´óÏó´«Ã½

Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate Tim Walz is facing backlash after reports revealed his 2006 congressional campaign made false claims about a drink-driving arrest when he was a high school teacher.

A police officer in 1995 stopped Mr Walz, who was 31 at the time, in Nebraska for going 96mph (154km/h) in a 55mph zone.

He pleaded guilty in March 1996 to a reduced charge of reckless driving. He lost his license for 90 days and was fined $200 (£154), the Associated Press reported.

But in 2006, his campaign manager at the time told media that Mr Walz was not drunk when he was pulled over, falsely suggesting it was a misunderstanding.

Mr Walz failed field sobriety and breath tests after the trooper smelled alcohol on his breath, court documents show.

He was then transported to the hospital for a blood test where his blood alcohol level was 0.128% compared to the legal limit of 0.10%, according to court documents.

Mr Walz told Minnesota's Star Tribune newspaper that he was watching college football with friends before his arrest. He was booked into the Dawes County jail.

Then a high school teacher, he reported the incident to his principal and resigned from his football coaching responsibilities at the school. He offered to quit his teaching job, but the principal talked him into staying, the Star Tribune reported.

He said after the incident and described it as a "gut-check moment" in a 2018 interview.

The recent backlash Mr Walz faces stems from how his former campaign aides from his 2006 congressional run described the incident to local media.

His campaign manager at the time suggested Mr Walz was not drunk, saying he could not understand the trooper because of hearing loss from his time serving in the National Guard.

The campaign manager also falsely claimed to the Rochester Post Bulletin that the judge who dismissed the case had criticized the arresting officer for not understanding that Walz had hearing loss.

Walz had ear surgery in 2005 to fix his hearing loss, the Associated Press reported. But court records do not mention that Mr Walz struggled to hear the officer at the time of the arrest.

His campaign at the time also claimed that Mr Walz was allowed to drive himself to jail on the night of the arrest, which was untrue.

Mr Walz reportedly acknowledged that he was drunk at the time of the arrest.

"It's just a dangerous situation," Mr Walz said in a 1996 court transcript of the hearing. "Not just to myself, but to the others who aren't even involved with it."

The ´óÏó´«Ã½ has reached out to the Harris-Walz campaign for comment.