On Thursday, it was reported that Democrat National Committee Chair and Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz offered to change her anti-pot vote to please a big Democrat donor. Now the Congresswoman is denying that she made any such offer, despite released emails to the contrary.

On February 20, news broke that Wasserman Schultz’s office promised to reconsider her anti-pot vote if a big donor would stop publicly criticizing her over her past anti-pot position.

As she gears up for a possible run for the U.S. Senate from Florida, Wasserman Schultz is keen to quell criticism, and when Dem. donor John Morgan, an Orlando trial lawyer, renewed his criticism of the Congresswoman’s pot position, her office immediately tried to smooth the waters.

An email correspondence was begun in an attempt to cajole Morgan into ceasing his criticism. But the lawyer refused to budge, claiming that Wasserman Schultz was only attempting to “bully” him.

The email chain, which was made public by Politico, claimed that Wasserman Schultz was in a “tizzy” over the criticism and said that “she might be willing to support new amendment” if Morgan would cease and desist with his loud criticism.

Now the Congresswoman is wholly denying that the story is true.

Despite Politico’s reports of the email chain, Wasserman Schultz is saying that there never was any such correspondence.

“Wasserman Schultz said there were no emails,” the Florida’s Sun-Sentinel reported on Friday.

The Congresswoman’s office went on to claim that the story is “outrageous” and “false.”

But Lawyer Morgan is firing back, claiming that Wasserman Schultz is lying.

“Why she would go out and lie or cover up when there’s a chain of records is beyond me,” Morgan told the media on Friday.

Regardless, Wasserman Schultz insists that she was only trying to let Morgan know that she was coming to support the newest pro-pot proposal—despite her very vocal past criticism of pot initiatives. The whole situation was just a “misunderstanding” the Congresswoman said.

“I’ve seen the language that they’ve proposed for the 2016 ballot,” Wasserman Schultz said. “I was more comfortable with the way the language was going…. I wanted to see if, before battle lines were drawn again, we could start a conversation.”

Those involved in the email chain have not disputed the original reporting but are now attempting to steer clear of further controversy.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.