The story hit the World Wide Web before noon on Friday. It was a blockbuster.

“Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship,” the headline screamed.

Reporter Kyle Cheney at Politico had nailed it down, hard — apparently so, because there it was, on the Internets. The story was so big, some hefty political pundits immediately began pontificating about LAC (Life After Carson): Where would his supporters go when the soft-spoken neurosurgeon pulled out of the GOP presidential race, as he would surely have to do, that wretched liar.

Wolf Blitzer at CNN, yammering away as the news network killed time before an appearance at the White House by President Obama, got all wee-weed up. “We’re getting word that …” he said breathlessly, Newspeak that means, “Someone else is reporting something that we’re just going to steal and just report without checking.”

Then he read portions of the newly posted story, citing Politico — and using the exact headline, that Carson “admits fabricating.” CNN had called Carson a liar, but fobbed it off on Politico.

Where’s the quote? Not in the lead, not the third graf — not… anywhere.

Yet the problems with the story were clear to anyone reading at a fifth-grade level. “Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship” — but… where? Where’s the quote? Not in the lead, not the third paragraph, not — anywhere.

Turns out, Carson wasn’t even quoted in the story. Nowhere. Never said a word, let alone “admitted” anything, and certainly not “fabricating.”

To back up, the breaking story revolved around a tale Carson has told many times, including in one of his books. In “Gifted Hands,” the brain surgeon wrote that in 1969, when he was 17 years old, he was introduced to Gen. William Westmoreland. The two dined together as part of a banquet (Carson was a standout in the Reserve Officers’ Training Corp college-based military program). Before he left that night, Carson says he was offered a “full scholarship” to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York.

So Politico went in search of a story and found it — or so they thought. West Point had no record of Carson ever applying to the academy, let alone being offered admission. And what’s more, there’s no such thing as a “full scholarship,” Politico reported triumphantly.

Who do you think would win the Presidency?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

But back to our saga. While Carson isn’t even in the story, his campaign manager is. Just after a gloating paragraph that reads: “When presented by POLITICO with these facts, Carson’s campaign conceded he never applied,” here’s what Carson’s spokesman said: “‘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.'”

Where’s the guilty plea that Carson “fabricated” the story? (Don’t bother trying to find it — not in the Politico story.)

That’s it. That’s what the Carson campaign — not Carson, mind you — said. So, where’s the “admission?” Where’s the guilty plea that Carson “fabricated” the story? (Don’t bother trying to find it — it’s not in the Politico story.)

Here’s the thing: Carson has never claimed he applied for admission to the academy, in fact many times has said he did not apply. He said he had already decided to go into medicine. And he never said the academy’s bursar office had offered a free ride in a formal document, just that Westmoreland had done so in post-banquet chit-chat.

By mid-afternoon Friday, CNN was still reporting the story, but not as breathlessly. And Politico had quietly put up a new “improved” version, which no longer declared that Carson had “fabricated” part of his biography.

Then, in a 5:32 p.m. rewrite, Politico (sorry, POLITICO), added this: “Editor’s note: POLITICO stands by its reporting on this story, which has been updated to reflect Ben Carson’s on-the-record response. The original story and headline said that Carson’s campaign had admitted he ‘fabricated’ a ‘full scholarship’ from West Point, but now Carson denies that his campaign’s statement constituted such an admission, and the story and headline were changed to reflect that. POLITICO’s reporting established that Carson said he received a ‘full scholarship’ from West Point, in writing and in public appearances over the years — but in fact he did not and there is actually no such thing as a ‘full scholarship’ to the taxpayer-funded academy.

“And today in response to POLITICO he acknowledged for the first time that was not the case. Carson never explicitly wrote that he had applied for admission to West Point, although that was the clear implication of his claim to have received an offer of a ‘full scholarship,’ a point that POLITICO’s initial report should have made clear.”

Wow. Where to begin with that hot mess? The note said the story “headline said that Carson’s campaign had admitted he ‘fabricated’ …” but that’s a complete lie. It said no such thing. The original headline said “Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship,” not his campaign.

Politico said, “Now Carson denies that his campaign’s statement constituted such an admission, and the story and headline were changed to reflect that.” So, just because Carson denied it Politico changed its story and headline? Or was it that the needled-up headline was wrong all along?

The website also said in Carson’s recounting of a dinner 46 years ago, it was “the clear implication” that he received an official “offer of a ‘full scholarship.'” Now “journalism” revolves around a “clear implication”?

What tripe. The simple story is this: A general at a banquet with ROTC standouts had simply said to Carson — a 17-year-old kid who would go on to Yale and become one of the world’s most famous neurosurgeons — “We’d love you at West Point, come for free.”

That’s what Carson said later on Friday: “I don’t remember all the specific details. Because I had done so extraordinarily well, you know, I was told that someone like me — they could get a scholarship to West Point. But I made it clear I was going to pursue a career in medicine.”

“It was, you know, an informal, ‘With a record like yours we could easily get you a scholarship to West Point.'”

“It was, you know, an informal, ‘With a record like yours we could easily get you a scholarship to West Point.'”

By day’s end, the Politico story was headlined: “Exclusive: Carson claimed West Point ‘scholarship’ but never applied.” Remember from the editor’s note, that was “the clear implication.” But it didn’t matter. The story had played all day — damage done.

There are three takeaways from the saga:

  • Politico has an agenda and, as with most of those on the Left, the ends justify the means. Even as the story crumbled upon even the slightest unpacking, Politico stuck with it — until 5:32 p.m., when the day’s news cycle was done.
  • The mainstream media, CNN, the three networks, the Post, the New York Times, all picked up the story. Why? Because they’re beginning to fear the power of Ben Carson. If Donald Trump does implode, and were his supporters to move to Carson, that lil’ ol’ surgeon would wield incredible power. So they ran the story all day, damn the facts.
  • The Carson campaign might not be ready for prime time. Stacked with many political neophytes, the campaign let the story fester all day, only at the end — after everyone had gone home for the day — putting the candidate out to address the bogus story. Poorly played and badly managed.

But in the end, it was Politico that was the biggest loser. They over-wrote a story, pushed the headline past the facts they’d collected, and hunkered down. They bailed on the story in the end, but so late, who will remember on Monday morning?

And Carson said Saturday he hauled in $3.5 million in for the week, thanking a “biased media.” So maybe the disgraceful and dishonest take down didn’t succeed after all.