Sunday, May 2, 2010

National Enquirer's 'Obama cheating scandal' cheats readers

Posted by Chris Haire on Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:44 PM

Just when the gang at the National Enquirer appeared to be getting some props from their fellow journalists, now they've up and ruined all that by running a hack-assed article exposing President Obama as another cheating politico getting hands on with the help. But that hasn't stopped Drudge and others from pushing the story.

Of course, that was yesterday. And today is a brand new day. The Enquirer report — which seemed to have run in full on the tabloid's site yesterday — has been cut dramatically, most likely to drive the curious to actually pick up a copy at the grocery store (Something I'll likely do later today).

Here are the opening graphs from today's version. (You can head here to read many of the bits that were cut):

Reports out of Washington, DC: PRESIDENT OBAMA in a shocking cheating scandal after being caught in a Washington, D.C. Hotel with a former campaign aide.

A confidential investigation has learned that Obama first became close to gorgeous 35 year-old VERA BAKER in 2004 when she worked tirelessly to get him elected to the US Senate, raising millions in campaign contributions.

Now, the investigators are searching for a hotel surveillance videotape.

That said, here's the evidence that Enquirer has presented thus far:

1. A limo driver picks up Vera Baker, Obama's alleged paramour from a friend's house.

2. He takes her to a hotel where Obama is staying.

3. The president waits in the lobby while Baker goes to a room to change. According to the Enquirer, this is the damning bit. See, according to the limo driver, "to the best of [his] knowledge" Baker was not staying there. Yikes. Talk about flimsy proof. The limo driver isn't saying that he knew she wasn't staying there. He's saying that he had no frikkin idea if she was staying there or not.

4. After driving Obama and Baker around town to various locations, at 10:30 p.m. the driver "drove them to the hotel and they went in together!" His "services for the evening were done." Now, here comes the damning part: According to the driver "there was absolutely no indication she was going to leave the hotel that night." Once again, the driver has admitted that he doesn't know dick. Maybe Baker was staying at the hotel, maybe she wasn't. Maybe she left later that evening, maybe she didn't. The limo driver doesn't know. His services for the evening were done at 10 frikkin 30.

5. And then there's the matter of the hotel surveillance footage. According to the tabloid, the Enquirer "has learned that on-site hotel surveillance video camera footage could provide indisputable evidence to the investigation." Hmm. Notice the wording here: The Enquirer doesn't say that footage exists showing the pair together in an amorous embrace. Nope. All the Enquirer is saying is that if there was footage of the pair engaged in an amorous embrace, it would provide indisputable evidence that they were engaged in an amorous embrace, and right now, they're hoping to find that footage if it even exists.

Very tricky, guys. Very tricky indeed. But you didn't fool me.

That said, I overheard a fella talking about it at the grocery store yesterday, and you certainly fooled him. Bravo.

Imagine the damage, they could do if they actually had proof.

Tags: , , ,


Comments (14)

Showing 1-14 of 14

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-14 of 14

Add a comment

Classified Listings
Most Viewed

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2015, Charleston City Paper   RSS