreed to that and then they ended up choosing a polygraph examiner and claiming I chose him, when, in fact, I didn’t. There were supposed to be two polygraph examiners to conduct two independent tests. That never happened. There was one [inaud] test that entailed two separate sets of questions, that was drug [sic] over an approximately four and a half hour timeframe.
53:10 Roger: Wow. Um, is Bigears still on there? [sound of disconnected line] He’s gone? Alright, how about Lois in Oklahoma? Is Lois there?
53:21 Lois: Yes.
53:22 Roger: Hello, Lois. You’re on with Larry Sinclair. 53:26 Lois: Hi, Larry. How are you?
53:28 LWS: Hi, Lois. I’m fine, and you?
53:30 Lois: I’m just great. Great press conference, by the way. (LWS: Thank you.) Um, I was gonna ask you a question. You said that you were arrested after the press conference and it was trumped up charges. What is [sic] the charges exactly?
53:43 LWS: I’ve already said. As far as I know, the charge is claiming theft of $1,000 or more here in Delaware. The charge out of DC, when they came in and said they were arresting me, they stated they were arresting me on a fugitive of justice warrant out of Delaware. However, Delaware never had a fugitive from justice warrant, nor did DC police, nor did the DC courts.
54:09 Lois: Did it have anything to do with the MoneyGrams to purchase a car?
54:14 LWS: [Tone changes] Excuse me, ma’am. There was no purchase of any car. I don’t know where you’re getting your information from, but I just told you what the charges are, based on the court file.
54:25 Lois: [inaud, speaking under her breath]
54:27 LWS: I’m sorry? Let me ask you a question, Lois. Where did you get your information from, because you’re quoting information from one of the pro-Obama sites that has not been released to me, nor to the court. So I would like to ask you, where are you getting your information from?
54:42 Lois: Off the Mitch and Nan Show, when I went over there and looked.
54:47 LWS: Oh, okay. Well no, I’m asking because the Mitch and Nan Show is posting a lot of information and statements…[Lois inaud talking in background]
54:52 Lois: …Please don’t talk over me. 54: 55 LWS: Huh?
54:56 Lois: How about Al Stoller? Do you know who that is?
54:58 LWS: Excuse me, ma’am, I refuse to answer questions about…[Lois still inaud talking in background] Ma’am? No…no…no (Lois: …my boss) Excuse me? I’ve never stolen a car, ma’am. You need to check the … you need to check the claims … you need to check the Small Claims Court records of Sacramento County. I went to Small Claims Court with Mr. Stoller and it was dismissed, in my favor, and when I moved out of California, he went and refiled three years later. So please, do not tell me about my personal life or my personal situations, when I’m there. You’re not.
55:30 Roger: Alright, Lois [chuckling]…
55:33 LWS: I mean, it’s amazing. That’s what I’m talking about. (Roger: Yea, yea.) These people are digging up…(Roger trying to calm down LWS: Larry, Larry) She’s mentioning Mr. Stoller, of Auto Finance of Sacramento, California. A car that was financed, that was actually jointly financed between me and a friend of mine. A vehicle that Mr. Stoller has had returned to his custody, uh, years ago. I contacted Mr. Stoller after they started putting this out there, and I received an email from him, and I specifically asked Alan, “Alan, did you make these statements? Did you send this email?” And I told him to call his attorney because they’re saying that Alan Stoller is accusing me of auto theft. Funny, I’ve never been accused of auto theft, by Mr. Stoller. I was accused of defaulting on a loan that was not even my loan to begin with. That’s what I mean when I say, the attacks are…are manipulated, they are doctored. They don’t want to state factual information. They want to state it the way it fits their needs and I’m not going to allow them to do that.
56:33 Roger: No, that’s fine. Again, it’s all irrelevant. People…
56:37 LWS: [cuts in]…it seems…you know what, Roger? It is irrelevant to the issue [inaud]
…you say what…the story is not being reported. It’s not being reported because these individuals, such as this lady, and I thank you for taking that call, because I definitely want an mp3 file of this show. Ah, um…they have refused to identify themselves. They have called Social Security and accused me of everything in the book, even though Social Security has talked with me. I have reported everything I am legally required to report. That’s what I’m saying. They are doing this and they are putting this out to the major media outlets. And Greta van Susteren herself said the reason she has ignored this and not spoken with me,
even though she personally asked me to give her my cell phone number on May 31st. She
says she hasn’t gone there because I’m not credible because an article Ben Smith from Politico dot com publishes, based on these people, this lady and her group: misinformation; distorted information; and doctored information.
57:43 Roger: Well, they’re missing the point. I mean, let’s just draw the dot from little Joe Biden to big Joe Biden to the Osama … (LWS: Exactly.) Barack Hussein Obama…
57:55 LWS: Exactly. You know, the attorney that [sic] was hired today, we agreed on …on a
… on a… on an addition paragraph in our retainer agreement, which is, he will represent me on this criminal charge here in Delaware. If this criminal… if, in representing me on this criminal charge …
58:14 Roger: We’ve been through all four in different levels with different people, Larry. Paula Jones went through this. Jennifer Flowers went through this. Dolly Kyle Browning went through this. Uh…uh, everyone who’s been somehow or other against the democrats, gets this kind of treatment. It’s just, you know, how ‘bout Juanita Broderick, [edit other names]? The media doesn’t want to take anybody seriously. Uh, that’s why we’re here, Larry. Don’t worry. People take me seriously. Relax. We’ll get this resolved. Don’t go away.
[edit break]
59:13 Roger: Larry, we’re going to take a couple callers and then I’ve got a billion questions that we’re never going to get through all of it.
59:15 LWS: That’s fine. And understand something. To callers like Lois, if I say, “No comment” that’s it. [chuckles]
59:20 Roger: [chuckles] That’s fine. (LWS: Okay.)
59:22 Roger: Bill in Canada, you’ve been waiting a long time. Bill, you’re on the radio. 59:24 Bill: Yes, hi.
59:25 Roger: Hi.
59:26 Bill: I’ve been following this story, both on Mitch and Nan and Larry’s site and in the medium, You Tube, and what have you. And, I guess the issue Larry has is one of credibility because of his track record, um, you know, things that seem to have been verified and, you know…
59:59 LWS: [cuts in] Verified by who [sic], Sir?
01:00:02 Bill: Well, verified by, if you go on to, say, Pueblo County site, there’s…
01:00:06 LWS: [cuts in] Sir, the problem …(Bill: [inaud]) Sir? (Bill: Yes?) Pueblo. Colorado is… it’s nothing new. I … I mentioned that… I disclosed that back in February, actually in late January [Bill tries to continue] ‘scuse me, January, myself. Mitch and Nan or no other pro- Obama blogger has revealed or disclosed anything about me, or my past, that I did not first put out there in the public spectrum. [sounds like Bill or someone in background, saying “Liar”] So, if you’re going to use that to question my credibility, then use the facts that I am the one that put it out there and acknowledged it. Now it’s not my fault that you don’t want to hear it from me [Bill still trying to talk], you want to hear it from a pro-Obama blogster …
01:00:53 Bill: I’m just laying the foundation here. (LWS: Ah hah.) And there is that stuff that is floating about, that even you bring forward, right? (LWS: What?) There’s things out there like that, that even you present, but you’re still, ah, you’re starting from a negative point on the credibility scale.
01:01:08 Roger: [cuts in] Alright, Bill, let’s just see what…
01:01:11 Bill: Let’s start with that, alright. Then you go forward and there’s a difference in, say, a Monica Lewinsky scandal was … (LWS: The blue dress) she’s got the dress and that’s the thing, I think a lot of people are having trouble with your story. There’s very little out there…
01:01:34 LWS: [cuts in] Can I ask you a question? [inaud – Larry and Roger talking over each other] My question is this. Everybody uses this Monica Lewinsky and the blue dress. Was Bill Clinton asked about Monica Lewinsky BEFORE the blue dress was ever produced, yes or no?
01:01:50 Bill: Yes.
01:01:51 LWS: See? That’s the difference. The media and these pro-Obama supporters and attackers are saying that Barack Obama does not need to be asked, and should not be asked, and I beg to differ with you. I’m not the one hiding here. Barack Obama is the one who’s put up a Web site called, “Fight the Smears” and they actively challenge everything said about Michelle Obama, “whitey” tapes, and whatever, yet the biggest so-called smear in their words, not mine, is Larry Sinclair and they don’t even deny it. They don’t even mention it. Do you understand what I’m saying?
01:02:30 Bill: It’s because if they acknowledge it, it gives the story legs, right? Then the mainstream media can run with it….
01:02:35 Roger: [cuts Bill off] Now let’s … (Bill: Right?) Bill, let me ask you a question. I want you to help me understand something. Here you have an outed gay man, who makes no apologies for his past, who makes no apologies for the fact that he’s gay, who’s come out and said, “Hey, I know you’re not going to believe this, because I’m a wreck of a human being, but I went down on this guy and got high with him. It’s true.” And, I’m saying, what is in it for Larry to do that?
01:03:06 Bill: Um, well…(Roger: What’s the point of it?) the notoriety alone [Bill attempts to continue but now he, Roger and LWS are all trying to talk over each other.]
01:03:18 LWS: No, but you can not go on with notoriety book deals, because, you know what? I have…I have stayed away from ALL of that. I have NOT asked for any book deals. I’ve not even pursued it. I’ve not even entertained a PHONE CALL.
