Hillary Clinton in Bosnia

The former First Lady described her 1996 trip to the base at Tuzla earlier this week in a speech:

I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn't go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went. I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.

I don't recall that sniper incident, but I was only fifteen or so at the time, and now video has surfaced showing contemporary news coverage of the sniper attack on Clinton, and even capturing a portion of that harrowing dash -- including a moment when Clinton uses her body to shield a little girl from danger:

Impressive stuff, I urge everyone to watch the video and see for themselves.

Comments

1. You suck at embedding videos.
2. She was shielding herself with the girl.

Posted by Monster | March 22, 2008 3:59 PM

OMG! Don't watch that video unless you have a real stomach for violence!

Posted by Mark | March 22, 2008 4:01 PM

Funniest.take down.ever.

Posted by enozinho | March 22, 2008 4:02 PM

Those video clips just seem to jump up and bite you in the butt don't they?

Posted by Descartes | March 22, 2008 4:07 PM

Who the hell makes shit up about getting shot at by snipers?

Posted by Reality Man | March 22, 2008 4:12 PM

Sinbad didn't remember it that way. What is this, Rashomon?

Posted by LT Nixon | March 22, 2008 4:15 PM

Hoping to cover up her lies, the Clinton campaign has removed her speech describing the harrowing ordeal from its website.

If it's not on the website, it must have never happened.

Posted by om | March 22, 2008 4:16 PM

Dude, that wasn't Hillary Clinton in the video. That was the body double. We've been using them since Reagan got shot.

Meanwhile, the real Hillary Clinton landed on a different runway -- where she did come under sniper fire.

Unfortunately, she can't reveal this without compromising the whole "body double" security program.

Posted by Vantage Point | March 22, 2008 4:20 PM

More lies- Ohio got punked: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/from-the-fact-c.html

Posted by Monster | March 22, 2008 4:22 PM

Ron Brown, close Clinton advisor and the most effective DNC Chairman in a generation, was killed in this conflict.

Posted by Robert Powell | March 22, 2008 4:25 PM

Well, for the sake of fairness, Obama has served up some whoppers of his own. Remember when he told Hillary that she was "likable enough?" Yeah, well, turns out she isn't.

Posted by Tom in Raleigh | March 22, 2008 4:27 PM

Tom, that was a great one. It made me laugh out loud.

Posted by Josh | March 22, 2008 4:29 PM

Seriously, does she not know what the internet is? We're the YouTube generation, Clintons. We have everything on record.

Posted by ZednCu | March 22, 2008 4:31 PM

Ron Brown, close Clinton advisor and the most effective DNC Chairman in a generation, was killed in this conflict.

Not to detract from his death or the death of anyone else who died with him, but didn't he die in an accidental plane crash? I don't remember him being shot down or anything.

Posted by Alexis | March 22, 2008 4:36 PM

Well, for the sake of fairness, Obama has served up some whoppers of his own. Remember when he told Hillary that she was "likable enough?" Yeah, well, turns out she isn't.

Posted by Tom in Raleigh | March 22, 2008 4:27 PM

My hat's off to you, Tom. That. Was. Funny.

Posted by nctodc | March 22, 2008 4:41 PM

That take-down doesn't count because Hillary is still winning among white, registered Democrats who block embedded flash video.

Posted by southpaw | March 22, 2008 4:42 PM

Here's the thing: Hillary can get away with this kind of thing because "Hillary Clinton lies" is no longer a new story for the MSM. It's been covered too many times.

That's called being "vetted". It means you get to have an interesting relationship with the truth.

Posted by Jake | March 22, 2008 4:43 PM

Funny YouTube comment: "Do you know that if you look close it seems as if the scrunchies that the little girl is wearing are saturated with Ricin."

Posted by Monster | March 22, 2008 4:45 PM

I think Samantha Power deserves an apology now, don't you?

Posted by joe shmoe | March 22, 2008 4:49 PM

Tom in R -- too funny!

HRC got 4 "Pinocchio's" from WaPo today for this Bosnia lie. I'm trying to give her the benefit of the doubt and maybe she has the country wrong when such an incident happened, but then I think: Ummm, it would have been pretty big news had the FOTUS's life been endangered by sniper fire.

Posted by evie | March 22, 2008 4:50 PM

Obama says he never heard any of Wright's hate-spewing rhetoric in the 20 years he attended the Qaddafi-loving bigot's church. I can't wait till footage shows up catching him in that lie.

Posted by Dan | March 22, 2008 4:54 PM

There was nowhere to link for this video other than newsbusters? Those guys are ridiculous.

