According to The Associated Press Breitbart collapsed while walking near his home. A neighbor saw him fall and called paramedics, the AP quoted his father in law, Orson Bean, as saying. Bean said Breitbart had suffered from heart problems in the past.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigman/2012/03/01/andrew-breitbart-dies-suddenly-at-age-43/
This was March 1.
I can't find anything online the predates the current stuff talking about his health, but then again, it's hard to find anything predating the current stuff at all. At any rate, I don't know if his father in law was incorrectly quoted at one point or if he was confused, or?
That’s the question. And I haven’t been able to find a way to know when the various reports were given. The Reuters article also reports the spokesman for the coroner’s office saying that he had not seen a doctor in over a year but they hadn’t received his medical history yet. If what he said was true, it would discount the claims that he had been hospitalized last year or last month with heart attacks. But how would the coroner know he hadn’t been seen by a doctor for over a year without looking at a medical history?
I have no idea what really happened. I’m just noticing the discrepancies. Just like with the Bin Laden assassination, the stories don’t line up. Since the people have been given no reason to believe the word of either our government or our media, we’re left in a fine pickle, where we can’t really know anything.
And then they wonder why we question what the real story is. This is a dangerous situation. Like Chicken Little just waiting to happen. Our entire government and media are Chicken Little. If we need a clear warning we’ll never get one because we never know when both government and media are lying to us.
And the particular question with this is whether Obama’s allies or - even worse - our own government might have covertly assassinated Breitbart for simply being a threat to this regime. There’s a good reason we wonder if that would happen: that very act has just been made legal by a vast majority of Congress, when they voted in a law to allow US citizens to be arrested/detained as terrorists for merely being “belligerent” - with the term left undefined. If the government is allowed to self-define “belligerent” and anybody who fits that definition is a terrorist who has no Constitutional rights, then that person is also fair game for the POTUS alone to give the assassination order.
And they wonder why we don’t trust our government. It should be a huge wake-up call for anybody who remembers what America used to be, to realize that we now really and truly have no reason to believe that our government would NOT have assassinated Andrew Breitbart, given that such a thing is now legal - signed into law by Barack Hussein Obama (or whatever his real name is) with no means for anybody to ever ask questions or require justification, evidence, or due process.
The questions I have for every member of Congress - and especially those who voted for that bill - are these: What would legally keep Obama from ordering the assassination of Andrew Breitbart, and what recourse would anybody have if such a thing was done?
THOSE are sobering questions, and the American public deserves an honest answer to them.