01:03:32 Bill: No, I mean, neither would other that are half-way through the story. The story’s not over, right?
01:03:37 LWS: [sighs] Sir, I assure you. I will die a natural death, I hope…
01:03:43 Roger: [cuts in] I think he should’ve come out and said he had an affair with Hillary and he could have sold more books.
01:03:47 LWS: Oh, but the funny thing is, I don’t even want to…you know what? I’m getting tired of even writing on this BLOG, much less wanting to write a book. There’s nothing in this…
01:03:58 Roger: [cuts in again] I just can’t imagine some gay guy coming out and saying in front of the spotlight, saying “Hey, I’m gay” and you know, “This guy [inaud]…
01:04:06 LWS: [cuts in] Here’s the funny thing, Roger, you know? And I understand where [sic] Phil… [corrects self] Bill is saying there could be, you know [cuts out] that they know me. They committed crimes with me and all this good stuff, trying to get notoriety, trying to make money. One of the major, ah, anti-Larry Sinclair bloggers actually started contacting The Globe and The National Enquirer, trying to sell stories from me, claiming to know me and then when I exposed them for it, you know, they accuse me of selling my story to Globe Magazine. Here’s the funny thing…
01:04:49 Bill: [cuts in] But regardless, I mean the motive, the potential is still there whether you deny it or not … (LWS: But, Sir.) Even these leeches and parasites may make a few bucks of your story … (LWS: Oh, but they are…) they’re going to [inaud] that crap no matter what.
01:05:10 LWS: [cuts in] But here’s the funny thing: I have opened up my financial records four different times to four different media outlets and NOT ONCE, not once, okay, can anybody show where I have received a dime, other than five hundred dollars that I openly, fully disclosed. I charged Globe Magazine for the right to come into my home and take a picture to use in their magazine. I have never ONCE received, nor requested a single penny from anything Globe Magazine has written. In fact, I have actually contacted Globe Magazine on at least THREE occasions, asking them to correct parts of their articles where they attributed … (Roger: Wait a minute…simmer down.) So this isn’t about money.
01:05:55 Roger: Larry, Larry, Larry, Larry. Stop. I’ve got this figured out. (LWS: Ah huh?) Bill. Bill. (Bill: Ya.) You think Larry’s going to cash in?
01:06:12 Bill: Why not?
01:06:15 Roger: Well if you so convinced that he’s going to go out and get the big “chink” from this deal.
01:06:17 Bill: Well, I’m trying to present the perception that I picked up [inaud – all talking over each other] about this issue.
[inaud – all three talking over each other]
01:06:29 Roger: Stop, stop, stop, Larry. (LWS: Yea.) ‘Cause this has got to stop. This is craziness, okay? I watched them take a guy like David Koresh, who was weird as hell, but they demonized the poor bastard. He was the worst…he was Satan incarnate, by the time they got done with him, so they could go in and burn him and kill him, okay? Um, David Koresh was not that bad a guy. But they had the build up, so they demonized the poor bastard, so he became the most horrible human being that ever lived: drug dealer; baby rapist; crazy lunatic; called “I am God”. My god, we’ve got to kill this lunatic, okay?
01:06:58 Bill: Well they demonized him. It was in the mainstream media…(Roger: And they demonized Paula Jones) mainstream media…
01:07:07 LWS: You know what though? You just hit it dead on nail [sic]. This is not in the mainstream media, yet I have been demonized, I’ve been called “pedophile”, which is not true. I have been called, “racist”, which is not true. My 67 year-old mother has been called, “whore”. They have called her home and harassed her and tried to intimidate her and you know what? That is all in the name of a candidate for President of the United States. Now you tell me there’s nothing wrong with that.
01:07:31 Bill: Well, there’s a lot of kooks out there, Larry, a lot of whacky people… 01:07:34 LWS: [cuts in] Sir, these are not kooks. These are well-organized…[inaud Roger
trying to talk over everyone]
01:07:38 Bill: …[inaud, possibly saying “when you’re talking about blow jobs”] you’re going to get people, all kinds of whackos are going to phone you up, right? [Roger continues interrupting and talking over people] But when you step out on the stage, you invite that like any person in the public. They get all kinds of whacky people. (LWS: But, Sir, these…) You look at celebrities…
01:07:55 LWS: But, Bill, what I’m trying to explain to you is, we have documentation showing these are not whacky people off the…off the fringe. These are well-organized, orchestrated groups that originated with My Barack Obama dot com, through Barack Obama for America, networking situ…ah, ah, circuit. (Roger: Larry…) These are not kooks. These are people, who are actively and knowingly engaging in activities, and illegal activities at that, on behalf of a presidential candidate.
01:08:24 Roger: Okay, Frannie, Frannie, say “Goodbye” to Bill. Hang up on Bill. Thank you, Bill. Larry.