Posted by washerdreyer | March 22, 2008 4:56 PM

Laugh now, losers. Just wait until the footage comes in proving Clinton's claims that she:

1) Tore down the Berlin Wall
2) Traveled into space on Sputnik
3) Cornered bin Laden in the hills of Tora Bora
4) Won American Idol in 1986
5) Wrote the bestselling novel "War and Peace"
6) Personally executed Che Guevara
7) Finished second in Star Search

She's been shielding us from the truth of her endeavors so far FOR OUR OWN GOOD. Now that you've started criticizing her, she'll have no choice but to reveal the extent of her involvement in every national security crisis, and pop music contest, of the last 35 years.

Posted by Craig | March 22, 2008 4:58 PM

My God, that was hair-raising. She's a freaking commando! Who'd a thunk?

Posted by MR. WHIPPLE | March 22, 2008 5:00 PM

Obama says he never heard any of Wright's hate-spewing rhetoric in the 20 years he attended the Qaddafi-loving bigot's church.

Uh-huh. I assume you've seen the picture of Wright sitting next to Hillary during Bill's prayer breakfast? Those Clintons, they sure do love them some Qaddafi-loving bigots too. YEEEEHAAAAAWWWW!!!!!

Posted by Jake | March 22, 2008 5:01 PM

joe shmoe

She'll get it, when Clinton has to grin and vote to make her Abassador to the UN

Posted by Dirk | March 22, 2008 5:03 PM

"Obama says he never heard any of Wright's hate-spewing rhetoric in the 20 years he attended the Qaddafi-loving bigot's church."

False.

Posted by Tony Hussein | March 22, 2008 5:06 PM

Against conventional wisdom, it seems like things are coming out on Fridays. Trying to adhere to conventional wisdom, candidates are waiting until Monday to respond. The echo chamber over the weekend becomes deafening.

Of all the crazy charges in this campaign this one seems to actually be real. Okay she mis-remembered something. Sinbad calls her out. Does she step up and apologize for confusing details, no, she backs up her lie. Now video is out with small children greeting her and what can she say? She better say something quick.

If this does sink her campaign (and I'm not sure it shouldn't), at least she gets out without releasing her tax returns ;-)

Posted by Patrick | March 22, 2008 5:16 PM

Dan please provide evidence that "Obama says he never heard any of Wright's hate-spewing rhetoric in the 20 years he attended the Qaddafi-loving bigot's church."

All I've seen him say was that he wasn't in the pews when some of the specific controversial statements that came out on YouTube were spoken, and as far as I know, the facts have supported that claim.

Posted by Dave C | March 22, 2008 5:17 PM

To the person who realized that there is a HRC body double - you were right. Unfortunately HRC and Sinbad were photographed side by side - you see, when you and your body double are photographed together ... that's the cat comming out of the bag.

Posted by Bud | March 22, 2008 5:18 PM

So she misremembered but everyone else (including Sinbad) got it right? That's presidential material if I've ever seen it.

Posted by Jake | March 22, 2008 5:20 PM

"There was no greeting ceremony. We were basically told to run to our cars. That's what happened."

Priceless.

Posted by evie | March 22, 2008 5:20 PM

Definite appeal to the Reagan Democrats there, who like a fabulist president.

Posted by lampwick | March 22, 2008 5:20 PM

Seems there's a raft of incidents like the first lady's. There was Geraldo Rivera, standing on a craggy hilltop somewhere over there, dodging sniper fire. Some said his cameraman was chucking dirt clods at him. Geraldo sensing is journalistic career was in the dumper, strongly denied any appearance of impropriety. Hillary Clinton certainly exhibits a jaunty stride, for one in such imminent danger. Point being, it just puts a real crimp in one's outlandish tale when there's a camera present: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by Peggy McGilligan | March 22, 2008 5:22 PM

Patrick, I have to agree with you. The interesting thing about this is that we're not hearing a lot of counter-spin from the Clinton campaign. At least I haven't yet.

I hear she had a quiet schedule yesterday, too.

Posted by Hope springs eternal | March 22, 2008 5:24 PM

Hope,

This is going to be fascinating because the usual sources are ignoring this video (deliberately I guess). Drudge, Politico, etc. are not reporting it yet. Clinton doesn't read the Atlantic blogs? LOL

It is in a DKos diary but not on the front page yet, I don't know why. Nothing on TPM.

Can the left wing new media create a media story like the right wing has been doing for five years? If not, why not? Excepting places like Ben Smith, MyDD, Taylor Marsh that are in the bag for HRC, can the others push a story?

Pusing a negative HRC story should be easier than a McCain story, good way to cut teeth for November. Plus, it will end this divisive primary.

Posted by Patrick | March 22, 2008 5:33 PM

Anybody still convinced Clinton isn't a corrupt, lying bitch?

