Connect with us

2020

Joe Biden Continues to Lie About Drunk Driver Killing His First Wife

Joe Biden has for years claimed that his first wife and his daughter were killed by a “drunk driver” in 1972. But this appears to be untrue.

Published

on

Along with the claim that Joe Biden had a “blue-collar” upbringing — he had a decidedly upper class (though not “rich”) childhood — Joe Biden has for years claimed that his first wife and his daughter were killed by a “drunk driver” in 1972. However, closer examination of the records proves that the man driving the truck that slammed into the Biden family car was never charged with drunken driving. So, why has the media allowed this perception that Biden lost his wife to a drunk driver to persist?

As late as 2007 Biden said that the man who was involved in the fatal crash that killed his wife and daughter was a “guy who allegedly … drank his lunch” before he got behind the wheel of his truck and in 2001 the TV show Inside Edition aired a tape of Biden saying the truck driver “stopped to drink instead of drive.” Additionally, several media outlets have included the drunk driver claim in their bios of the Senator from Delaware.

This drunk driving accusation, though, is simply a Biden creation and every time this claim is uttered it pains the family of the poor, maligned man involved in the tragic accident with Biden’s family, truck driver Curtis C. Dunn. Gannett owned DelewareOnline reports the anguish that Biden’s continued lie causes the man’s family every time it is uttered.

“To see it coming from [Biden’s] mouth, I just burst into tears,” Dunn’s daughter, Glasgow resident Pamela Hamill, 44, said Wednesday. “My dad was always there for us. Now we feel like we should be there for him because he’s not here to defend himself.”

Trending: Trump Scolds CNN's Jim Acosta: Be ‘Quiet’

In truth, there was no finding of alcohol being involved in this tragic incident. In fact, some investigators thought at the time that the accident was caused by Biden’s wife pulling out into the intersection not having seen Dunn’s truck bearing down upon her. It was simply a horrible accident with no blame saying Dunn was at fault, much less drunk.

According to the research that DelewareOnline did for the story, neither Biden’s book nor his website bio contains that drunk driver reference but Biden has delivered the claim in several appearances.

The New York Times reported the 2007 crowd at the University of Iowa grew silent as Biden gave his version of what happened that day.

“Let me tell you a little story,” The newspaper quoted Biden as saying. “I got elected when I was 29, and I got elected November the 7th. And on Dec. 18 of that year, my wife and three kids were Christmas shopping for a Christmas tree. A tractor-trailer, a guy who allegedly — and I never pursued it — drank his lunch instead of eating his lunch, broadsided my family and killed my wife instantly, and killed my daughter instantly, and hospitalized my two sons, with what were thought to be at the time permanent, fundamental injuries.”

Biden told a similar story when addressing an audience at the Bob Carpenter Center at the University of Delaware a few days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

“It was an errant driver who stopped to drink instead of drive and hit a tractor-trailer, hit my children and my wife and killed them,” Biden said, according to a transcript archived on his Senate Web site.

Now, I suppose for a politician looking for the sympathy vote, saying your wife was killed by a drunk is better than saying that your wife made a fatal mistake behind the wheel. But the truth says something else, entirely contradicting Biden’s great campaign soundbites.

“The rumor about alcohol being involved by either party, especially the truck driver, is incorrect,” said Jerome O. Herlihy, a Delaware Superior Court judge who was chief deputy attorney general and worked with crash investigators in 1972.

Still, there have been several news sources that have included the drunk driver aspect in Biden bio reports.

For instance, Cristina Chang of the Huffington Post posted on September 10, 2008:

But Delaware’s Senator-elect would face a more difficult challenge soon after his election, when a drunk driver struck the car carrying his family, killing his wife Neilia and daughter Naomi and severely wounding sons Hunter and Beau.

The Economist Magazine published a story on August 28th saying the same basic thing:

He endured an unspeakable personal tragedy, shortly after his first run for the Senate in 1972, when his wife and daughter were killed by a drunk driver.

And NPR initially published a Biden bio with the same drunk driver claim, but later corrected the story with this disclaimer:

Correction: Earlier versions of this story said that a drunk driver was responsible for the deaths of Sen. Biden’s wife and daughter. There is no evidence that the driver was drunk.

Kudos to NPR for correcting the record.

But, here is the thing. Biden himself has made this claim in public at least two times — most likely far more. So, why has the media basically stayed mum about this lie? Isn’t it important for the American people to know what sort of man Biden is? Why are they ignoring this story?

As Thomas Lifson of the American Spectator says, “Is this an attempt to exploit the death of his first wife for political gain? The thought is sickening. Even if Biden was initially misinformed, he and his campaign have allowed a lie to propagate throughout the media.”

