http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/ben-carson-west-point-215598
Ben Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship
Carson's campaign on Friday conceded that a central point in his inspirational personal story did not occur as he previously described.
By Kyle Cheney
11/06/15 11:29 AM EST Updated 11/06/15 11:34 AM EST
Ben Carson’s campaign on Friday admitted, in a response to an inquiry from POLITICO, that a central point in his inspirational personal story was fabricated: his application and acceptance into the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.
The academy has occupied a central place in Carson’s tale for years. According to a story told in Carson’s book, “Gifted Hands,” the then-17 year old was introduced in 1969 to Gen. William Westmoreland, who had just ended his command of U.S. forces in Vietnam, and the two dined together. That meeting, according to Carson’s telling, was followed by a “full scholarship” to the military academy.
.
West Point, however, has no record of Carson applying, much less being extended admission.
“In 1969, those who would have completed the entire process would have received their acceptance letters from the Army Adjutant General,” said Theresa Brinkerhoff, a spokeswoman for the academy. She said West Point has no records that indicate Carson even began the application process. “If he chose to pursue (the application process), then we would have records indicating such,” she said.
When presented with these facts, Carson’s campaign conceded the story was false.
“Dr. Carson was the top ROTC student in the City of Detroit,” campaign manager Barry Bennett wrote in an email to POLITICO. “In that role he was invited to meet General Westmoreland. He believes it was at a banquet. He can’t remember with specificity their brief conversation but it centered around Dr. Carson’s performance as ROTC City Executive Officer.”
“He was introduced to folks from West Point by his ROTC Supervisors,” Bennett added. “They told him they could help him get an appointment based on his grades and performance in ROTC. He considered it but in the end did not seek admission.”
This admission comes as serious questions about other points of fact in Carson’s personal narrative are questioned, including the seminal episode in which he claimed to have attempted to stab a close friend. Similarly, details have emerged that cast doubt on the nature of Carson’s encounter with one of the most prominent military men of that era.
The West Point spokeswoman said it certainly is possible Carson talked with Westmoreland, and perhaps the general even encouraged him to apply to West Point. However, she said, the general would have explained the benefits of a West Point education without guaranteeing him entry.
An application to West Point begins with a nomination by a member of Congress or another prominent government or military official. After that, a rigorous vetting process begins. If offered admission, all costs are covered; indeed there are no “full scholarships,” per se.
In “Gifted Hands,” Carson says he excelled in his ROTC program at Detroit’s Southwestern High School, earning the respect of his superiors — just a couple years after anger problems led him to try to murder a friend. He attained the rank of second lieutenant by his senior year of high school and became the student leader of the city’s ROTC programs.
In May of his senior year, he was chosen to march in the city’s Memorial Day parade.
“I felt so proud, my chest bursting with ribbons and braids of every kind. To make it more wonderful, we had important visitors that day. Two soldiers who had won the Congressional Medal of Honor in Viet Nam were present,” he wrote. “More exciting to me, General William Westmoreland (very prominent in the Viet Nam war) attended with an impressive entourage. Afterward, Sgt. Hunt” — his high school ROTC director — “introduced me to General Westmoreland, and I had dinner with him and the Congressional Medal winners. Later I was offered a full scholarship to West Point.”
But, according to records of Westmoreland’s schedule that were provided by the U.S. Army, the general did not visit Detroit around Memorial Day in 1969 or have dinner with Carson. In fact, the general’s records suggest he was in Washington that day and played tennis at 6:45 p.m.
Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson, left, sits with civil rights leaders Ralph Abernathy, Rosa Parks and Levy Watkins at a celebration marking Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday in 1980. The event was held at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. Carson became the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital in 1984.
There are, however, several reports of an event in February of that year, similar to the one Carson described. Then, Westmoreland was the featured guest at a 1,500-person banquet to celebrate Medal of Honor recipient Dwight Johnson. The event drew prominent guests, including the governor at the time, the mayor of Detroit, the president of Ford Motor Company and nine previous Medal of Honor awardees, according to an Associated Press account of the event.
Carson, a leader of the city’s ROTC program at the time, may have been among the invited guests at the $10-a-plate event.
Carson’s later retelling of the events in this period of his life downplays his meeting with Westmoreland and that event’s link to a West Point acceptance. In his January 2015 book, “You Have a Brain,” — a book geared toward teenagers — Carson again recalls his rapid rise through his high school ROTC program to become the top student officer in the city.