I mean, please.

At least if we were running Angelina Jolie for President, we'd have two advantages:

1) No matter what somebody brought up about her past behavior - sex, drugs, whatever - she'd say, "Yes, I did that. Next!" She admits everything, denies nothing, couldn't care less about all of it.

2) She's had so much combat training for her movies we wouldn't need to pay for Secret Service protection - she can take care of herself.

Clinton put five million of "her" money - we're told, but she won't show the tax records to prove it - into her campaign. Angelina puts four million of her money into her new charity foundation (Brad puts in another four million.) Then they actually hand that money out as opposed to spending it on PR for the foundation.

In terms of smarts, Angelina makes Hillary look like Homer Simpson.

In terms of attitude, Angelina makes Hillary look like Saddam Hussein.

In terms of looks, Angelina makes Hillary look like Ernest Borgnine.

Angelina for President!

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 22, 2008 5:35 PM

It's not a lie. Everyone knows that Bosnian snipers can't hit the broad side of a barn. In the Balkans, sniper fire is like the weather, right? Everybody kind of strolls around, signing autographs and stuff.

Nothing to see here, people, move on, move on...

Posted by Tungsten | March 22, 2008 5:36 PM

RSH - "bitch," as you've used it, is over-the-top sexist and not helpful.

Posted by evie | March 22, 2008 5:38 PM

I honestly think that people have become immune to the Clinton's lies. It doesn't surprise us anymore, it is seen as normal or commonplace. If I lied about my "resume" as much as Clinton has, do you think that I would have a job? Nope. But Clinton wants us to basically hire her to be the leader who heeds the voice of the people and represents our nation before the rest of the world. Hunny bunny, it doesn't work that way.

Posted by Laura | March 22, 2008 5:38 PM

GOD DAMN AMERICA! THIS IS GREAT NEWS FOR OBAMA!!

Posted by Moronic | March 22, 2008 5:40 PM

I'm with evie.

Posted by Ted | March 22, 2008 5:44 PM

Hillary Clinton would sweep the leg.

Posted by Starscream | March 22, 2008 5:54 PM

Definite appeal to the Reagan Democrats there, who like a fabulist president.

One does have to wonder why newsbusters is making such a big deal about this... after all, if we kinda-sorta feel like what Hillary said is what happened, who are we to harsh on everyone's buzz? That stuff has been uncool since the days of bread with 80 different taxes on it, food stamps used to buy vodka, and welfare queens in cadillacs.

Posted by Tyro | March 22, 2008 5:54 PM

"Hillary Clinton would sweep the leg."

Put him in a body bag, Hillary!!!

Posted by pubasnacks | March 22, 2008 6:03 PM

Obama says he never heard any of Wright's hate-spewing rhetoric in the 20 years he attended the Qaddafi-loving bigot's church. I can't wait till footage shows up catching him in that lie.

You need to check your facts, Dan. Obama said in his speech, "Did I hear things that were controversial? Yes." Dan, we're all sorry but the pastor thing isn't going to work out for Hillary.

Can anyone imagine what would have happened if Al Gore had been caught in an actual exaggeration like this in 2000? Why, it would have been even bigger than the preacher thing.

Posted by Pug | March 22, 2008 6:06 PM

Hillary says the C-130 and the C-17 Globemaster are known for their agility and quick take-off capacity. These are two of THE BIGGEST AIRCRAFT ON THE PLANET. No disrespect intended to the venerable workhorses; but whenever I have to clear a hot LZ, a GLOBEMASTER isn't my first choice: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by Peggy McGilligan | March 22, 2008 6:10 PM

Both Clintons, and Madeline Albright, Ron Brown, and a number of others in the White House at the time, deserve real credit for doing the right thing in Bosnia. It was too damned late, but better late than never. After the spectacle of EU complicity with Serb atrocities for years, and the innovation of making "UN Safe Area" synonymous with "mass grave", they took decisive action and stopped the killing. Credit where credit's due.

Posted by Robert Powell | March 22, 2008 6:18 PM

Dunno folks. Seems like in your rush to judgment you forgot how dangerous those little girls are. Isn't that a Glock in her back pocket? I mean, let's not go overboard here - Hillary really did lay it on the line in confronting that youthful sniper...

Posted by morzer | March 22, 2008 6:26 PM

I predict Clinton's response will be a new round of crying and saying the mean men in the media are picking on her again.