But, should we put the onus on the lying politician as Lifson seems to do, or should we place the onus on the media that should be investigating and illuminating this lie? Of course, it is a disgusting exploitation of his wife’s tragic death but that he uses that tragedy on the campaign trail isn’t the problem. In fact, it is a legitimate segment of his life’s story perfectly proper to use for campaign fodder. What isn’t legitimate is inventing aspects of that story out of whole cloth to make it seem a more sympathetic tale instead of sticking to the truth.

Isn’t the news about getting to the truth?

Apparently not because, thus far, they are letting Biden get away with a whopper.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Advertisement

2020

Warren and Sanders Share Testy Post-Debate Moment: ‘You Called Me A Liar’

The fiery moment could have major implications on the already tense race.

Published

on

Much has been said about the Democratic civil war that continues to rage, particularly in the realm of the 2020 race to the White House.

The left simply hates President Trump.  They loathe him.  They’ve even gone so far as to rage under the “resistance” moniker, as though they are some sort of unified force against the evil that they perceive in the President.

Nothing could be further from the truth, and one only needs to examine the 2020 field of candidates to realize this.

The most recent flare up among these progressive combatants has come from the far left side of the spectrum, with Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders now arguing with one another over something the latter may have said to the former in a private 2018 meeting.

As the story goes, Bernie told Liz that “a woman can’t win” in 2020.  Warren, who just this week saw Bernie eclipse her fully in Iowa’s polling, dug this gem out of her war room in order to force the issue onto the debate stage on Tuesday night.  When Sanders denied the claims, Warren was forced to confront him after the structured broadcast ended in a tiff caught on a hot mic.

“I think you called me a liar on national TV,” Warren told Sanders on stage after they both offered perfunctory “good job” greetings to other rivals, according to audio captured by CNN, which co-hosted the debate with the Des Moines Register.

“What?” Sanders replied, according to CNN’s report.

“I think you called me a liar on national TV,” she said again.

“You know, let’s not do it right now. If you want to have that discussion, we’ll have that discussion,” Sanders responded,

Warren replied: “Anytime.”

That appeared to have irked Sanders who then said: “You called me a liar.”

He added: “You told me — all right, let’s not do it now.”

Progressive Democrats have lamented the burgeoning feud, believing that this internal rift accomplishes nothing, and only bolsters the outlook of moderate candidates such as Joe Biden.

Continue Reading

2020

Bernie Bros Whining After ‘Rigged’ Debate…But Was This The Plan All Along?

The slighting of Sanders is playing right into the progressive politician’s hands.

Published

on

It appears as though the Bernie Sanders campaign is looking to score the sympathy vote ahead of the Iowa caucuses.

Sanders and his supporters have a chip on their shoulder after being unceremoniously cheated out of the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination by Hillary Clinton’s collusion with the DNC.  For many within the party, it was this unfathomable electoral meddling that allowed Donald Trump to easily trounce Clinton in the general election, as Democratic voters were simply disenfranchised and despondent after the rigging scandal was exposed by Wikileaks.

Bernie’s handlers certainly understand that his supporters are wary of yet another establishment assault on the Democratic Socialist’s 2020 run, and have already begun to whine about his treatment during last night’s televised debate…particularly at the hands of CNN, who seemed to be in rival Elizabeth Warren’s corner.

Of course, it stands to reckon that this may be all a part of the plan.

Sanders being “cheated” during the debate last night fits into the storyline that the Vermont Senator’s team has been working to construct; one of an anti-establishment outsider being completely stonewalled by a corrupt and archaic Democratic Party.

Make no mistake about it – Bernie’s campaign is relishing in the controversy, hoping to use this perceived slight to separate Sanders from the rest of the field who are allegedly colluding against him.

 

 

Continue Reading

2020

Russian Hackers Who Infiltrated DNC in 2016 Just Hacked Biden-Linked Burisma

Putin is back at it, hoping to again neuter Americans’ democracy.

Published

on

Mother Russia is sticking her nose back into America’s business yet again, this time rather blatantly attempting to influence yet another American election.

During the 2016 presidential election, the Kremlin waged a fairly serious war on American democracy, with their battles being fought on the fertile, young battlefields of cyberspace.  Not only were Russian hackers implying the tried and true methods of “phishing” and old-fashioned encryption-assault, but Putin’s ploy also included massive farms of online trolls, bots, and provocateurs who flooded social media with whatever messages the Kremlin wanted to see make headlines in the United States.

Now, as 2020 looms large, the same bad actors within the Russian cyber warfare space are at it again, and they are now presumably targeting Democratic nominee Joe Biden via his son Hunter’s job at Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma.

