As of this moment, the 22 episode of Tucker Carlson on X has 13.6 million views. The episode has a way to go to reach the astronomical number Carlson’s show put up with his sit-down with Trump, and it may never make it there, but Larry Sinclair’s account of his interactions with Barack Obama and some of those around the president, will now be known by millions.
This was not the first time Americans have met Larry Sinclair. However, the first time, very people knew about it and the media suppressed the story. It’s not as if the press weren’t present when Sinclair publicly presented his account for the first time. I remember the 2008 press conference well, and the room was full of reporters. But if you had not caught it on C-SPAN, you would not have known about it.
I found Sinclair believable then and I find him believable now. To be sure, an account won’t do for evidence obviously, but there are elements of the story that really make you think. It makes sense. It’s probably true. Can’t know for sure. But I believe the man.
For the record, I did not vote for Obama. Twice I did not vote for him. I had a colleague say to me before the election in 2008 (this was at convocation), “You, Andy, you must be especially excited to see a black man elected president.” I thought about asking her why she would assume that, but I said instead, sarcastically, “You mean Alan Keyes?” She was astonished. I hated the question and the snide remark just came out of me. I knew she didn’t mean Keyes. She couldn’t have meant Keyes. (If you don’t know about Keyes, look it up.)
I didn’t vote for Obama because (a) he was obviously CIA (see A Company Family: The Untold History of Obama and the CIA); (b) he was installed as president by the corporate state to continue the neoconservative agenda with a handsome brown face (count the wars he waged); (c) he acted like a Christian with a neon cross when only a few years before he mocked Christianity (Barack Obama: Doing the Lord’s Work; Obama’s Religious Speech); and (d) I had no doubt that he was going to set back race relations fifty years. In fact, on point (d) part of his function was to recreate the racial politics that Democrats have depended on since the founding of the nation. Oh, and (e) the rallies and flags were serious fascistic. It just wasn’t right. He would give speeches with no content and the crowd would swoon. Creepy. Orwellian. Hitlerian. For more reasons, see my July 2008 blog entry Why I am Not Voting for Barack Obama.)
I said what I said to my colleague because it could not be a black conservative that I was supposed to be excited about. Remember how they smeared Clarence Thomas? Remember how they mocked Herman Cain? And then, later, how they would mock Ben Carson? It’s the same thing with celebrating the first woman anything. Sarah Palin? Elizabeth Dole? “No, not those kind of women. We mean Hillary Clinton or Rachel Levine—those kind of women.” For progressives, the identity politics piece is not about the first black person, the first woman, the first gay person, etcetera. It’s about a progressive who happens to be black, or woman, or gay, or trans, or Muslims, or whatever. The identity piece is contingent on the politics. It’s so obvious. I’m always astonished by how stupid intelligent people are getting sucked in by such obvious con men.
So, no, I could not vote for Obama. Not because he blew Larry Sinclair in the back of a limo in 1999. Who cares about that? So he’s gay or bisexual. So what? I couldn’t vote for Obama because he represented—and continues to represent—the managed decline of the American Republic.
freedom and reason 