Posted by Ron | March 22, 2008 6:26 PM

I hear that the little girl grew up, and is now making an ad for Obama, denying that she was a pro-Clinton sniper.... *s*

Posted by maraschion | March 22, 2008 6:29 PM

"Both Clintons, and Madeline Albright, Ron Brown, and a number of others in the White House at the time, deserve real credit for doing the right thing in Bosnia. It was too damned late, but better late than never. After the spectacle of EU complicity with Serb atrocities for years, and the innovation of making "UN Safe Area" synonymous with "mass grave", they took decisive action and stopped the killing. Credit where credit's due.

Posted by Robert Powell | March 22, 2008 6:18 PM"

True, but that credit belongs to people actually in the administration, the bureaucracy and the military at the time. Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, was the one who scared Bill out of acting sooner after reading "Balkan Ghosts."

Posted by Reality Man | March 22, 2008 6:29 PM

Matt,

Very glad to see you've posted this, but I think you, like everyone else, are missing a big piece of the story.

Sinbad's comments to the Washington Post on March 10th, calling into question Hillary's earlier accounts of the plane trip, created a ruckus as soon as they were published, and news of them spread throughout the news media and blogoshere almost immediately. The Clinton campaign had to be aware of the new-found-doubt of Hillary's version of events, that was raised by the Sinbad story

From this point, they had seven days before Hillary Clinton's speech at George Washington University to look into the records of the flight and the landing ceremonies, both their own and those of news reports, and correct Clinton's highly erroneous earlier accounts.

But what did they do? Instead, they choose to not only stick with her original story, but actually ramped up its details. This decision was nothing less than an act of fraud.

100 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

Posted by Steve | March 22, 2008 6:32 PM

I think this really depends on what your definition of "sniper fire" is.

Posted by Tim K | March 22, 2008 6:35 PM

Tim K, I have to say that last comment means you are now batting 1 for 5217. Keep up the good work!

Posted by uncleangus | March 22, 2008 6:37 PM

a true mitt romney moment. she'll say she didn't *literally* have to endure sniper fire, but the sniper fire was there in spirit. or something.

Posted by jdw | March 22, 2008 6:43 PM

I think this really depends on what your definition of "sniper fire" is.

Guys, I'm pretty sure this was intended as snark.

Right? You just left off the ;-), right?

Posted by Ted | March 22, 2008 6:44 PM

a true mitt romney moment. she'll say she didn't *literally* have to endure sniper fire, but the sniper fire was there in spirit. or something.

Posted by jdw | March 22, 2008 6:44 PM

Surely the logical move would be to claim that the Obama campaign planted the little girl to damage Hillary?

Posted by zilifant | March 22, 2008 6:47 PM

It also depends on your definition of "no welcoming ceremony" and "run for our cars."

Posted by The Meaning of Is | March 22, 2008 6:48 PM

This decision was nothing less than an act of fraud.

No, it was an act of arrogance. The only people who would do something like that are people who perceive themselves to have Bush-levels of untouchability-- the sort of people who are going to say, "Yeah, I'll peddle bullshit. What are you gonna do about it, huh? Write some fancy little article?"

Posted by Tyro | March 22, 2008 6:53 PM

"But what did [the Clintons] do? Instead, they choose to not only stick with her original story, but actually ramped up its details. This decision was nothing less than an act of fraud."

Dick Morris says, “Hillary Clinton was deeply involved in the White House's inner workings only from the time of Bill's election through the Democratic defeat in the congressional elections of 1994 … But Bill Clinton saw his loss of Congress as owing to Hillary's policies and ideas. He felt that his presidency had been captured by a liberal phalanx that included the first lady and such staffers as George Stephanopoulos and Harold Ickes. He … exiled Hillary from the White House, asking her to mix the largely ceremonial duties of her “job” with writing, speaking and policy advocacy. Her key role in the White House was a thing of the past - and remained so through all of 1995, 1996 and 1997 … So Hillary's experience, real enough in 1993-94, led to a total disaster, the first loss of the House for the Democrats in 40 years:” http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by Peggy McGilligan | March 22, 2008 7:19 PM

"RSH - "bitch," as you've used it, is over-the-top sexist and not helpful. "

Hey, I use racial, ethnic and sexist slurs WHEN THEY'RE TRUE. And only when they're true.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 22, 2008 7:19 PM

So Hillary exposed her daughter Chelsea to this raging war zone, with sniper's bullets hitting all around her? For shame! What kind of mother is she?

Posted by Bobster | March 22, 2008 7:27 PM

Wow, that's embarrassing!

I say that as a Obama supporter, contributor and phone-banker who nevertheless has been fairly uncomfortable with all the Clinton bashing I've seen on le intarwebs. Yeah, Hill and Bill have done some really questionable things from the standpoint of what's good for the party during this campaign but politics is always a rough sport and Obama should be able to take it.

But this just makes her look ridiculous!

