Bachmann Lied…Again

So, Michele Bachmann lied…again.

Marc Gallagher reports, in part:

Earlier tonight Michelle Bachmann lost her Iowa Campaign chairman to the Ron Paul campaign. She lashed out claiming it was financially motivated. Not true, says her current Iowa Political Director.

Here is the relevant portion of Bachmann’s statement after the defection occurred:

Kent Sorenson personally told me he was offered a large sum of money to go to work for the Paul campaign. Kent campaigned with us earlier this afternoon and went immediately afterward  to a Ron Paul event and announced he is changing teams. Kent said to me yesterday that ‘everyone sells out in Iowa, why shouldn’t I,’ then he told me he would stay with our campaign.

Here is a statement from her current Iowa political director Wes Enos regarding her statement above from a press release put out by the Ron Paul campaign:

“I won’t say much about the situation or the conflicting statements beyond this; I can say unequivocally that Kent Sorenson’s decision was, in no way financially motivated.  His decision had more to do with the fact that the Ron Paul supporters have been something of a family to him since he was first elected in 2008 and here in the end, as it becomes more and more apparent that the caucus cycle is coming to an end, Kent believed that he needed to be with them as they stand on the cusp of a potential caucus upset.  While I personally disagree with Kent’s decision, and plan to stay with Michele Bachmann because I truly believe in her, I cannot, in good conscious watch a good man like Kent Sorenson be attacked as a ‘sell-out’ ….That is simply not the case, and it was not the basis of his decision,” said Mr. Enos.

Read the rest HERE!


2 thoughts on “Bachmann Lied…Again

  1. As if this man truly knows. He said from outset he doesnt know the motivation. You paulbots are rabid and just as censoring as the current occupy white house fraud.

  2. Well, thank you for reading the post, though I find it unfortunate that you resort to name-calling. “Paulbot” isn’t exactly an argument. And “rabid”, while a nice use descriptive word, doesn’t really deal with the issues.

    I think the my post should be taken seriously for a couple of reasons.
    1) What would be his motivation for defending Sorensen? After all, as you may know, Wes Enos was forced to resign after he defended Sorensen. So, why risk losing your job for a lie? Bachmann, on the other hand, has plenty of motivation for lying – she’s trying to win the nomination and her campaign is continually spiraling down.
    2) Bachmann has been caught lying multiple times before. In fact, MSNBC reported that 73% of Bachmann’s investigated debate claims were false. That was higher than any other GOP candidate.
    You can see my posts about this, all linking to direct quotes and sources – here and here

    I am not trying to personally insult Michele Bachmann, but her track record of truth-telling is not a good one.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s