National Enquirer Update: Retracts Hotel Surveillance Claim in Obama Affair claim!

National Enquirer Update: Retracts Hotel Surveillance Claim in Obama Affair claim!

www.mediaite.com

The National Enquirer, which published a report this morning that “investigators are attempting to obtain a tape” that proved an illicit rendezvous between President Barack Obama and former US Senate campaign staffer Vera Baker, has updated their story this afternoon to retract the claim that there is video evidence of the affair with the alleged testimony of an anonymous chauffeur.
Looks like the National Enquirer Obama sex scandal is unraveling rather quickly. The latest from the paper is that “An Enquirer reporter has confirmed the limo driver’s account of the secret 2004 rendezvou

(visit the link for the full news article)

I didn't think there were any legs to this whole story. If so, what didn't it come out in the 2008 Pres. Run?

Should be interesting to see who this gets tracked back to?

I say...... Democrates, trying to appear to be Tea Partiers. )

Personally, I am glad this probably won't be a story. I do think he is a loving family man and I would like to keep that. NOt another politican sex scandal. Wait, I forgot, it wouldn't matter because Obama is a Dem and that stuff doesn't matter when it is a Dem.

www.mediaite.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I swear something must be wrong with the reply button on this one.

ALl fine and dandy when a matter breaks and it makes it appear one way-comments out the wazoo.

But when eveidence or retractions occures and dis-qualities the original story-it is like ... tumlbeweeds?

What up with that?

reply to post by anon72


Of course they retracted. We are talking about the National Enquirer. Not a credible source by any means, they are just s**t slingers.

reply to post by anon72


Funny how many people suddenly start to believe the national enquirer when it conforms to their confirmation bias.

I'm not so sure if "deny ignroance" is really what is going on here most of the times.

reply to post by space cadet


I would have agreed with you except that I gave them a slight eye due to their breaking of the John Edwards Lovechild and affair. They atleast earned that much with the good work they did on that story.

But, to be honest, when I first saw the story and saw they were behind it-I figured they had to have a tape or there was no credibilitiy to the story.

Well, the story will be blown out of the water now, with their admission to no tape etc. Regardless it is true or not. They dropped the ball.

Also, now if some tape comes out, it will also be discredited. As well as the next 1000 stories coming from them. They really screwed up on this story/lead/tip.



[edit on 5/2/2010 by anon72]

That national Enquirer Lied? NOOOO



Sorry. Thats all I have.

reply to post by Common Good


I don't think they out-right lie but rather stretch the true-in most cases.

As I said, the did break the John Edwards story and stayed with it when everyone was minking fun of them.

The MSM didn't pick up on the story for almost 2 years later. duh

reply to post by anon72

I didn't think there were any legs to this whole story. If so, what didn't it come out in the 2008 Pres. Run?

Actually it did,

but oh well,

reply to post by Stormdancer777


I don't recall this one. Not that I want to sound like I am saying Prove it. but could you put some sources up on that one.

Obama was in an affair, or rumors or, during the 2008 election-that is.

I guess I could have missed that but ....

I know you are just heartbroken.

But keep up the good work......not.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Actually, there is no retraction. That is a comment from someone, but if you go the NE website, there is no retraction.

If you find the retraction, could you please post it?

well I guess they can always go back to printing
stories about 2 headed Alien Babies.
lol

that sells papers too

[edit on 2-5-2010 by boondock-saint]

reply to post by anon72


www.abovetopsecret.com...

newsbusters.org...

Will Media Investigate Obama Affair Rumors?
By John Stephenson (Bio | Archive)
Mon, 10/13/2008 - 02:39 ET

reply to post by Libertygal


From your OP here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

And now, a hush-hush security video that shows everything could topple both Obama's presidency and marriage to Michelle!

And now the Enquirer article reads:

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

www.nationalenquirer.com...

They changed article to say “searching” for alleged tape. Seems like a retraction to me. Unless you just enjoy flogging a dead horse.


ETA: NewsBusters = Brent Bozell.


[edit on 2-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

Luckily, I saved the text of their original article to disk, as I have since the Enquirer began revising their text 4 or so times.

Here is Mediaite's original title:

National Enquirer Obama Story Update: Retracts Hotel Surveillance Claim
» 29 comments
by Frances Martel | 4:37 pm, May 1st, 2010

and some of the comments:

May 1, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Frances, Please attach the National Enquirer URL confirming your statment. Their website makes NO mention of your UPDATE. Thanks

May 1, 2010 at 5:38 pm
Oh, OK. Mediaite is now editing posts from conservatives. Defend your post Martel. Stop pandering to your whining liberal base. Confirm your claim that NE retracted the video

May 1, 2010 at 6:00 pm
National Enquirer has not retracted the video claim as per their website.
www.nationalenquirer.com...
So, that said, what evidence/source confirms of the retraction if it’s not mentioned on the NE website?

May 1, 2010 at 6:03 pm
What is the definition of a retraction? Maybe they stopped mentioning the existence of a video but should that be called a retraction?

May 1, 2010 at 10:12 pm
You should check with the National Enquirer link …..It has not changed it’s claim of the existence of a video.
It’s still there. In fact, it reworded to suggest they are more confident of a video , not less.

I would be happy to send you the webpage as it stood originally, if you want it, but they did the exact same thing as NE did, creative editing.

ETA brackets

[edit on 2-5-2010 by Libertygal]

reply to post by Libertygal


I lifted the quote from your OP and compared it to current NE story. They've CHANGED the story by your own admission "4 or so" times.

But WHY ON EARTH would you present comments to support your claim? They carry no credibility.

They ARE NOT in possession of alleged tape. (i.e. proof) End of story.


[edit on 2-5-2010 by kinda kurious]

It wouldn't matter if the story could not be iron clad proven, the accusation is out there now, and time will reveal the truth. Personally, I would believe that there was an affair and more than just one. Maybe the enquirer is playing a tease on Obama and later will let the shoe drop as his first term nears and end.

For some the rumor alone is more than enough evidence, even though we are innocent until proven guilty in the land of the free.

Although there is no evidence to prove this actually happened, be ready to see people demanding proof that it didn't happen.

Modus operandi for most anti-Obamites willing to pounce on anything against the President.

- Lee

reply to post by lee anoma


I don't know. It seems like this story (if you will) died as quick as it came up. Which it should have.

No matter what anyone calls it, there is not sufficient colaborating evidence for them even to run a hit piece (if that was their intent).

Not that it prbably matters to N.E. but any creditability they earned/obtained with the Edwards story(s) will be gone. Not a good follow-up scandal idea.