Posted by Jeff S. | March 22, 2008 7:27 PM

Stupid is as stupid does

Posted by dogeatdogi | March 22, 2008 7:35 PM

Stupid is as stupid does

Posted by dogeatdogi | March 22, 2008 7:36 PM

Everyone has different opinions about their experiences at particular moments in time. However, when others cannot confirm your accounts and they sound rather contradictory, there is definately a moment to pause and examine the evidence. Is Sen. Clinton so single-minded for power that she would be this vindictive in language to distort the truth? If this is the case, I really feel sorry for those who have been lied to in past primaries/caucuses.

Let's work hard to make sure the right person is commander in chief.

The Clinton machine has got to be derailed and it is up to us to help make this happen.

Obama '08

Posted by Ophelia | March 22, 2008 7:47 PM

"Ron Brown, close Clinton advisor and the most effective DNC Chairman in a generation, was killed in this conflict."

How perfectly Clintonian. Ron Brown was killed when the plane in which he was travelling flew into a mountain in Croatia (not Bosnia). The crash was attributed to pilot error.

Posted by Danube of Thought | March 22, 2008 7:56 PM

"Ron Brown, close Clinton advisor and the most effective DNC Chairman in a generation, was killed in this conflict."

How perfectly Clintonian. Ron Brown was killed when the plane in which he was travelling flew into a mountain in Croatia (not Bosnia). The crash was attributed to pilot error.

Posted by Danube of Thought | March 22, 2008 7:58 PM

Seems like in your rush to judgment you forgot how dangerous those little girls are.

She about to start some shit, Zed. If you ask me, I'd say she's up to something. And to be honest, I'd appreciate it if you eased up off my back about it.
... Or do I owe her an apology?

Posted by James Edwards | March 22, 2008 7:58 PM

Seriously, does she not know what the internet is? We're the YouTube generation, Clintons. We have everything on record.
--ZednCu

You're making that up. What really happens is that the Obama campaign feverishly looks up stuff in local newspapers.
--G. Ferraro

Just sitting back, logically--if the airport is under sniper fire, the First Lady's plane doesn't land. Nor the Secretary of State's, nor the first child's, nor...well, any senior person whose assassination would cause significant kerfuffles. Maybe Sinbad's. Maybe lower level diplomats who are paid to wade through war zones. The fact that she believes this just strikes a really odd, disturbing note.

Posted by Deborah | March 22, 2008 8:09 PM

Wikipedia on Ron Brown's death:

"On April 3, 1996, while on an official trade mission, the Air Force CT-43 (a modified Boeing 737) carrying Brown and 34 other people, including New York Times Frankfurt Bureau chief Nathaniel C. Nash, crashed in Croatia. While attempting an instrument approach to Čilipi airport, the airplane crashed into a mountainside killing everyone on board; the final Air Force investigation attributed this to pilot error and a poorly designed landing approach.[2] There were many speculations as to the circumstances surrounding the plane crash that caused Brown's death including many government cover-up and conspiracy theories, i.e. whether the Clintons had him murdered as some conspiracy theorists conjectured about Vince Foster's suicide[3] stemming in part from the fact that Brown was under investigation by independent counsel for corruption.[4]"

So once again, the words "corruption" and "Clinton" are linked.

Then there's this (which I haven't read and have no idea whether it's anything of significance):

Ron Brown's Body: How One Man's Death Saved the Clinton Presidency and Hillary's Future (Hardcover)
by Jack Cashill (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/Ron-Browns-Body-Presidency-Hillarys/dp/0785262377

Book Description

"The mysterious death of Ron Brown has caused much controversy and suspicion, and in this investigative book, Cashill takes a close look at Brown's checkered career as Clinton fund-raiser and commerce secretary and consequently exposes the Clintons' dirty, relentless practices for getting financial backing. Cashill answers the most trenchant questions surrounding Brown's rise and fall: Why did his plane crash? Why did the White House suppress an investigation? What was the purpose of Brown's trade missions? And what larger forces caused the Clintons to seek international cash? Using the case of Ron Brown's untimely death as a touchstone for the Clintons' unseemly and unsavory practices in the White House, Cashill explores the seedy depths of the most corrupt adminstration in American history during its two most desperate years and focuses directly on the machinations of the direst threat to today's political scene, Hillary Clinton."

From a post by a book reviewer on Amazon:

"Ron Brown was in one sense a kingmaker. His tight-fisted control of the Democratic Party put forth a united front that helped propel Clinton to victory in 1992. He had sought questionable monies (both parties do it so regard this as an observation as opposed to a slam) from the Asian community in San Francisco and Los Angeles. This wound up culminating in the John Huang/Charlie Trie scandals that were far more important to American security than Monica Lewinsky ever dreamed of being.

