Media Fabricated “Bully Romney” Story to Cover for Obama


Young Mitt

Was young Mitt Romney a high school bully? The Washington Post fakes a story that said he is – and gets called out.

A mounting body of evidence is pointing to another growing scandal in the news world, on par with the Rupert Murdoch saga in the UK in terms of impact, if not scale.

Earlier this month, President Obama announced that he would use his executive power to authorize gay marriage in the US if he had the chance. Obama’s remarks were an elaboration on Vice President Biden’s statement that the administration would be “comfortable” with changing the traditional definition of marriage – a statement that privately enraged a President desperate to avoid coming out on the issue, according to later reports. The President’s popularity among swing voters began to decline as a result of his “evolution” on the issue – in 2008 he promised to never support same-sex marriage – and challenger Mitt Romney looked much more trustworthy on the matter.

But, as if from nowhere, Obama was handed a miracle. Just a day later, the Washington Post put up a story claiming that some of Romney’s high school classmates saw him “hold down” and “assault” a student he believed to be gay. Suddenly, Romney was a “bully,” and Barack Hussein Obama, who admitted to trying drugs “enthusiastically” in high school and shoving a girl he detested, became a saint of respectability. Other news outlets (seeing money to be made) quickly picked up the story, and the Romney campaign was forced to apologize for something the candidate didn’t ever remember happening.

The timing and subject of WaPo’s drive-by on Romney immediately some raised flags, though. Could this be another Rathergate? In 2004, Dan Rather literally fabricated documents that said President Bush had lied about being in the military – what if the Washington Post gave Mitt Romney the same treatment? Questions about the legitimacy of the story went unreturned by the mainstream media, further darkening the clouds.

Taking matters into their own hands, conservatives decided to interview the family of John Lauber, the Romney’s purported “victim” who has since passed away. To their surprise, Lauber’s family said the entire story was simply false. Further digging revealed that many of the classmates who had corroborated the original Washington Post story hadn’t even been present at the scene as they claimed. When pressed separately, their timelines fell apart.

The story was indeed a hoax!

Christine Lauber, John’s sister, said that John would have been “furious [about the story.]”  But another sister, Betsy, put the final nail in the coffin:

“The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda.”

“There will be no more comments from the family.”

Advertisements

I'm a young guy with a news addiction. I love engineering, politics, and economics, and I have a mind built for analysis. Also, I write a lot, though I hate the paperwork... You can read my work at www.dynamopolitics.com !

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in President Obama
5 comments on “Media Fabricated “Bully Romney” Story to Cover for Obama
  1. Steve says:

    Unfortunately the media has committed another sin which they will not repent of. The damage is inflicted. Yet the fact that the story if false will never become a story at all. The truth is what they fabricate.

    • Yeah, I found that out too shortly after I published the article. No one is saying anything about the fact that this is made up, which astounds me! Where is Fox News, at least? They should be using this to attack their competitors as unreliable. We have checks and balances in the world of media too – maybe this is a sign that they’re not working the way they should?

  2. John Decker says:

    Actually, Lauber’s family said the “portrayal” of John Lauber was completely false. They never claimed the event was false. How could they? They weren’t there. All they could rightfully claim is that John never told them about it. The main quote from here sister in the Blaze piece was: ““Even if it did happen, John probably wouldn’t have said anything,” she said. “If he were still alive today, he would be furious [about the story].” That does not come close to denying the event itself. But this is a typical conservative tactic. Discredit some part of a story in order to rebut the entire thing by association. Nice try, but, as Art Fleming used to say, “Sorry, no.”

  3. John Decker says:

    btw, in a piece headlined “Media Fabricated “Bully Romney” Story to Cover for Obama,” you wait until the second-to-last paragraph of the entire blog to even introduce your specious evidence. That’s some reporting technique you have, Dynamo! Ever heard the phrase “burying the lede”? If you had any confidence in your so-called evidence, I assume it would appear in your blog before the penultimate paragraph.

    • I’m not sure what burying the “lede” is supposed to mean, but this article is written using the “soft lead” style commonly taught in many schools of writing and journalism. And if your relying on where I place my facts as refutation, you clearly don’t have much of an argument.

      Now, let’s look at the evidence against the story:
      1-The timing of the release, just after President Obama flip-flopped on gay marriage
      2-A WaPo correction which removed several key “witnesses” from the school at the time of the incident.
      3-The lack of any documentation of the incident from contemporary sources.
      4-The insistence of the victim’s family that this event was unlikely/did not occur.
      5-The inability of the “witnesses,” when questioned separately, to hold a consistent timeline.

      If, in spite of this evidence, you still want to believe the story, that’s up to you. But if you’re trusting people who knew Romney at that time as proof that the story happened, you have to apply the same suspension of disbelief to the people who explained that he left Bain in ’99 to run the Olympics. Are you willing to concede that point? Otherwise you’re just picking and choosing who’s credible and who isn’t to fit your agenda (and don’t give me that crap about being listed on SEC filings – I can attest from personal experience that there is a difference between being a CEO and actively managing a company).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow DYNAMO and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2 other followers

About the Author
DYNAMOpolitics

DYNAMOpolitics

I'm a young guy with a news addiction. I love engineering, politics, and economics, and I have a mind built for analysis. Also, I write a lot, though I hate the paperwork... You can read my work at www.dynamopolitics.com !

View Full Profile →

%d bloggers like this: