[little jeremiah]

I still regard lots if information in his book, the parts that are verifiable by others, to be claims that appear to be authentic, including his information from Ruth Ndesandjo and the birth-dates for David and Mark. None of Ruth's information has been refuted with any evidence that I have seen.

Fake "evidence" (people saying things, people that have a vested interest in mythology) that has not been refuted is not "evidence". You conveniently ignore the fact that many people have a vested interest in hiding 0kaka's background and have been actively doing so for many years. Oh, and what is this "us"?

After reading his editorial in the WaPo abusing eligibility activists and calling us racists...

I don't want to be mean but you thought someone who got a Pulitzer Prize for a fawning book about Clinton was therefore trustworthy? You really think people on FR are fools.

[Seizethecarp]

“I don't want to be mean but you thought someone who got a Pulitzer Prize for a fawning book about Clinton was therefore trustworthy?”

You are still in black/white mode, I see.

You continue to provide no evidence that can be verified in support of an alternative set of parents or parent for Barry.

Maraniss’ Clinton book was not fawning nor is his Barry book. His Barry book is so damaging to Barry that Obots are refusing to buy it. The book destroys huge swathes of Barry's “Dreams” narrative showing that book and Barry's entire 2008 election narrative to be fantasy designed to fool voters into thinking he was not really a white guy in a black skin pretending to be from the hood. The book has been devastating for both Maraniss and for Barry's cred with his own peeps.