I remember the grand funerals of the crew as if it were yesterday. Clinton has contributed to his 'blame' in the so-called conspiracy theory; who can forget him leaving the memorial service at the church and laughing loudly - only to see a TV camera and fake shed croccodile tears on national TV?"

The reviewers indicate that Cashill's book is reasonably unbiased. However, a check of Cashill's Web site indicates him to be a right winger with a thing against Bill Clinton, so...

Pretty much tells you all you need to know about Ron Brown and Clinton. Something corrupt was going on there.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 22, 2008 8:23 PM

LEAVE HILLARY ALONE!

Posted by James "Chris Crocker" Gary | March 22, 2008 8:46 PM

Good gravy. There's plenty here to legitimately slam HRC on without dipping into the "they had Ron Brown offed" insanity.

Posted by Woody Bombay | March 22, 2008 9:06 PM

Do you care about your privacy, reproductive, sexual orientation and other civil libertarian rights?

The Dems need to win the Presidency in 2008 or you can forget about it.

The Dems should also be able to win several more Senate (very important for Judiciary selections) and House seats, governor races and other local elections.

Hillary and Bill are willing to sacrifice your civil rights for their remote chance at their third term.

They have been utterly reckless by enhancing and legitimizing John McCain, and thus the Republican agenda on civil rights, Middle East war and tax breaks for the rich.

They have betrayed the Democratic Party and the Public’s interests as they did during their first eight years with triangulation, corruption, gross polical mismangment and lack of leadership resulting in massive defeats for Democrats at the polls, Newt Ginrigh, etc. etc.

Superdelegates must get them out of this race NOW.

Do you care about your civil rights??

Posted by Dana | March 22, 2008 9:33 PM

This lie from Hillary deserves far more press scrutiny; it's not insignificant. If any other candidate had told this whopper they would be crucified by the media.

Hillary's whole campaign is based on a lie regarding her experience, and this incident symbolizes that very well. This alone should shatter her candidacy.

Hillary cannot be trusted; we all know that by now. She can never win and she could never govern effectively, because both require trust.

Posted by cm | March 22, 2008 9:50 PM

Senator Clinton has traveled extensively in an official capacity representing the United States. Obama has not left the country since he was a small child with the exception of completing the Hajj a few years before joining the Senate. Obama has never visited Europe and has refused to hold meetings of his subcommittee on European Affairs in protest of how the EU treat its Muslim immigrants.

Posted by your fingers say you want the spin, but your heart and pharnyx say otherwise | March 22, 2008 10:13 PM

"Obama has not left the country since he was a small child with the exception of completing the Hajj a few years before joining the Senate."

You POS.

Posted by Tony Hussein | March 22, 2008 10:17 PM

Just words. Thoroughly vetted. Only two candidates have passed the Commander in Chief threshold. It's our turn, this time. Ready on Day One. Yes She Can. 35 years of experience. 21st Century Solutions Business. This whole thing's the biggest fantasy I've ever seen. Meet me in Ohio. Automatic Delegates. Cocaine.

Had enough?

Posted by Gregor | March 22, 2008 10:36 PM

it's a vast right-wing conspiracy folks.They are the ones that twisted Hilliary's words.

Posted by Hussein | March 22, 2008 11:16 PM

I remember when the right-wing used to bash the Clintons, using almost exactly the same phrasing. My, my, how things change.

Posted by Buford Gooch | March 22, 2008 11:17 PM

I remember when the right-wing used to bash the Clintons, using almost exactly the same phrasing. My, my, how things change.

Posted by Buford Gooch | March 22, 2008 11:18 PM

Literally, I LOLed. No wonder she considers herself ready from day one to be commander in chief of the armed forced. Evasive landing approach, reverse thrust in the air, the lads sitting on their flak jackets, sniper fire all around, a death-defying dash to armored vehicles. Can't you just hear The Ride Of The Valkyries defiantly playing? LOL!

I hope an accurate memory isn't required as president. Hers puts Spaceman Spiff's to shame.

Posted by klr | March 22, 2008 11:43 PM

Spaceman Spiff! Now there is a candidate who can take us into the future! Did he land under sniper fire, too?

Posted by joe shmoe | March 22, 2008 11:57 PM

Well, somebody mentioned Ron Brown, so I looked him up to see what little I remembered about him - mostly that he supposedly had a bullet wound in his head (which never made any sense to me since the plane obviously crashed - which would make the assassin a suicide, right?)

It appears, however, that there was some corruption being investigated. That reminded me of the whole Chinese money raising thing which is apparently mentioned in Cashill's book.

