Larry Sinclair‘s Wild Allegations Against Barack Obama‘s Past
In 2008, a Minnesota man named Larry Sinclair exploded onto the fringes of the national media scene by making extraordinary allegations about then-presidential candidate Barack Obama‘s past. At a press conference, Sinclair claimed he did cocaine and engaged in sexual acts with Obama back in 1999. He even accused associates of Obama‘s from Chicago of menacing him to keep quiet.
Sinclair‘s allegations of personal drug use and gay sex caught tabloid attention during Obama‘s rise as a young, inspirational political figure aiming for America‘s highest office. With Obama‘s campaign centered around hope, change and a commitment to truth, the unproven accusations seemed designed to damage his squeaky clean public image.
Yet serious questions emerged immediately about Larry Sinclair‘s credibility, motives and the lack of evidence for his spectacular claims. Most mainstream journalists steered clear of amplifying his attention-seeking assertions without further verification. But in the viral world of the internet, false rumors still have a way of spreading.
The Alleged 1999 Encounter Between Obama and Sinclair
On his website, Sinclair laid out his alleged encounter with Barack Obama in somewhat meticulous detail. He claims their meeting took place early in the morning on November 6, 1999 at the upscale Chicago Hotel. Sinclair, then in his late 30s, had returned to his room after drinking at the hotel bar. He says he then received a call asking if he wanted to meet Obama to "get something to take the edge off."
According to Sinclair, Obama soon arrived at his hotel room and produced a bag of cocaine. The two men then allegedly used the stimulant together before Sinclair says he provided Obama with oral sex in the room and again later in Gundlach‘s limousine rental car. Parts of Sinclair‘s story appear rather cinematic – he claims the limo circled Chicago‘s tony Gold Coast neighborhood while the two men consumed more cocaine and engaged in another sex act.
Sinclair would make further explosive claims that senior advisor David Axelrod coordinated with political blogger Dan Parisi to organize a campaign to discredit him. He says Parisi met with him in February 2008 and offered a $750,000 payment under condition that Sinclair recant his story. Sinclair took this as proof that Obama‘s inner circle was offering hush money and trying to intimidate him.
Widespread Skepticism & Dismissal of Allegations
Despite breathless promotion across right wing blogs and YouTube channels, Sinclair‘s story failed to attract mainstream media coverage. A few factors explain the lack of pickup:
For one, Sinclair‘s criminal history undermined his credibility substantially. He had several felony convictions in the 1990s related to credit card fraud – hardly making him a trustworthy narrator.
Additionally, Sinclair failed to provide any substantive evidence backing his claims. The supposed limo driver who witnessed the gay sex acts never stepped forward to confirm Sinclair‘s account during Obama‘s presidency.
Finally, little details of the story strained believability. Would Obama risk his entire marriage and career prospects by doing cocaine with a near-stranger at a hotel off the Chicago Miracle Mile? Why had Sinclair waited nearly ten years to come forward with these damaging revelations?
Sinclair Tries to Bolster Claims with Polygraph Test
In an attempt to validate his statements, Sinclair voluntarily took a polygraph test administered by Whitehouse.com. The test administrator concluded:
Mr. Sinclair did engage in sexual activity with the above described Barack Obama on 11/6/99 after consuming drugs.
However, the reliability of polygraph testing remains highly controversial. Potential issues like improper structure of test questions or subject anxiety can influence results. Notably, Whitehouse.com‘s owner had a history of releasing news stories aimed at generating publicity.
Mainstream media outlets refused to put much stock in the questionable polygraph findings. They preferred to side with the Obama campaign‘s position labeling Sinclair as a "con man" unworthy of response. Without better proof, Sinclair‘s claims mostly circulated among right wing message boards open to salacious conspiracy theories.
Sinclair Hints at Connection to Donald Young Murder Mystery
Possibly realizing that the gay sex bombshell wasn‘t exploding, Sinclair shifted gears by hinting ominously at another alleged piece of Obama‘s hidden past. Specifically, he pushed speculation that Obama and Reverend Jeremiah Wright may have known more about the murder of Donald Young than they let on.
Young had worked as choir director at Wright‘s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago while Obama attended services there. He was found shot to death in December 2007, stunning the community.
Chicago police eventually charged Fredrick Hubbard with Young‘s murder following an attempted robbery. However, with Sinclair fanning flames online, a whisper campaign took root that Young had been killed to silence him over Obama‘s secrets. Other deaths of young black men in Chicago were also dragged into conspiracy chatter.
Officials worked to dispel what Young‘s family called "vile and disgusting lies." But the culture of suspicion toward power had clearly taken root among partisan internet circles. For political allegations in the social media age, the standard had shifted disturbingly from going wide with the truth to going viral with enticing speculation.
The Role of the Media in Responsible Reporting
The fringe speculation over Barack Obama‘s past puts focus back on the media industry‘s responsibility in how such allegations get covered. Most mainstream outlets sensibly disregarded Sinclair‘s attention-seeking claims due to his serious credibility issues and lack of confirming evidence.
Yet in the Wild West of the internet, norms for fact-checking allegations understandably lag behind traditional media. The economic incentives of racking up clicks and views reward explosive headlines over discretion. And partisan rage bait has a way of lighting up the dark corners of social sites.
In an ideal setting, standards exist so that the verifiability and seriousness of allegations dictate the intensity of media coverage, not merely scandalous appeal. Striking the right balance remains difficult, given America‘s open information ecosystem. But the lessons of Sinclair‘s brew of lies and careless exaggeration hopefully spur more prudence.
Conclusion: The Non-Impact of Meritless Claims
In the end, Larry Sinclair‘s allegations had zero impact on derailing Obama‘s meteoric political ascendance. The presidential candidate comfortably won two national elections despite all the ruckus. Most Americans rightly dismissed Sinclair as lacking credibility from the outset.
Yet this case still exposes how a single person can use the internet‘s unmatched reach to promote distortions without accountability. And it reveals an appetite in some crowds for swallowing fictions that confirm preconceived biases. Disturbing aspects of political discourse surely persist today.
The nature of partisan allegations in the social media age makes perfectly "concluding" this story impossible. Questions linger even from the deaths of Donald Young and others that conspiracy theorists dubiously link back to Obama. But absent substantiating evidence, responsible citizens should refrain from turning tragedy into vaporous rumors. There are enough true issues to debate in pursuit of a just society.