“That position allowed me the chance to meet four-star general William Westmoreland, who had commanded all American forces in Vietnam before being promoted to Army Chief of Staff at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.,” he wrote. “I also represented the Junior ROTC at a dinner for Congressional Medal of Honor winners, marched at the front of Detroit’s Memorial Day parade as head of an ROTC contingent, and was offered a full scholarship to West Point.”
Carson has said he turned down the supposed offer of admission because he knew he wanted to be a doctor and attending West Point would have required four years of military service after graduation.
Cecil Murphey, who ghostwrote “Gifted Hands,” told POLITICO that his memory of Carson’s exchange with Westmoreland was hazy.
“My gut response is that it was not a private meeting, but there were others there,” he said in an email. “The general took a liking to Ben and opened doors.”
I wish I found these types of academic/resume admissions of falsehoods from people surprising at this point, but, alas...
As to Dr. Carson's reaction to CNN's attempt to clear something up about his past, now that was interesting.
At any rate, supporters gonna support.
I wish I found these types of academic/resume admissions of falsehoods from people surprising at this point, but, alas...
As to Dr. Carson's reaction to CNN's attempt to clear something up about his past, now that was interesting.
At any rate, supporters gonna support.
It is an interesting juxtaposition, isn't it? And according to Dr. Carson, it is all the media's fault (at least that's what he said a few hours before his campaign admitted to the Westpoint lie). Well, now there's going to be a lot more scrutiny and if anything he said comes back to bite him like his Westpoint lie is doing today, he only has himself to blame...
Ben Carson on questions about his past: 'Bunch of lies'
Ben Carson slammed CNN's reporting into his past as a "bunch of lies" in a combative interview on Friday.
"This is a bunch of lies, that is what it is," Carson said on CNN's "New Day" when Alisyn Camerota asked about the report by Scott Glover and Maeve Reston in which they spoke to people Carson grew up with. "This is a bunch of lies attempting to say I'm lying about my history, I think it's pathetic, and basically what the media does is they try to get you distracted."
Later that day, Politico published a story that Carson fabricated his story of having been offered -- and having rejected-- a scholarship to the storied West Point military academy.
Full story: http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/06/politics/ben-carson-responds-violent-past-new-day/index.html
PS - Bhawk, nice new sig image. 
[Edited on 11/6/2015 by gondicar]
" quit calling me a liar for saying I committed attempted murder when I was 14 or i'll do it again to prove I can."
Carson is just a wig and a motel away from being Norman Bates.
Great new signature Bhawk. Congratulations!
...Add this to his theory on the purpose of the Great Pyramids.....
Vetting of republican candidates is so much fun for the liberal media. Going back to junior high fistacuffs and now some embellishment about a school he never said he attended or graduated from. So thorough! Yet Obama got a free pass and now hillary as well. Lets see what else they can find on carson in the name of journalism.
He might of said he was a doctor to a coed when he was still an intern.
Vetting of republican candidates is so much fun for the liberal media. Going back to junior high fistacuffs and now some embellishment about a school he never said he attended or graduated from. So thorough! Yet Obama got a free pass and now hillary as well. Lets see what else they can find on carson in the name of journalism.
He might of said he was a doctor to a coed when he was still an intern.
Yep, it's all the fault of the liberal media. We learned from alloak that Carson is a man of impeccable character. So, who are we to believe - alloak or the disgusting liberal media? Carson is a man beyond reproach. Anything and everything vetted by the liberal media is false. They are destroying the man of 100% truth.
Vetting of republican candidates is so much fun for the liberal media. Going back to junior high fistacuffs and now some embellishment about a school he never said he attended or graduated from. So thorough! Yet Obama got a free pass and now hillary as well. Lets see what else they can find on carson in the name of journalism.
He might of said he was a doctor to a coed when he was still an intern.
And here comes the defenders of the right wing, right on cue. It is not lying that bothers them, just lying by democrats.
Obama got a free pass? That's too funny.
Vetting of republican candidates is so much fun for the liberal media. Going back to junior high fistacuffs and now some embellishment about a school he never said he attended or graduated from. So thorough! Yet Obama got a free pass and now hillary as well. Lets see what else they can find on carson in the name of journalism.
He might of said he was a doctor to a coed when he was still an intern.
Free pass? Obama was scrutinized for everything, going back to having to prove where he was born. Yeah, free pass.
Heck, even IF Obama was born in Kenya he would be in the same situation that Ted Cruz is now - born in a different country with one parent being a citizen - but he don't see Republicans saying Ted Cruz can't be president. I don't think it's too difficult to see why that is, so who is getting a free pass?
Wow, he started his lying even BEFORE he entered politics.
Vetting of republican candidates is so much fun for the liberal media. Going back to junior high fistacuffs and now some embellishment about a school he never said he attended or graduated from. So thorough! Yet Obama got a free pass and now hillary as well. Lets see what else they can find on carson in the name of journalism.
He might of said he was a doctor to a coed when he was still an intern.
Hold on a second.
If the vetting of Democrats has been so poor as you say, then wouldn't the Republicans want to be vetted to the fullest extent possible?
After all, this is a matter of integrity, right?
However, if you believe that since no Democrats are vetted, therefore no Republicans should be vetted, then your disgust with the non-vetting of Democrats has zero merit.
You cannot claim and cede the moral high ground at the same time.
Obama got a free pass?!?!?
Wow.
Stunningly false Goober. Wow.
isn't this as bad as lying about doing time in the military?
Politico, a far-left activist site claims Dr. Carson lied. The Daily Caller, a conservative site says otherwise. Somebody is lying.
‘Politico Story Is An Outright LIE’
By Daily Caller News Foundation
November 6, 2015, 3:42 pm
http://freedomsback.com/content-partners/team-carson-politico-story-is-an-outright-lie/
November 6, 2015
Rachel Stoltzfoos
Posted with permission from Daily Caller News Foundation
"The campaign never 'admitted to anything,'" a spokesman for Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson told The Daily Caller News Foundation in response to a hit by Politico claiming his campaign admitted to "fabricating" a key point about his West Point story.
"The campaign never ‘admitted to anything,'" a spokesman for Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson told The Daily Caller News Foundation in response to a hit by Politico claiming his campaign admitted to "fabricating" a key point about his West Point story.
"The Politico story is an outright Lie," Doug Watts told TheDCNF.
Politico published a piece Friday claiming Carson's campaign "admits fabricating" the fact that he applied and was admitted to West Point.
"Ben Carson's campaign on Friday admitted, in a response to an inquiry from POLITICO, that a central point in his inspirational personal story was fabricated: his application and acceptance into the U.S. Military Academy at West Point," Kyle Cheney writes in the lede.
The Carson campaign disputes Politico's unsubstantiated claim he ever claimed to have applied to West Point or been admitted: "He never said he was admitted or even applied."
"This is what we have come to expect from Politico."
Here is the full statement Watts provided to TheDCNF:
"Dr Carson was the top ROTC student in the City of Detroit. In that role he was invited to meet General Westmoreland. He believes it was at a banquet. He can't remember with specificity their brief conversation but it centered around Dr. Carson's performance as ROTC City Executive Officer.
He was introduced to folks from West Point by his ROTC Supervisors. They told him they could help him get an appointment based on his grades and performance in ROTC. He considered it but in the end did not seek admission. There are "Service Connected"
nominations for stellar High School ROTC appointments. Again he was the top ROTC student in Detroit. I would argue strongly that an Appointment is indeed an amazing full scholarship. Having ran several Congressional Offices I am very familiar with the Nomination process.
Again though his Senior Commander was in touch with West Point and told Dr. Carson he could get in, Dr Carson did not seek admission.
The Politico story is an outright Lie. Dr. Carson as the leading ROTC student in Detroit was told by his Commanders that he could get an Appointment to the Academy. He never said he was admitted or even applied.
The campaign never "admitted to anything"
This is what we have come to expect from Politico."
Politico reporter Kyle Cheney, who has the byline on the Carson story, did not immediately respond to multiple requests for comment.
Stay tuned folks, it is only Friday.
Looks like Daily Caller, along with Ben Carson and Muleman1994, will be the only liars at this end of this one. Surprise surprise. Carson and his campaign confirmed this themselves to multiple media outlets.
This "revelation" has been available for hours, yet just a short time ago the only story Muleman1994 could find was on some crappy conservative site.
Oh that's right, Google is a liberal search engine and cannot be trusted.
__________________________________________________________________________
So, you believe the far-left website and trash a conservative site.
Easy son, your bias is showing.
Applying the liberals methodology this would make you are a racist.
Politico crying about their liberal bias being exposed by the Washington Post and the New York Times
POLITICO criticized for media bias story
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/05/politico-criticized-for-media-bias-story-124945
By Dylan Byers
POLITICO has come under sharp and widespread criticism today for a site-leading story about media bias against Mitt Romney at the Washington Post and the New York Times.