And that of course ties in with every other bit of corruption we know the Clinton's were involved in. Money is clearly their thing. Marc Rich got pardoned for money.

Hillary's "personal assistant", Huma Abedin, according to Larry Johnson (who knows her and who is upset that I suggested something fishy going on there), is from a wealthy family, conveniently explaining why someone making less than $30K a year can afford a half million dollar apartment and wear thousand dollar clothes. Since her family is Saudi, that still raises a lot of interesting questions about the Saudi influence on the Clintons, just as it does with Bush.

It also raises questions about the earlier report that the LA Times was sitting on a major sex scandal by one of the Presidential candidates. At the time, there were plenty of candidates to choose from. Now we're down to three - and the LA Times still hasn't reported the story - which tends to indicate it's still one of the three.

Shocking Inside DC Scandal Rumor: A Media Ethics Dilemma
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/ronrosenbaum/2007/10/29/shocking_inside_dc_scandal_rum.php

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 23, 2008 12:39 AM

This sounds like a job for Bill O'Reilly. He's been in combat. Nothing you've done in your life compares to the things he's seen. He's a warrior, only, with a pen, not a gun. And you better believe, if there's some guy threatening the life of someone in his unit, that fellow is gone. A real gone guy.

Posted by El Cid | March 23, 2008 12:58 AM

O'REILLY: Have you been in combat Colonel?

CROWLEY: Yes.

O'REILLY: So you know what we're talkin' about. Cause I was in combat and when you are there your adrenalin is flying through your ears. And you know you've got the gun and I just couldn't understand - we had a guy in here from one of the human rights saying you have to try this marine and I almost got - I was incensed. How did you feel about it?

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/05/06/transcript_of_oreilly_interview_with_p_j_crowley_and_neal_puckett.php

Posted by Bill Orally | March 23, 2008 1:54 AM

As an Obama supporter, I'm confident that he can and will win the nomination without having to plumb the depths of nutbag conspiracy mongering.

Ron Brown was a brilliant and effective DNC Chairman, the best I've seen in many years of watching this stuff. He died in a military aircraft trying a difficult approach in bad weather to a tiny military airport in the mountains on a trip to the Balkans in support of a policy all Americans should be proud of. The fact that some people would try to build a conspiracy on innuendo and gossip is fairly typical of a particular personality disorder that's out of place in grownup politics.

I don't know the details, and will take Reality Man's word that Hillary was initially hesitant about Bosnia. I suppose most in Washington were. But she was supportive when push came to shove, and has never backed away from the position that intervening was the right thing to do. I think she, like others involved in the decision, deserve credit for it. It's not enough for me to support her candidacy, but it's not insignificant.

Posted by Robert Powell | March 23, 2008 3:10 AM

For what it's worth, the speech is still on her site: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=6553

Nevertheless, this goes to show that Hillary Clinton has that key component of the Democratic DNA: to continually display her intrinsic ability to lose a race.

From the de facto endorsement of McCain over Obama, to the unforced "...as far as I know" comment, to this, not to mention her refusal to release her earmarks and tax returns, and the baggage that comes with the name Clinton (a political double-edged sword if there ever was one), how does she really expect to get elected as POTUS? Just on the fact that people are so completely tired of the GOP?

Whether he's worth the label or not, the GOP has selected the one candidate in their process that can reach out to independents, and that could actually win this election, despite the horrid economy and a pointless, direction-less war.

Posted by socctty | March 23, 2008 4:33 AM

Spaceman Spiff! Now there is a candidate who can take us into the future! Did he land under sniper fire, too?
Posted by joe shmoe

Many times. Often it was giant balls of flying snot, but this election cycle that would hardly surprise me.

Posted by Deborah | March 23, 2008 9:26 AM

“I remember when the right-wing used to bash the Clintons, using almost exactly the same phrasing. My, my, how things change.”

Oh My. If you disagree with Billary you are Judas and a right wing conspirator.

If you disagree with Bush you are a traitor and a left wing conspirator.

Nothing has changed. Bush/Clinton/Cheney/Rove/Penn.

They all suck BIG TIME. Time to turn a page from these ass wipes.

Posted by benzoid | March 23, 2008 10:16 AM

Politicians, like the rich, are different from most people. The thought of being caught in a lie makes most of us cringe so much that, aside from its moral aspects, the shame is enough to keep us relatively honest. Politicians just brazen it out. If HRC is like Bill she has psychic denial armor like the hide from a dozen rhinos.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | March 23, 2008 10:54 AM

The world is watching how the United States defines democracy, you know, that thing that we are trying to force into the Middle East.

