Rumors of a devastating tape of Michelle Obama are being spread by the Clinton shock troops:

And from whence does it come. Well from Hillary Clinton supporter and somewhat veracity-challenged Larry Johnson, at “No Quarter”, who, quite naturally, implies it is the Republicans (but seems quite happy about the possible result none-the-less) playing this card:

I now have it from two three four sources (three who are close to senior Republicans) that there is video dynamite–Michelle Obama railing against “whitey” at Jeremiah Wright’s church. Republicans may have a lousy record when it comes to the economy and the management of the war in Iraq, but they are hell on wheels when it comes to opposition research.

Johnson is a political hatchet man who covered for Valerie Plame and her lying husband Joe Wilson. All of Larry’s claims proved wrong in the end – he prides himself on his ability to lie and intimidate. Too bad he’s a about 100 IQ points short of actually being as clever as he thinks he is.

For example: why would any GOP source uncover this October Surprise Atom Bomb now? Obama is in, Clinton is out – keep the powder dry on this one and we get President McCain. All this does is help Clinton – not the GOP. There probably IS a tape, but clearly it is in the hand of the Clitonistas. Let’s break down Larry’s comments to see if he actually says anything, other than there is this tape?

First sentence: “I now have it from two three four sources (three who are close to senior Republicans) that there is video dynamite …”. He has three sources from Congress. They are close to senior Reps. Senior Dems are ‘close to’ senior Reps. Dem Staffers are ‘close to’ senior Reps. Maybe his sources are Rep Staffers getting word from Dem staffers who favor Clinton? Who knows, but Johnson is CIA trained on the art of misdirection, so read his words carefully. He does not say what party or candidate his sources are from, and he doesn’t say who has the tape. He has just allowed the mind of the reader to draw conclusions that are not there.

Second sentence: “Republicans may have a lousy record when it comes to the economy and the management of the war in Iraq, but they are hell on wheels when it comes to opposition research.” Think this has to be connected to the first sentence? Not really. I have seen this done many times. For example, I have seen someone present details of a SW architecture, then present on best practices, and then go onto something else. The funny thing was, when I asked if they used the practices the presenter said not completely, he was just presenting context.

Another example was in the Valerie Plame Game, where there was a lot of discussion about Joe Wilson debriefing the VP about his visit to Niger Turned out Wilson never debriefed Cheney, and neither did the CIA. Also turns out Wilson did not report back to the CIA, but actually debriefed an two officers at his home with Valerie serving tea (though she claimed she was not involved with Wilson’s report). You have to watch these people, they are great at making you think there is connection when there isn’t.

So why do this now? Well, Hillary needs to cripple Obama ASAP. She needs to make sure his unelectable before the convention. What this news does is force Obama back on the defensive. Without the tape he is trying to deny a negative, or an unknown. And now everyone is going to start digging through videos to see if they can find this atom bomb. Checkmate. How can Obama deny something he hasn’t seen? If he does have it he has to make it public and then deal with it. If he doesn’t find it others will. If it is a myth the rumor cannot be squashed.

Classic Clinton Dirty Tricks – executed by a dirty trickster himself. H/T to Q and O