Russian hackers recently targeted the Ukrainian gas company that was at the center of President Trump’s impeachment — and they succeeded in gaining access to its email accounts, according to California cybersecurity firm Area 1 Security.

The hackers are said to have infiltrated Burisma Holdings months after Trump urged Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter, who had served on Burisma’s board.

“What we’ve uncovered is that the same Russian cyber actors who targeted the [Democratic National Committee] in 2016 have been actively launching a phishing campaign against employees of Burisma Holdings and its subsidiaries, to try to steal their email usernames and passwords,” Area 1 co-founder Oren Falkowitz tells NPR’s Morning Edition.

Those involved were already infamous for their work in 2016.

The hacking operation was the work of the GRU, the Russian military spy agency, according to Area 1, which has published its findings online. The company says Russian hackers sent seemingly legitimate emails pointing to malicious websites that looked like authentic Burisma sites to try to dupe employees into sharing private login information.

Election interference has been a prevailing political topic in American for the better half of a decade now, and it doesn’t appear as though we’ll be rid of this menace for some time still.

Continue Reading

2020

Bernie Team Member Busted by Project Veritas Spouting Violent Rhetoric

One can only wonder if Sanders will be forced to respond to this revelation during tonight’s debate.

Published

on

They say that you are only as good as the people who support you, and if that’s that case, Bernie Sanders could be in serious trouble.

The Vermont Senator has suddenly found himself on top of the dog pile of Democratic candidates with only a few short weeks until the Iowa caucuses.  But, as with all things in our topsy-turvy political world, this newfound popularity is a double-edged sword, and anti-Bernie actors are coming out of the woodwork to torpedo the Democratic Socialist’s campaign.

First, there was the incredibly troubling assertion by the Elizabeth Warren campaign that Sander, during a private meeting back in 2018, said that “a woman can’t win” in 2020.

Now, just a day later, the undercover journalists over at Project Veritas have released a hidden camera video that shows a Bernie Sanders campaign worker admitting to some ridiculous and terrifying beliefs.

The video begins with a Project Veritas journalist asking an individual identified as Sanders organizer Kyle Jurek if “MAGA people” could be re-educated if Sanders wins the White House. “We gotta try,” Jurek replies. “In Nazi Germany, after the fall of the Nazi Party, there was a s***-ton of the populace that was f***ing Nazified.”

“Germany had to spend billions of dollars re-educating their f***ing people to not be Nazis,” he continues. “We’re probably going to have to do the same f***ing thing here.”

“That’s kind of what all Bernie’s whole f***ing like, ‘hey, free education for everybody’ because we’re going to have to teach you to not be a f***ing Nazi,” he added.

And that’s not all…

The video also shows Jurek warning that Milwaukee, host of this year’s Democratic National Convention, will “burn” if Sanders fails to win the party’s nomination. “If Bernie doesn’t get the nomination or it goes to a second round at the DNC convention, f***ing Milwaukee will burn,” says Jurek. “It’ll start in Milwaukee and then when the police push back on that, other sites will f***ing [explode].”

The footage concludes with Jurek issuing the chilling prediction that Milwaukee could see riots akin to the 1968 convention in Chicago, where left-wing activists engaged in violent riots in the streets. “Be ready to be in Milwaukee for the DNC convention. We’re going to make [1968] look like a f***ing girl’s scout f***ing cookout,” warns the Sanders field organizer. “The cops are going to be the ones f***ing beaten in Milwaukee.”

Bernie Sanders was colluded against during his 2016 campaign for the presidency by Hillary Clinton and the DNC, according to emails released by whistleblower organization Wikileaks.

This violent revolutionary rhetoric isn’t contained to just Jurek either.  In 2017, a former Bernie Sanders campaign worker named James T. Hodgkinson attempted to assassinate the entire GOP charity baseball team, nearly killing Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise before being shot and killed by Capitol Police.

Continue Reading

2020

Pelosi Accused of Using Impeachment Timing to Sabotage Bernie Sanders’ 2020 Campaign

Is the Democratic Party really this scared of Bernie Sanders?

Published

on

There have been countless theories offered as an explanation as to why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi chose to withhold the already-passed articles of impeachment from the Senate, but the latest out of Washington DC may be the most bizarre yet.

By not submitting the articles to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Pelosi may have believed that she was leveraging President Trump’s embarrassment over impeachment against McConnell’s hopes to railroad the Senate into an acquittal of the President without so much as a single witness being deposed by the higher chamber.  If Trump is never acquitted, he can never claim vindication, and Pelosi believed that the President may be far too proud for that.

Then there’s the idea that withholding the articles would create such a tumult in the capital that other possible witnesses would come forward on their own.  Former national security adviser John Bolton’s latest announcement seems to lend some credibility to this theory as well.