Thanks to Hillary, we are teaching the world that democracy is about mis truths, racism, and doing anything to win. I fear that the seeds we sew today will over-run us in a forest of mis-fortunate in a near future.

"We the people," has become UBS - "You and US"

Posted by Robert D. Spicer | March 23, 2008 11:45 AM

why didn't she just go to southeast and dodge bullets there? Would have save the American tax payer a heck of a lot of dough.

Posted by Monica Lewinsky | March 23, 2008 12:10 PM

Hillary misspoke. She meant *rhetorical* sniper fire.

Those op-eds are *vicious*.

Posted by Jon H | March 23, 2008 4:57 PM

Obviously the video has been slowed down so that it doesn't appear she's running.

Posted by Keith | March 24, 2008 10:57 PM

Obviously the video has been slowed down so that it doesn't appear she's running.

Posted by Keith | March 24, 2008 10:57 PM

SO, next time hillbilly brings up the 'extra pillow' thing, barack should just say 'hey, maybe we should all run for our cars?'

Posted by CB | March 24, 2008 11:48 PM

No surprises here, the bitch is lying and that's all there is to it.
Now people all over the Internet go all baloony and 'Yesssss...we caught her in a lie!'
But do you really think she cares about that?
More than Bush cares about what you write about him?
My point is that these power-elitists don't give a s**t about being caught lying, infact they don't give a s**t about any of us 'normal' people in any way what so ever.
Get real, don't get sucked into these fruitless discussions. Do something about it instead, like run her over with your car when you see her and later claim 'it was an accident' because you got temporarily blinded by a sun-reflection from her sunglasses.

Posted by Kim Brian | March 25, 2008 1:53 AM

No surprises here, the bitch is lying and that's all there is to it.
Now people all over the Internet go all baloony and 'Yesssss...we caught her in a lie!'
But do you really think she cares about that?
More than Bush cares about what you write about him?
My point is that these power-elitists don't give a s**t about being caught lying, infact they don't give a s**t about any of us 'normal' people in any way what so ever.
Get real, don't get sucked into these fruitless discussions. Do something about it instead, like run her over with your car when you see her and later claim 'it was an accident' because you got temporarily blinded by a sun-reflection from her sunglasses.

Posted by Kim Brian | March 25, 2008 1:54 AM

Sorry bout the duble posting, the freaking site didn't seem to respond to my first post attemt.

Posted by Kim Brian | March 25, 2008 1:57 AM

I have been made aware that my sarcastic comment in the previous posting could be misinterpreted as an encouragement to violent actions, which is far from my intentions.

However, what I wrote about the elitists in power not giving a s**t about 'normal' people still stands.
Furthermore, on a daily basis we ARE being lied to about all the important matters in this world and this life.

There is no doubt in my mind that we are being controlled and abused/exploited by a very dangerous powerful elite which controls everything on this planet including all our governments.

How can this have happened?

Well, unfortunately most people don't care enough about what's going on, or they refuse to believe what's going on because it would shatter their believes in 'goodness', 'fairplay', 'authorities' etc. and also it would require of them an active effort to research and stay informed.

Sadly enough that's not what people want to use their energy on and therefore prefer staying 'asleep' lullyfied and passified by the elitist owned mass media manipulation programs.

And the first tool of mass manipulation is lying and deceiving in any way you can to achieve what you want. Spreading confusion and dividing people.

If that doesn't work seccond tool comes into play - violence, racketeering, threats and imprisonment.

After that the third tool: Assasination, murder, execution.

So what can we do to defend ourselves?

Some people would say something like: 'Love thy enemy' or 'If somebody slaps you in the face turn your cheek and let them slap you again'.
This attitude ofcourse also comes from another means of mass manipulation, the 'Holy Bible'.

Holy my ass! If we want to survive the present threat to all of us we have to do something NOW, not just waiting to get slapped again (for the 10000th time)

Here is some advice regarding our possibilities...

It seems that in their incredible arrogance the elitists expect all of us just to act as sheep being led to the slaughterhouse. They see themselves as invulnerable.

That can be to our advantage.
Stop being nice and obedient.

First we got to awaken the sleeping masses:
Whenever you can, expose the elitists' and their henchmens dirty deeds; go to the local newspapers, write on the Internet, talk to everyone you know etc.

Stop buying the products manufactured by the elitist companies. Get used to another more modest lifestyle.
Don't waste your time watching the elitist controlled mass medias. (stupid tv series, films and untruthful news programs)

The more people getting aware the more difficult for the elite to maintain their control.

It's very likely as we have seen before, if the elite loses the grip they go to the second and more violent tool as I mentioned above.
And if that's not enough then 3rd tool comes into play.

We have seen this many times before going from Jesus, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Ol