The sudden and unexpected death of conservative media titan Andrew Breitbart in 2012 remains one of the most enduring political mysteries of the past decade. At just 43 years old, Breitbart collapsed and died while walking near his home in Los Angeles in the early morning hours of March 1, 2012.
Officials immediately ruled his death as resulting from natural causes, citing heart failure. Yet the circumstances surrounding his passing—and the eerie sequence of events that followed—have fueled relentless speculation, conspiracy theories, and unanswered questions that continue to haunt political observers and Breitbart’s supporters alike.
Breitbart’s death did not occur in a vacuum. Just weeks prior, the combative and unapologetic conservative provocateur had publicly declared that he was in possession of damning video evidence related to then-President Barack Obama.
Breitbart had asserted in multiple public appearances and interviews that he held footage capable of derailing Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in February 2012, Breitbart electrified the conservative base with a tantalizing teaser: “I’ve got video. This election we’re going to vet him. We are going to vet him like nobody’s ever vetted before. The videos will greatly affect the 2012 election and I will release them just before November.”
Breitbart’s statement ignited a firestorm of anticipation and anxiety across the political spectrum. For critics of Obama, Breitbart’s promise represented the potential exposure of secrets that mainstream media allegedly refused to confront during Obama’s 2008 rise to the presidency.
According to Breitbart, the American public had been deprived of a rigorous examination of Obama’s past affiliations, associations, and ideological foundations. His claim that he possessed videos revealing explosive insights into Obama’s background captivated conservative media and grassroots activists eager to see the president politically wounded before facing re-election.
But Breitbart would never get the chance to fulfill his vow. His abrupt death just weeks after his public threats instantly cast a pall of suspicion over the tragedy. The official coroner’s report cited heart failure with no signs of foul play.
Yet for those aware of Breitbart’s robust and energetic persona, the explanation seemed too convenient, too tidy. His family history did include heart disease, but skeptics pointed to the timing of his death—so close to the moment he had promised to reveal potentially presidency-shaking information—as more than just coincidence.
Fueling the suspicions further was a dark and deeply unsettling twist. Just over a month after Breitbart’s death, on April 20, 2012, the Los Angeles County coroner who had been tasked with performing the autopsy on Breitbart, Michael Cormier, also died suddenly.
His cause of death? Acute poisoning from arsenic. Cormier, a respected forensic technician with decades of experience, reportedly fell ill on the very same day Breitbart’s autopsy results were scheduled for release.
He was taken to a hospital but died shortly thereafter. Authorities confirmed that his death was a homicide, yet the investigation into who might have poisoned Cormier—and why—has remained frustratingly inconclusive. No arrests were made, no clear suspects identified, and no motives publicly established.
The convergence of these two deaths—Breitbart’s sudden heart failure and Cormier’s arsenic poisoning—was too much for many to write off as random chance.
For conspiracy theorists and even cautious skeptics, the events hinted at the deliberate silencing of individuals who posed a threat to powerful political interests.
Was Breitbart assassinated to prevent the release of the purported Obama videos? Was Cormier targeted because of what he might have discovered during his examination of Breitbart’s body? These questions remain unanswered, but they have served to immortalize the intrigue surrounding both deaths.
Adding to the intrigue, there was confusion and controversy over what videos Breitbart was actually referring to in his CPAC speech. Shortly after his death, a video surfaced showing a young Barack Obama at a 1990 rally at Harvard University, embracing and praising Professor Derrick Bell, a radical academic known for his critical race theory scholarship.
The video was released by Breitbart’s media company, though many critics claimed it was underwhelming and hardly the bombshell that Breitbart had promised. However, some insiders suggested that this was merely one of several videos Breitbart had compiled, and the most incendiary footage never saw the light of day after his untimely demise.
Steve Bannon, who was a close associate of Breitbart and later rose to national prominence as a key strategist for Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, hinted at the possibility that more footage existed. Bannon once described Breitbart as a man deeply committed to exposing what he saw as a coordinated leftist movement within American academia and politics, orchestrated to reshape the cultural fabric of the nation.
The alleged Obama videos, according to those who knew Breitbart, were part of this broader mission to reveal the hidden machinations of power.
Yet despite these claims, no additional videos of significance ever emerged. Whether they were destroyed, suppressed, or never existed in the form Breitbart described remains a subject of heated debate.
The lack of transparency from officials regarding both Breitbart’s and Cormier’s deaths only compounded the suspicion. Independent researchers and journalists have called for more thorough investigations, but official channels have largely dismissed such inquiries, insisting there is no evidence linking the deaths to any broader conspiracy.
For many in the conservative movement, Breitbart’s death symbolized more than just the loss of a charismatic and fearless media warrior. It represented a broader concern about the limits of dissent in modern American politics.
Breitbart had made his career challenging the narratives of mainstream media, exposing corruption, and rallying a new generation of conservative activists.
His sudden death, coming at a time when he was poised to deliver what he described as a knockout blow to Obama’s re-election bid, became a chilling reminder of the dangers that may accompany the pursuit of inconvenient truths.
Even now, over a decade later, the mystery surrounding Breitbart’s death continues to fuel suspicion and debate. In an era where political polarization has only deepened and trust in institutions has eroded, the unexplained and coincidental nature of these events keeps conspiracy theories alive.
Questions linger in the minds of many: What did Andrew Breitbart really know? What did the videos contain? Who benefited from ensuring that information was never made public? And most disturbingly, who had the means and motive to silence not only Breitbart but also the man tasked with examining his body?
Despite the passage of time, there has been little resolution. The official narratives have not satisfied those who view the deaths as part of a larger and darker story about power, secrecy, and control in American politics.
The legacy of Andrew Breitbart, both as a media pioneer and as a figure shrouded in mystery, endures. His name is often invoked as a symbol of unflinching opposition to political orthodoxy and as a cautionary tale about the price that may come with challenging the entrenched forces within the corridors of power.
The unanswered questions surrounding his death, paired with the suspicious demise of Michael Cormier, ensure that the story remains a focal point of intrigue for investigators, journalists, and citizens who refuse to accept official explanations at face value.
Until more is revealed—if anything ever is—the truth about what happened to Andrew Breitbart may remain one of the most provocative and unsettling mysteries in recent American political history.
-1750487979-q80.webp "Mike Johnson Shuts Down Liberal Critic with One Sentence")