The story, by executive editor Jim VandeHei and chief White House correspondent Mike Allen, offers both reportage and analysis of the GOP's frustration, citing complaints from Gov. Haley Barbour and former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer while at the same time affirming the validity of those sentiments, as when they write that conservative charges of bias "often ring true."
"No wonder Republicans are livid with the early coverage of the 2012 general election campaign," VandeHei and Allen write. "To them, reporters are scaring up stories to undermine the introduction of Mitt Romney to the general election audience – and once again downplaying ones that could hurt the president."
Later, the authors argue that a front-page Washington Post story about Romney cutting off a classmate's hair in high school "was invested with far more significance than it merited, and is more voyeuristic than relevant to assessing Romney’s readiness for office."
Allegations such as this led to a wave of criticism from outlets ranging from Talking Points Memo to GQ to the Washington Post's media blog, as well as stern rebuttals from editors at both the Post and the Times.
"It's effectively an unsigned house editorial. And it levied a change of journalistic malpractice at two of Politico's biggest rivals," Devin Gordon, a senior editor at GQ, wrote. "The house position of Politico, as evidenced by this piece, is that they are fair and their chief competition is not. It's a thinly disguised, fundamentally craven argument for Politico's superiority in the world of political coverage. Let's call this article for what it was. It wasn't journalism. It was business."
Josh Marshall, the editor of Talking Points Memo, called it "an astonishingly bad piece of reporting/analysis" and accused POLITICO of being "a bit notorious for using its news pages to attack key rivals, whether that’s in pieces like this or pieces nominally slotted as ‘media’ coverage." (Via Twitter, Marshall explained that that was "not an aspersion" on this blog.)
VandeHei and Allen declined to comment on the fallout from their story.
In a statement to POLITICO, part of which was published in VandeHei and Allen's piece, Times political reporter Richard Stevenson defended his paper's reporting on the presidential campaign.
"Since the very first stirrings of the 2008 campaign, the Times has exhaustively and aggressively covered nearly every aspect of Barack Obama's story," Stevenson said. "To suggest that we've pulled our punches or tilted coverage in his favor or against his opponents just is not supported by the facts."
The Washington Post also stood by its reporting in a statement to the Huffington Post's Michael Calderone.
"The depth, quality and fairness of our coverage is visible every day to every one of our readers," a Post spokeswoman said. "Assertions of bias just don't square with the reality of our journalism."
One point that has irked so many members of the media is that, with this story, POLITICO seems to be blaming its competitors for actions of which it, too, may be guilty. In an effort to offer comprehensive coverage of the presidential race, POLITICO reports on both the grand narratives and the political minutiae, and critics have charged that some of the stories are, in VandeHei and Allen's words, "invested with far more significance" than they merit.
Both Andrew Beaujon, a media reporter at Poynter, and Erik Wemple, the Washington Post's media blogger, rightly point out that in the wake of the Washington Post story on Romney's high-school bullying, POLITICO flooded the zone with coverage of the fallout, including multiple items about the story, a 1500-word piece assessing the effect of the story, a story about the Post's decision to hold the story, a story about Romney's apology, an Arena debate about the story, and two opinion pieces about the story.
Wemple argues this is hypocrisy; Beaujon argues that POLITICO is merely "fulfilling its mission to aggressively and thoroughly cover the stories of the day, no matter how voyeuristic or irrelevant they may be."
...
In a recent interview with GQ, Jason Horowitz, the author of the Post story on Romney's high-school incident, argued that the responsibility of political journalists is to get as much information onto the public record as possible.
"My feeling is my job, if somebody’s running for president, is to know as much about him or her as possible and what people find relevant or not relevant is fine, but my job is to put as much out there as voters can know," he said.
This is the general philosophy of most political news organizations today, especially those that have a strong Internet presence. As far as I can tell -- though I am speculating -- it is a philosophy that VandeHei and Allen endorse.
But, as far as I can tell, VandeHei and Allen aren't arguing that the Times and the Post haven't covered the stories that could prove harmful to Obama's campaign. Rather, they are arguing that those newspapers have put greater emphasis on stories that may prove harmful to Romney's campaign -- which is certainly a point worth debating.
VandeHei and Allen cite four different stories -- two in the Times, two in the Post -- and in each case their central preoccupation is with which page the story appears on in the print edition. A Times story about Ann Romney's horse-riding days appears "on the front page of its Sunday edition," while a Times story about new revelations of Obama's pot-smoking days appears as "a brief on A15." The pot-smoking story "landed on page A6" of the Washington Post, while Horowitz's story about Romney's bullying was "a front-pager."
So I suppose one could argue that, at the end of the day, this is all just about the disparity between print journalism, which requires highly selective curation, and digital journalism, which allows for comprehensive -- and occasionally contradictory -- coverage to exist in one place, all at the same time.
But I won't make that argument.
[Edited on 11/7/2015 by Muleman1994]
Let's lay this out so simple that even somebody with Muleman's limited intelligence level can understand:
Fact #1 - This is a quote from Ben Carson's book (Muleman - a quote means he said it in writing) -
“I felt so proud, my chest bursting with ribbons and braids of every kind. To make it more wonderful, we had important visitors that day. Two soldiers who had won the Congressional Medal of Honor in Viet Nam were present,” he wrote. “More exciting to me, General William Westmoreland (very prominent in the Viet Nam war) attended with an impressive entourage. Afterward, Sgt. Hunt” — his high school ROTC director — “introduced me to General Westmoreland, and I had dinner with him and the Congressional Medal winners. Later I was offered a full scholarship to West Point.”
Notice the final line, which is a quote by Carson - Later I was offered a full scholarship to West Point
Fact #2 - Carson was NOT offered a full scholarship to West Point. Carson's campaign has now admitted this. They may be arguing over the word "fabricating" but they have admitted that he was not offered a full scholarship to West Point. In fact, there is no such thing as a full scholarship West Point.
So (are you following along with this Muleman), Carson claimed something that was 100% proven to be untrue, and that his champaign admitted was untrue. By definition, this is a LIE. It doesn't matter what a right-wing blog says - It is a lie. He claimed something happened in a book he wrote. That thing he claimed was untrue! You can't blame the liberal media for this. He lied! Sorry, I know you believe that no Republican has ever told a lie, but Carson did and was caught doing it.
This left-wing hit job just keeps getting better.
Anyone notice how fast Politico has dropped the word "fabricated" from the headline?
CNN is also having a fit. They are outraged that Dr. Carson is "refusing to admit that he did not do what he did not do!"
Stay tuned folks, only a year to go.
This left-wing hit job just keeps getting better.
Anyone notice how fast Politico has dropped the word "fabricated" from the headline?CNN is also having a fit. They are outraged that Dr. Carson is "refusing to admit that he did not do what he did not do!"
Stay tuned folks, only a year to go.
He lied Mule - admit it. If you can't admit this when the facts are obvious, then there is no hope of you ever having any credibility.
This left-wing hit job just keeps getting better.
Anyone notice how fast Politico has dropped the word "fabricated" from the headline?CNN is also having a fit. They are outraged that Dr. Carson is "refusing to admit that he did not do what he did not do!"
Stay tuned folks, only a year to go.
He lied Mule - admit it. If you can't admit this when the facts are obvious, then there is no hope of you ever having any credibility.
________________________________________________________________________
What proof do you have?
Nothing as usual. You are the liar.
This is almost funny.
The liberals, with only a political hit piece from a discredited left-wing attack site, are claiming that Dr. Carson lied. Even better, they call this “fact”.
Y'all are the very definition of "low-info voter".
This is almost funny.
The liberals, with only a political hit piece from a discredited left-wing attack site, are claiming that Dr. Carson lied. Even better, they call this “fact”.Y'all are the very definition of "low-info voter".
Exactly which fact are you disputing, (a) the claim he made in his book, (b) the fact that he was not accepted into West Point with a full scholarship, or (c) the definition of a liar?
This left-wing hit job just keeps getting better.
Anyone notice how fast Politico has dropped the word "fabricated" from the headline?CNN is also having a fit. They are outraged that Dr. Carson is "refusing to admit that he did not do what he did not do!"
Stay tuned folks, only a year to go.
He lied Mule - admit it. If you can't admit this when the facts are obvious, then there is no hope of you ever having any credibility.
________________________________________________________________________
What proof do you have?
Nothing as usual. You are the liar.
I thought I broke it down so simply that even a moron could understand. I guess I overestimated your intelligence.
A Moron has an IQ between 50 - 69.
2112 - Can you break it down so an Imbecile can understand? They have IQ's between 20 - 49.
I've also misjudged Mule to be a Moron. It appears he is clinically an Imbecile.
This is almost funny.
The liberals, with only a political hit piece from a discredited left-wing attack site, are claiming that Dr. Carson lied. Even better, they call this “fact”.Y'all are the very definition of "low-info voter".
