It didn’t take long for Rep. Lauren Boebert to react to unfounded accusations that she was an “unlicensed paid escort.”
The American Muckrakers PAC produced a release that contained a number of allegations against the Republican firebrand, but Boebert claims none of them are true and there is no evidence.
The result is immediate legal action by her attorneys.
It all started when the Muckrakers smeared Boebert in the release by claiming she was an “unlicensed escort” for a sugar daddy website, and also claimed she’d had two abortions.
They even included a series of heavily redacted text messages where a PAC staffer seemed to lead an unknown person to suggest that Rep. Boebert was blackmailing Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to get his political support.
TRENDING : Kamala Makes Concerning Omission At California Faith Meeting – She Says To Have ‘Faith In Each Other,’ But Fails To Mention God
On top of that, the release said Boebert and her husband had a “meth problem” and Boebert was “stripping at the time.”
There were a couple pictures included but these have since been debunked; the photos were actually of a different woman: Melissa Carone, who made “unsupported voter fraud claims during the 2020 election.”
As far as Boebert as concerned, the PAC won’t get away with any of this.
From Fox News:
Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., will take legal action against the Democrat political action committee (PAC) that claimed, without evidence, that she was an ‘unlicensed paid escort,’ Fox News Digital has learned.
Boebert’s attorney sent a letter to the American Muckrakers PAC regarding the claims that she was an ‘unlicensed paid escort’ who had ‘two abortions,’ pledging to bring ‘civil defamation’ lawsuits against the PAC.
Boebert called the accusations “disgusting” and “blatantly false” and added that this Democrat-funded PAC published “pages of false statements knowing they were completely fabricated.”
Her attorney, Jonathan Anderson, issued a statement that said the Muckrakers were “managed by Democrat political operatives,” and “exclusively opposes conservative candidates.”
Anderson went a step further by saying:
We have irrefutable evidence that each one of these statements is patently false. You knew this though.
Muckrakers published these outlandish statements knowing they were fabricated but you likely operated under the inaccurate assumption that publishing false statements against a public figure would not create legal liability.
Anderson finished by saying the entire fiasco will be a “costly miscalculation” for the PAC and its donors, and claimed there was enough evidence to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the PAC is guilty.
In fact, Boebert’s lawyer said that in addition to the defamation suit, these actions are “criminally liable.”
According to the law in Colorado, organizations can’t spread false information that could influence an election. And if this is what the Muckrakers were trying to do, they could be in even more trouble.
No matter what happens, though, it does seem like a tremendous mistake on the part of this Democrat-funded group.
The evidence is starting to mount that nothing they published was accurate, and produced only to smear a political candidate. All they can argue is that they didn’t know the information was false.
But even then, Boebert and many others will say that’s no excuse — and punishments should come down.