man get this info out already,down with 0bama




Who is withholding the Obama-Ayers docs?



AP’s Mark Silva has an article appearing on the Chicago Tribune’s “The Swamp”today that update’s Curt’s original post, Shielding the facts about Obama’s relationship with terrorists”.

And it’s one interesting headline: “Barack Obama records sealed at Illinois”

Now I have an inherent distrust of headlines… as well we all should. And sure enough, no where in Silva’s article is any legal “sealing” of records. And that’s what I think of when that word appears.

Instead, what we have here is one donor, holding out big time on data.

The university’s Chicago campus maintains that the donor of the records that document the work of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge has not handed over ownership rights. The university says it is “aggressively pursuing” an agreement with the donor, and as soon as an agreement is reached, the collection will be made accessible to the public. The university has not identified the donor.

~~~
“The donor’s only concerns regarding the collection are due to personnel information that could include names, confidential salary information and even Social Security numbers,” a spokesman for the university said. Spokesman Bill Burton, no relation to an Obama spokesman of the same name, said he could not identify the owner.

Three notable responses strike me here. First, the federal gov’t releases information with blacked out areas for sensitive information. Uh.. haven’t these people heard of a Sharpie?


Second… the Jr. Senator/wannabe POTUS… aka His Messiahship… has no control over these records. Well now, isn’t that convenient? John Edwards is willing to donate DNA for a paternity test, but then he’s assured there will be no paternity test because the mother has to demand it. Is Obama doing the same? Offering “DNA” INRE these docs, knowing full well the donor will refuse to release the documents?

And last, but far from least… the lack of disclosure is ****ing to Obama. That is obvious. So which is worse… the disclosure? Or the lack of disclosure?

If, as the donor says, it is to protect the SSN# of the participants, they can comply… and do so protecting the privacy information, as well as clear the name of Obama. If, indeed, the donor has no wish to infringe on information to the public - whether or not it condemns the jr. Senator - they will come to a quick agreement and release the documents.

If they hold this up past the November election…. or, for that matter, longer… then the donor - an institution dedicated to education of the public, mind you - has one of two specific reasons for not disclosing information about a US candidate for President to the US public.

1: They are trying to protect Obama from election support harm because of what the records reveal… or

2: The donor is afraid of what Obama and his handlers may *do* if they release the information. This can be any kind of threat from financial repercussions to physical harm. aka… good ol’ fashioned Chicago style mafia blackmail.

One is protection because of respect for Obama. The other is protecting their own interests - physical or financial - against threats from those surrounding the Obama campaign. Which is it? Withholding for respect? Or are they threatened in some way?

So this brings us to the $100 million dollar question. Just who is the donor, that the U of IL will not disclose, holding up the info chain?

The investigative minds will first turn to the head honchos: