As one might have predicted, O-Beasts reacting to my previous post presumed that I consider Larry Sinclair credible, even though I had used such phrases as "nuttier than a Snickers bar" and "One would be hard-pressed to conceive of a less credible source of information."
(The O-folk see only the reality they
want to see. That's why and how they formed delusions of Messiah-hood around a crooked Chicago pol.)
At any rate, I've found out a bit more about Paramjit Multani, the driver who allegedly hooked Sinclair up with Barack Obama.
Although Sinclair said that he was divulging the name for the first time at the press conference, he had in fact already allowed it to slip out. There is a taxi cab driver in Maryland by that name (this is the fellow I tried to reach), but he appears to be the wrong person.
Another Paramjit Multani was caught up in a particularly messy deportation proceeding, which lasted from 2000 to 2006. (He was accused of participating in a sham marriage.) The documentation created by that complex affair (see
here) indicates that this Multani may indeed have been in Chicago in 1999. This Multani was sent back to India in 2006 (if I understand the document correctly).
At the press conference, Sinclair disclosed a document which showed that one Rashpal Multani owned the limo service in question. A pdf of this document is
here. During the Q-and-A session, Sinclair indicated that the Multani he met moved to Tupelo, Missippi, not long ago. If so, then the fellow deported to India was a different man.
I wonder: How did Larry Sinclair come to know -- and remember -- the full name of the limo driver?
Another detail has cropped up which may indicate that "something odd" lurks in back of this story, however absurd the charges and the person making them. I'm intrigued by the role played by Dan Parisi of www.whitehouse.com.
You may recall the name, since he caused some controversy a decade ago. Many thought that children seeking the official site for the White House (www.whitehouse.
gov) might stumble onto Parisi's adult-themed site by accident. In the wild-n-woolly early days of the web, Parisi made a million dollars a year, pushing porn and anti-Clinton propaganda on his site.
He is now a big Obama fan. (Sounds like the Arianna story, eh wot?) And he has paid much attention to what Larry Sinclair has to say -- in fact, he paid for the lie detector test. More than that, he paid Larry $20,000 to
take the test, pass or fail.
But there may be more than
that. Here's what Larry had to say at the National Press Club:
Finally, in February 2008 I was told anonymously that Dan Parisi of Whitehouse.com received $750,000 from the Obama campaign through AKR Media to organize an effort to publically discredit me. When I confronted Dan Parisi with this allegation, he did not deny it but instead withdrew the second exonerating polygraph report of Dr. Gordon Barland, failed to post the video of my polygraph as he and Whitehouse.com promised they would do, and even removed posts from their web site altogether...
Why didn't Parisi deny the $750,000 pay-off charge? Parisi can't claim "I don't consider Larry Sinclair worthy of response." After all, Parisi considered Sinclair worthy of $20,000.
That
is odd. Obviously, no-one would pay $750,000 to discredit a mere nutjob.
Someone has devoted
an entire blog to debunking Larry Sinclair. This is no small operation -- the writers of the Mitch and Nan site are almost as prolix as
I am. More than that: These people claim to be personally responsible for arranging Sinclair's arrest.
Marjorie Schoedinger, the disturbed woman who charged George Bush with rape, did not evince this kind of attention.
Bottom line? I cannot believe Larry Sinclair. Yet I can't escape the feeling that this tale has ramifications we don't yet comprehend.
