Posted on 10/30/2015 9:01:58 AM PDT by conservativejoy
When I inquired about Ben Carsons speeches and appearances for Mannatech late last year, I was told I would not be speaking to Dr. Carson; I was only permitted to speak to his business manager, Armstrong Williams. From our conversation, it was clear Williams had no idea about any of Mannatechs controversies, or then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott suing the company for what the state called 'a particularly egregious case of false advertising.' (The company settled with the state out of court, agreeing to pay $4 million in restitution.)
Both Williams and Carson insist there was 'no compensated relationship' because the money for Carson’s speeches and appearances went through a Speakers Bureau. This is sophistry. The Speakers Bureau just transfers the money from the group to the speaker; Carson spoke to the group four times and talked about the companys 'glyconutrient' products in a PBS special as recently as last year. The company stated, 'a group of Mannatech independent distributors, not Mannatech Incorporated, sponsored Dr. Carson to be the sole speaker on a PBS special.'
Williams (and presumably Carson) contend that Carson never endorsed Mannatechs products, even though he appeared in company videos saying things like, 'The wonderful thing about a company like Mannatech is that they recognize that when God made us, He gave us the right fuel.' Thats a semantic argument about what constitutes an endorsement.
Carson wouldnt answer my questions, but he did answer a question from NewsMax. Last night, when asked about Mannatech, Ben Carson responded: Well, thats easy to answer. I didnt have an involvement with them. That is total propaganda, and this is what happens in our society. Total propaganda. I did a couple of speeches for them, I do speeches for other people. They were paid speeches. It is absolutely absurd to say that I had any kind of a relationship with them. Do I take the product? Yes. I think it is a good product.
His declarations that 'I didnt have an involvement with them' and 'absurd to say that I had any kind of relationship with them' are just bald-faced lies. Mannatech wanted to improve its image and happily paid Carson, one of the countrys greatest neurosurgeons, the man Cuba Gooding Jr. played in the HBO movie – to appear at their events and to appear in the company videos. They put his face all over their web site (sometime between my story and now, those images were taken down).
Carsons lack of due diligence before working with the company is forgivable. His blatant lying about it now is much harder to forgive.
He did a PBS Special for the Mannatech company, but still claims he had no involvement with them????
Wink Wink....
Know what I mean Vern...
We are all just uneducated rubes who juss need a tetch of polishin...
Shucks
Carson’s likable enough, but I would never consider voting for him in a primary. If somehow he got the nomination (which I consider an extreme long-shot), I would of course vote for him.
Carson can bring “Race” to escape.
What it tells us is that when it comes to lying, he is not in Hitlery’s league. Not even close to being as good of a liar as she is. He is not a good spin machine.
Agree 100%....
To accept his version we will have start redefining words like the Left did for Clinton. Oral sex was no longer sexual relations.
I wouldn’t have a problem with him endorsing the company. Giving the product credit for curing his prostate cancer while failing to mention he had surgery wasn’t right, but the worst thing was his untruthful denial of involvement with the company during the debate.
I have strong objections to Carson that would make it impossible for me to vote for him, period. I voted for Romney, then felt so convicted that I had to ask for forgiveness.
I don’t want that on my conscience again, but I respect that everyone does not have the same conviction on these matters.
Couldn’t Carson of just said “I supported the product and still do but I didn’t and don’t support the activities of the company and ended my association when this behavior came to my attention.
He was paid to make a handful of speeches for Mannatech.
During the debate he said he made some paid speeches for Mannatech.
How is that a “blatant lie”.
The moderator began the series of 2 questions (the first was about Costco) by referring to him being on the BOARDS of multiple companies (Costco being one).
The way he asked the questions gave the false impression that Carson was on the BOARD of Mannatech. That is what Carson was (truthfully) denying when he made the comment about propaganda.
He also said that if the company was using his image it was without his permission. Shortly after that the company stopped using him image. It is totally plausible that when he was informed he demanded they stop.
That would have been the honest thing to do, but the debate was not the first time he has not been truthful about his involvement with the company. It is just the first time it happened in a venue of national exposure.
Watch the debate from the time when the moderator started asking him about being on corporate boards of directors.
The moderator was clearly and falsely implying that Carson was on the board of Mannatech and had some sort of control over its operations.
That is the sort of “involvement” Carson was (truthfully) denying.
He told the truth about his dealings with Mannatech, stating that he did paid speeches for them and was a customer who liked their products.
I wonder if the Mannatech smear is really a trap for Trump. Trump promoted a shady MLM called ACN much more explicitly than Carson with Mannatech and received over $1.3 million. After saying what a great product they sold and saying it was a better investment than real estate, he later claimed he only gave “motivational speeches” and new nothing about ACN.
I don’t think it’s anything we have to worry about.
Carson is not getting the nomination.
Good point. If it works on Carson, they will go after Trump.
Thing is he has denied involvement in other interviews. He also claimed that the supplement cured his prostate cancer and did not mention having surgery.
There are a multitude of reasons not to vote for Carson, beginning with his Pacifist faith not being compatible with being Commander in Chief. Add to that amnesty for illegals and not being solid on the 2nd Amendment to name just 3 reasons and you have a totally unacceptable candidate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.