Exactly which fact are you disputing, (a) the claim he made in his book, (b) the fact that he was not accepted into West Point with a full scholarship, or (c) the definition of a liar?
_________________________________________________________________________
Your point (b) is a misrepresentation. He never applied to West Point so the rest of your post is your usual B.S.
The fact that the liberals here take anything from Politico as fact proves you lack the ability to see anything objectively or that the piece is a political attack. It is what Politico does.
i posted this to cause a sh!tstorm obviously....as did Politico. i see bad usages of words by Dr. Carson but, in general, i would rate this a misunderstanding and simplification of what happened over time. I don't think he lied, I think he simplified the story. i don't know that this is a big deal after further consideration. those on one side or the other will decide for themselves. i don't know.....if you were mad about rev wright or bill ayers or vince foster then you should be mad about this i guess.
This is almost funny.
The liberals, with only a political hit piece from a discredited left-wing attack site, are claiming that Dr. Carson lied. Even better, they call this “fact”.Y'all are the very definition of "low-info voter".
Exactly which fact are you disputing, (a) the claim he made in his book, (b) the fact that he was not accepted into West Point with a full scholarship, or (c) the definition of a liar?
_________________________________________________________________________
Your point (b) is a misrepresentation. He never applied to West Point so the rest of your post is your usual B.S.
The fact that the liberals here take anything from Politico as fact proves you lack the ability to see anything objectively or that the piece is a political attack. It is what Politico does.
Exactly!! You admit that he didn't apply for West Point. If he didn't apply for West Point then he couldn't have been accepted with a full scholarship like he said he was. Therefore he lied. The only way that he couldn't have lied would be if he (a) never actually said that he was accepted into West Point with a full scholarship (but he did say this in his book), or (b) if he was actually accepted into West Point with a full scholarship. Since you just admitted that he didn't apply for West Point, and therefore couldn't have been accepted into West Point with a full scholarship, then I don't see how you can possibly say that he didn't lie. This is a clear case. There is ambiguity here. Unless he can show us an acceptance letter from West Point or unless West Point has a record of accepting him, then he lied.
This is almost funny.
The liberals, with only a political hit piece from a discredited left-wing attack site, are claiming that Dr. Carson lied. Even better, they call this “fact”.Y'all are the very definition of "low-info voter".
Exactly which fact are you disputing, (a) the claim he made in his book, (b) the fact that he was not accepted into West Point with a full scholarship, or (c) the definition of a liar?
_________________________________________________________________________
Your point (b) is a misrepresentation. He never applied to West Point so the rest of your post is your usual B.S.
The fact that the liberals here take anything from Politico as fact proves you lack the ability to see anything objectively or that the piece is a political attack. It is what Politico does.
Exactly!! You admit that he didn't apply for West Point. If he didn't apply for West Point then he couldn't have been accepted with a full scholarship like he said he was. Therefore he lied. The only way that he couldn't have lied would be if he (a) never actually said that he was accepted into West Point with a full scholarship (but he did say this in his book), or (b) if he was actually accepted into West Point with a full scholarship. Since you just admitted that he didn't apply for West Point, and therefore couldn't have been accepted into West Point with a full scholarship, then I don't see how you can possibly say that he didn't lie. This is a clear case. There is ambiguity here. Unless he can show us an acceptance letter from West Point or unless West Point has a record of accepting him, then he lied.
_______________________________________________________________________
" If he didn't apply for West Point then he couldn't have been accepted with a full scholarship like he said he was."
Dr. Carson never said has was accepted.
Are you so consumed by your liberal bias you have to lie?
Politico has edited their hit piece now for the third time. It would seem that their intentional smear of Dr. Carson is falling apart fast.
On the “scholarship” part, numerous military screeners who evaluated prospects for admission to the military academies during the time period in question are explaining how this misrepresentation really happened. When it was explained to the prospect that their college education at an academy would be free they would say “it is as if you would be getting a full scholarship”.
Just like the CNBC debacle, the mainstream media and left-wing attack sites are being exposed for their liberal bias. Dr. Carson brilliantly turned it back on the media yesterday when he asked them why they did not vet Obama. He asked the mainstream media why they downplayed and generally ignored the fact that Obama had his academic and college financial records sealed. To this day no one in the mainstream media has questioned that refusal to disclose.
It is easy to understand why this is happening. Dr. Carson, by every independent poll, is considered the most honest and trustworthy candidate running for President and Hillary Clinton is dead last.
