- I am not saying in any way shape or form that Larry Johnson is lying about the existence of some video of Michelle Obama. Please. Larry would not do that. A video of some kind exists.
- If you read his posts closely, Larry does not claim to have seen the video in question himself. I may have missed a post where he did state this, but in the posts I have read, he does not. He was very clear that he has spoken to at least two people who do not know each other, who he trusts completely, and who have attested to the existence of a video.
- I do not consider the fact that some whacko rightwing bazillionaire has offered $1 million for a copy of the video to be proof of anything. Why not? Because the *rumor* of a terrible, career destroying video is something you can dangle in front of people for a long time and which can't be countered except by exasperated assertions that it doesn't exist. After all, the total lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is succeeding. The offer of a bounty, absent something more substantive, has all the hallmarks of a classic Republican ratfucking operation. Thus, I want to know more.
- If Larry says he has something for us to see by 9:00 AM on Monday, then the man will deliver.
- Larry has not promised a video for Monday. He just promised something big. I am very interested to see what he has in hand.
- Given the doctored clip from The War Room, putting slurs into Mickey Kantor's mouth, I think it is strongly in everyone's interests to approach any video with a big heap of healthy scepticism. While I trust Larry not to knowingly pass on anything that did not check out, I also know that there are a lot of people out there who would like nothing more than for Democrats generally and Hillary supporters in particular, to be led into a trap. Thus, I advise caution and critical evaluation of anything that purports to be explosive (video or something else), and to look carefully for signs that Larry may not have caught. The credibility you save will be your own.
- Two words: Dan Rather. Something can be true and yet still be a trap.
So, my caution is based on past examples from this campaign and from others of how something purporting to be true turns out to be a hoax or a trap. Don't let eagerness to hurt a political opponent make you gullible.
I also say that whether or not I like Michelle Obama, there's a shitload of sexism and, yes, racism (not to mention foul language and plain old bad manners) aimed at her that is not acceptable under any circumstances. I don't care if she's been a jerk. I don't like sexism aimed at Hillary and I don't like it aimed at any other female public figure, even those who tick me off. I fully expect that somewhere there is a video showing Michelle behind the pulpit at TUCC and saying things that I might find objectionable. Why? She's a long standing member of that church, she's a woman who bluntly speaks her mind, and things I find objectionable appear to be acceptable at TUCC. But thinking that there is some video that shows this person saying something so shocking that it will change the course of the campaign? Not unless I actually see a video that several disinterested professional video analysts attest has not been modified or altered and I decide that what she says is actually something I find objectionable. Further, even if I find her words objectionable, that doesn't mean I'll find them politically relevant. What others make of it is another thing entirely.
On Monday, I'll examine the evidence and draw my own conclusions.