The latest theory, from House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy no less, has a much more sinister tone to it.

McCarthy suggested during an appearance on Sunday Morning Futures that the speaker’s decision to withhold the articles of impeachment from the Senate may have been more strategic than Democrats have indicated, involving the Democrat primary race.

If Pelosi releases the articles this week, as she has indicated to her caucus, the Senate trial’s kickoff would coincide with the upcoming Iowa caucus, which will compromise several senators’ ability to campaign in the Hawkeye State, thereby giving a clear advantage to more “moderate” candidates like Joe Biden (D) and Pete Buttigieg (D).

McCarthy said:

Remember what happened in the last nomination process, where the DNC chairman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, had to resign the night before the nomination convention started because they had found out they had cheated Senator Bernie Sanders from the opportunity to become the nominee.

In the 2016 election, former First Lady Hillary Clinton was discovered to have influenced the work of the DNC in order to shun Sanders and catapult herself to the nomination, leaving many Democratic insiders wary that a similar scam could play out again in 2020.

 

Continue Reading

2020

Sanders to Warren in Private 2018 Meeting: A Woman Can’t Win 2020

The Democratic Civil War just took a terribly nasty turn.

Published

on

The knives are definitely out now in the 2020 race, and a number of those in the “top tier” of candidates are turning unfathomably vicious as we near the Iowa caucuses.

The infighting isn’t really anything new.  The extravagantly large size of the 2020 Democratic field has led to spats of all shapes and sizes, from the rigorous Joe Biden/Bernie Sanders healthcare debate, to a number of lesser known candidates lambasting former First Lady Hillary Clinton after she insinuated that Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard was a “Russian asset”.

While much of the previous turbulence has been objectively silly, things are taking a nasty turn this week as the Warren campaign accuses the Sanders campaign of sexism.

The stakes were high when Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren met at Warren’s apartment in Washington, DC, one evening in December 2018. The longtime friends knew that they could soon be running against each other for president.

The two agreed that if they ultimately faced each other as presidential candidates, they should remain civil and avoid attacking one another, so as not to hurt the progressive movement. They also discussed how to best take on President Donald Trump, and Warren laid out two main reasons she believed she would be a strong candidate: She could make a robust argument about the economy and earn broad support from female voters.

Sanders responded that he did not believe a woman could win.

The description of that meeting is based on the accounts of four people: two people Warren spoke with directly soon after the encounter, and two people familiar with the meeting.

Sanders issued a stern response.

“It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn’t win,” Sanders said. “It’s sad that, three weeks before the Iowa caucus and a year after that private conversation, staff who weren’t in the room are lying about what happened. What I did say that night was that Donald Trump is a sexist, a racist and a liar who would weaponize whatever he could. Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course! After all, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes in 2016.”

Sanders is currently on a collision course with former Vice President Joe Biden for the top spot in the race, making the timing of these allegations all the more suspicious.

Continue Reading

2020

Cory Booker Ends White House Bid Less Than One Month from Iowa Caucus

Booker’s campaign team just simply couldn’t find a way to inch over the Iowa threshold.

Published

on

It is crunch time for the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, with the all-important Iowa causes now only a stone’s throw away.

Iowa has long been one of the first “official” contests of any general election, and, as such, allows the nation to gauge just how well the in-fighting of the candidates has gone so far.  Will the frontrunners hold up to the scrutiny that they have faced so far?  Are the pollsters completely and utterly full of it?  Can a dark horse candidate pull off the upset?  The answers to questions such as these could be answered in the coming days.

That’s why it is almost essential for any candidate with any inkling of a shot to win it all stays in the race until Iowa…even if it means doing so on a shoestring budget or without any endorsements to speak of.  Only the truly despondent find themselves unable to inch across this threshold.

Cory Booker’s campaign just couldn’t seem to eek it out this go-round.

“It’s with a full heart that I share this news — I’ve made the decision to suspend my campaign for president,” Booker wrote to supporters in an email. “It was a difficult decision to make, but I got in this race to win, and I’ve always said I wouldn’t continue if there was no longer a path to victory.”

“Our campaign has reached the point where we need more money to scale up and continue building a campaign that can win — money we don’t have, and money that is harder to raise because I won’t be on the next debate stage and because the urgent business of impeachment will rightly be keeping me in Washington,” the senator added. “So I’ve chosen to suspend my campaign now, take care of my wonderful staff, and give you time to consider the other strong choices in the field.”

His departure now leaves a field that was once the most diverse in history with just one remaining African American candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.

The battle for the Democratic nomination looks like a two-sided one as it stands today, with Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders inching ever closer to usurping perpetual frontrunner and former Vice President Joe Biden by the day.

 

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider


Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend