Fact check: Democrat group makes several false claims in its dramatic allegations about Lauren Boebert’s past

By Sandra D. Stgeorge On Jun 25, 2022

In emails this week and in an interview Thursday, Wheeler admitted the super PAC was wrong when he insisted a photo of another woman posing on a bed was a photo of Boebert, had wrong when he claimed that Boebert initially failed to disclose a campaign contribution to Senator Ted Cruz of Texas was wrong to suggest that Cruz made large campaign contributions to Boebert immediately after he began running for office. his first primary, got the date of a Boebert car accident wrong and was wrong when he published a claim that Boebert had an abortion “in the fall of 2004” — at most six months before give birth to a son in March 2005.

The ‘major push’ defended by Wheeler includes the super PAC’s allegation that Boebert met escort clients through his profile on a ‘sugar daddy’ website – although the site told CNN it does not was no record of Boebert ever using it. Wheeler also defended the allegation that the anti-abortion MP had two abortions. The super PAC cited a list of three unnamed “Jane Doe” sources, whose names it did not release, as the basis for these claims.

Boebert’s spokesperson, Ben Stout, told CNN that Boebert had never had a profile on a “sugar daddy” website, had never been an escort, had never had an abortion and that other super PAC claims were also false. Boebert, who is running in a Republican primary that ends on Tuesday, called the allegations “completely baseless and disgusting,” the Washington Examiner reported last week.

“Wheeler’s baseless and libelous claims have been proven wrong time and time again with facts and evidence,” Stout said in a statement to CNN on Thursday. “MP Boebert has instructed her legal counsel to pursue all legal remedies to put an end to this outrageous behavior.”

The super PAC allegations, which prompted a lawyer for Boebert to send a letter to Wheeler pledging to sue for defamation, are particularly difficult to investigate because the super PAC has not released the corroborating evidence Wheeler tells his anonymous sources.

Wheeler said the super PAC is “ready and willing” to defend its main demands in a legal fight, although he also said he was “not interested in a trial” and does not believe his mistakes. were defamatory. The super PAC says all of its anonymous sources have expressed their willingness to come forward to be deposed and testify in court if Boebert pursues legal action.

The super PAC, which was also co-founded by retired Air Force Colonel and former congressional candidate Moe Davis of North Carolina, made a name for itself earlier this year by revealing unflattering information about a another right-wing member of the House, the representative from North Carolina. Madison Cawthorn, who beat Davis in the 2020 election.

While the super PAC’s case against Cawthorn has been bolstered by videos and other evidence, the super PAC has so far not released any evidence that would support its claims about Boebert’s personal and medical background. And the Boebert material the super PAC has released to date, citing these unnamed sources, has proven far from unassailable.

Here are some inaccuracies CNN found.

A photo of a woman who is not Boebert

One photo the super PAC insisted on is that Boebert posing on a bed in a tight dress is actually a photo of another woman. The woman, who posted the photo years ago on her profile on a modeling site, confirmed to CNN this week that it was indeed her in the photo.

After Wheeler argued in an email to CNN on Wednesday that this woman might have been ‘lying’ when she said it was her – Wheeler wrote that he confirmed ‘8 times’ with an ‘absolutely confident’ source the photo was of Boebert — Wheeler later conceded in an interview Thursday that the photo was not of Boebert.

“I’ll concede that. I think our source mixed that up with something else. I don’t know how she mixed that up,” Wheeler said.

The super PAC had released the photo last week as part of a transcript of a text message conversation in which the source, “Jane Doe 3”, claimed it was a photo from the page of Boebert on the “sugar daddy” site. The super PAC removed the photo from its own website last week after The Daily Beast and others said it was not a photo of Boebert – but, until Wheeler’s concession on Thursday, the super PAC had continued to argue to CNN that it was a photo of Boebert.

Wheeler’s claim that the woman in the photo might be “lying” prompted the woman to show CNN additional evidence proving it was indeed her, including an old hard copy of that photo and a second photo of herself in the same distinctive dress.

An error in the abortion claims

A document released Monday by the super PAC on its website says another unnamed source, “Jane Doe 1,” said she drove Boebert to and from a clinic where Boebert had an abortion “in the fall of 2004.” . But that supposed timeline was confusing at best: Boebert’s office pointed out to CNN that Boebert gave birth to her son Tyler on March 21, 2005.

When CNN later brought Tyler’s date of birth to Wheeler’s attention, Wheeler claimed in an email that there was a ‘typing error by our social media guy’ and quickly changed the document. to say that the abortion had occurred “in the fall of 2005”.

The claim “in the fall of 2004”, however, was made in a document on the super PAC’s website – in a section that the super PAC claimed was “reviewed” by its source prior to publication.

That’s not the only factual date-related problem the super PAC has had. Wheeler also acknowledged that a vehicle accident he originally claimed Boebert had in 2020 actually happened in 2019. (He said the super PAC stood by the rest of his account of the incident). incident; Boebert denies that account.) And when CNN asked Wheeler on Thursday what he makes of the fact that Boebert gave birth to another son in 2009, the same year the super PAC claims she had another abortion , Wheeler said what he thinks is this: “Maybe our source got the date wrong.”

He said the “underlying fact” that Boebert had abortions is nevertheless accurate. Again, Boebert says she didn’t have an abortion.

Cruz’s big contributions weren’t made during Boebert’s primary

The super PAC claimed on its website last week that Boebert was introduced to Cruz by a wealthy, politically connected escort client before she started her run for Congress in 2019 — and the super PAC then claimed: “When Boebert announced his campaign for Congress in December 2019, Senator Cruz donated at least $136,250.00 to the Boebert campaign.”

Boebert’s spokesperson, Stout, said Boebert never had an escort client and that she never spoke to Cruz or met Cruz before she won the 2020 primary. Cruz declined to comment for this article.

Regardless of when Cruz and Boebert first spoke or met, the super PAC’s claim about the timing of the donation was misleading at best. Cruz’s 20 for 20 Victory Fund, which has backed more than 20 Republican House candidates in 2020, made its contribution to Boebert’s campaign in September 2020, more than two months after winning the Republican nomination in a district where the Democratic candidate was competing. The wording of the super PAC — “When Boebert announced his campaign for Congress in December 2019” — at least left open the impression that Cruz’s donation came while she was an obscure candidate in a party primary.

Wheeler said in Thursday’s interview: “I agree that wasn’t an accurate way to put it. He should have said ‘later’ or ‘in September’ or ‘summer 2020’ instead. of – yes, that sounds like it’s immediate, but it’s only, as you pointed out, until the fall of 2020.”

Boebert was quick to point out Cruz’s contribution

Although the super PAC claimed on its website last week that Boebert initially did not report a $70,500 campaign contribution from Cruz, his campaign did in fact quickly report this Sept. 12, 2020, contribution from the Cruz fund. The Boebert campaign listed the contribution in its quarterly financial report in October 2020, the month following the contribution.

The Federal Election Commission sent the Boebert campaign a November 2020 letter noting that the campaign had not disclosed, on another form, that the Cruz fund was a “joint fundraising” partner of the Boebert campaign; the Boebert campaign then added that information to the other form. But even the FEC letter noted that the Boebert campaign had already disclosed the contributions it received from the Cruz fund.

When CNN explained those facts to Wheeler on Thursday, he admitted that the super PAC’s claim that Boebert initially failed to report Cruz’s contribution was not true. “I will also concede this point,” he said.

He said what the super PAC, “very haphazardly or carelessly,” was “trying to convey is that he’s very strange for a freshman, or for a first-time candidate for a election to Congress, to obtain $136,000 from an incumbent member, or sitting senator.”

But Boebert was not unique. The Cruz fund also gave more than $136,000 that same month to top congressional candidate Burgess Owens of Utah, plus more than $132,000 that month to debutant Troy Nehls of Texas, and more than $117,000 that month to beginner Wesley. Hunt of Texas, Public Records Issue.

‘Sugar Daddy’ site says it has no record of Boebert

A representative of the “sugar daddy” website on which the super PAC claims Boebert had a profile, SugarDaddyMeet.com, backed Boebert’s claim that she had never used the site – saying in an email to CNN that a search of its internal records found “No record of Congresswoman Boebert using this website.”

This statement is not classified evidence that Boebert has never been on this site or any other similar site. (The site’s rep, which matches “successful” men with “young and aspiring” women, reportedly identifies himself only as “Alice” and won’t answer follow-up questions.) But the super PAC didn’t until ‘now published no evidence. to contradict the statement.

Wheeler said the evidence is there. He said “Jane Doe 3” had pictures of Boebert’s old SugarDaddyMeet profile and that he had seen those pictures — but he didn’t own them himself and therefore couldn’t provide them to CNN.

Wheeler also acknowledged that Jane Doe 3 is the same source that made the mistake of identifying the photo of the woman on the bed as Boebert.

CNN asked Wheeler if there was absolutely no doubt that the woman pictured on the alleged SugarDaddyMeet page was Boebert. Wheeler paused for five seconds and said, “Well, that’s a picture I’ve seen before, but I haven’t verified that’s his picture.” Wheeler said he relied on the truthfulness of his sources, who he said had also seen Boebert’s SugarDaddyMeet profile in years past.

Boebert’s spokesperson, Stout, has repeatedly told CNN that Boebert never had a profile on the site.