01:08:27 LWS: Yea.
01:08:28 Roger: Ah, I’ve got to ask you a question. Um, a woman in Tennessee, ah, thank you, a woman in Tennessee has asked me to ask you about Donald Young.
01:08:39 LWS: Donald Young… I’ve provided a sworn affidavit on April 1st to the Chicago Police Department, advising them that I had had some communications on my cell phone, via cell phone and text message, from a gentleman, that [sic] identified himself, from the very first call, as representing the Barack Obama campaign, and repre… [corrects self] and calling himself, Mr. Young. Tha…that first phone call I received, that I received from Mr. Young asked me a question that made me know right away that he was not from the Obama campaign. He asked me the question: why I had not requested Sen. Obama acknowledge sexual encounters that we had in 1999? Now when he asked me that question, I knew right then and there that this was not someone from the campaign because, when I contacted the campaign, I never ONCE mentioned the sexual encounters nor did I ask that he acknowledge the sexual encounters. These communications took place from September through
[garbled]ember and, over the course of those four months, this individual made it clear to me: that he had received my cell phone numbers directly from Barack Obama; that he, himself, was intimately and sexually involved with Barack Obama; that Barack Obama had, uh, consulted his pastor, Rev. Wright, but he did not specify the name, he just said, “his pastor”, on how to publicly acknowledge his, uh, misstatement, or misspeaking, about the extent of his drug use. At the end of our conversations, towards December, Mr. Young had made it very clear to me, “Do not wait for Sen. Obama to correct his, ah, comments about his drug use”, that he would NOT be making any public statement about using drugs and using crack cocaine, as recently as 1999. That was the last contact I had from this “Mr. Young”. It was in March that I started becoming aware a Donald Young, who was an openly gay man, a choir director at Trinity United Christian Church, who, ah…, Barack Obama himself had sent personal condolence letters to his family, after his murder. And I started putting pieces together and I turned around and contacted the Chicago Police Department. And I told them that I felt that they needed to look into the possibility that Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright either KNEW the person that killed Donald Young, or actually HIRED the person who killed Donald Young, based on those conversations and text messages. I provided the Chicago police detective, Robert McVicker, with my cell phone numbers, which is what he requested. I confirmed with him a few days ago that he did, in fact, receive those records he had requested from Sprint/Nextel, which was my carrier, and that he had obtained those through a grand jury subpoena. Now that’s the ONLY information I’ve been able to confirm with him, because I am not privy to the investigation, nor am I entitled to him providing me copies of those phone records, because they were obtained through a grand jury subpoena and they are not his property to be giving copies out. I contacted him the other day, because I had requested my phone records directly from Sprint, and I was informed a few days ago, Sprint CLAIMS, that they could not provide me the records, that they did not exist. When Sprint said that, that’s what I wanted to ask McVicker if, in fact, he’d managed to get them and he said he did. Because I didn’t understand why Sprint had the records to provide the police department, but they don’t have to pr…provide to me. I am of the firm belief, that …
01:12:30 Roger: [cuts in] Didn’t Sprint give you a monthly tally of your calls? 01:12:33 LWS: Well, I…what I wanted was the records because the records show all
incoming phone numbers, and Sprint, ah, ah, an investigator or, ah, an attorney’s investigator
looked into it and the text messages are, in fact, saved on their servers. It was explained to me, after I spoke to the Chicago Police Department, a few days ago that, while they were able to obtain them, as opposed to me, it was because Sprint/Nextel has a legal department that has access to different servers, in order to retrieve those records. That those contact numbers either came from Donald Young, or came from cell phones that were ac… provided by Donald Young, Barack Obama or Jeremiah Wright.
01:13:24 Roger: Hmm… Wow. Alright, let’s go to Mondo, in Pittsburgh. You’re on the radio. 01:13:29 Mondo: Hey! How’re you doing? (Roger: Good.) I’d like to ask Larry, when was the
last time you talked to the limo driver?
01:13:35 LWS: That question’s been asked and answered. I told you back in February. 01:13:42 Mondo: When was that?
01:13:43 LWS: Back in February.
01:13:45 Mondo: Back in February? Um, I mean, is he scared?
01:13:50 LWS: Sir, right about now, with everything else that’s been going on, I would assume he is, but he was when I spoke with him the last time.
01:13:57 Mondo: Okay. The only other question I had was, ah, why, can you, ah come up with a time the second day?
01:14:08 LWS: First of all, Mondo, I couldn’t give you a specific time. I said, on the 6th it was in the evening, okay? (Mondo: Okay.) [cuts out and back in] …minutes or hour on when he showed up on hotel room, but I can not do that, and to expect me to do that I think you’re asking just a little too much.
01:14:37 Roger: Well, if you can’t answer, you can’t answer. We’ve got to take a break. We’ll be right back.