The Tarmac at Tuzla
In a speech last week at George Washington University, Hillary Clinton recalled a 1996 trip to Bosnia and said she remembered "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." Subsequent accounts by members of her party took exception to her recollection, and the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" blog reports that "A review of nearly 100 news accounts of her visit shows that not a single newspaper or television station reported any security threat to the First Lady." The Post also reprinted a photo of a relaxed-looking Clinton greeting an eight-year-old girl who'd been trotted out to the tarmac to read a welcoming poem.
This isn't the biggest story on the campaign trail right now, nor should it be. But there's something creepily revealing about Clinton's apparent ginning-up of the sniper-fire anecdote, and about her reaction to being caught out. First things first: Claiming she was in more danger than was actually present is baffling on the face of it. It doesn't even make tactical sense, because it isn't the sort of exaggeration that pads her foreign-policy experience; it's the sort of tall tale guys tell girls in bars. Besides, it's unnecessary: Even without sniper fire, what she did was impressive, at least to me. I mean, I didn't get on a C17 and fly into Tuzla in 1996. The riskiest thing I did in 1996 was eat at Johnny Rockets.
Clinton's initial reaction to getting caught in the fib isn't going to help her much either. This YouTube piece starts with a CBS report from the day of the incident, showing a smiling Clinton strolling across the tarmac as if she were headed to lunch, and pausing to be greeted by the little girl. Then it cuts straight to Clinton being asked about the discrepancy and stonily sticking to her story: "There was no greeting ceremony and we were basically told to run to our cars. Now, that is what happened." There's something particularly Clintonian about the grim-faced refusal to amend a story, even when the preponderance of reportage refutes it, and there's video besides. All she had to say was "You know, I may not have recalled this one exactly right. I made a lot of trips as First Lady and some of them were pretty dangerous." A campaign spokesman finally acknowledged today that Clinton "misspoke." Gee, you think? But that doesn't obviate the questions: What does it say about the character of the candidate that she felt a need to puff up her tough-guy credentials, which are wholly separate from her foreign-policy credentials, and that she couldn't back off the story even when it was pretty decisively discredited? There's message discipline, and then there's this. This feels like desperation.
Follow Bill Barol on Twitter: www.twitter.com/billbarol
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
She complained that the media had been to soft on Obama, yet there seems to be little outrage about this. The Clinton campaign says she "misspoke" & the press just rolls over & reports that she "misspoke". The truth is that she told a bald-faced lie, so why is the media using the euphemism that the campaign is feeding them? This isn't spin & it isn't hyperbole - it's outright dishonesty. Why are the media & her supporters willing to accept this kind of blatant behavior from a woman who wants to be president? If she's willing to lie about this, what else has she lied to us about & will she lie about in the future? And what does it say about her judgment that she chose to lie about something that was so easy to refute? Or is the ability to lie without flinching one of the criteria for passing the commander-in-chief threshold that Obama can't seem to meet?
What else has Hillary Clinton "misspoke" about?
She lied. It is just that simple and it's not the first time. Here's the YouTube moment...C
I was willing to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt on this one. I thought, well... She's traveled a lot so maybe she was mis-remembering some other sniper-fire experience she's had.
David Geffen was right: The Clintons lie with such ease. So do Mark Penn, Howard Wolfson, James Carville, Lanny Davis and all the others who want soooo badly to reclaim the Magic Kingdom. Come to think of it, the Republicans were right, too.
You bet.....an
There were no guns or gunfire in Bosnia, just people giving out flowers to vacationing Americans. Hillary should rememebr if she received flowers on her vacation or not.
I've heard that when couples are married long enough they start to look alike. Apparently in the case of the Clintons, they start to lie alike as well.
Oh everyone just lighten up It was a pretty good story now admit it. OK OK so what if it wasn't true, I mean like we really want to hear the truth, the truth is completely against american values and should be denounced and rejected where ever it's found. Youtube, i denounce and reject you for exposing the truth.
OK, since there is no other trip she had as 1st Lady where she could have been in any danger, this is ridiculous. Its not like she confused Bosnia for some other dangerous trip where she was under sniper fire. I'm a former Marine. You don't forget being shot at or hearing gun fire in a place that you shouldn't. This is a flat out LIE she told to look tough. Just like she voted for Iraq to look tough. But nooooooooo, some of you want to believe this so bad you'll buy any lie to feel better. And to paraphrase Ferraro, if she was a man there would be a countdown for her to exit the race. A man would be laughed of the stage after a lie so obvious and craven it sounds like a bar pickup line. Doesn't that sexist double-standard feel great ladies?
On a serious note. I was married to a woman like this. Scary! And for those of you that support this kind of behavior, good luck. May God be with you.
She may not even have lied about the incident, as she may not remember it clearly. But to pretend that she did remember it clearly and portray it in the most favorable possible light is even worse, since it means that she isn't honest with herself or with us about what she is certain of and what is in doubt, and because she can't admit when she's wrong. Nevertheless, this shouldn't be a big deal and should be taken in context, just as Rev. Wright's most controversial remarks should be. Too bad for all of us that the media is so inept.
DRHoen, I think Hillary is one of those people who is always "on send". That just means that language is used to "create realities" thought to be beneficial to oneself, and reality is so inconsequential as to be forgotten. (Just a fancy way to describe lying.) But I don't see that the context of Hillary's whopper and Dr. Wright's statements are related at all. What voters will think remains to be seen.
Giving her the biggest benefit of the doubt, which would be that she misremembered this, you have the following problems. She hasn't been shot at before that so called remembrance, or since. Now, that being the case, do you want a person with this kind of memory in the White House? Sounds waaaay too much like the dry drunk we have now, to me........
"She may not even have lied about the incident, as she may not remember it clearly."I would think being shot at would be something you would never forget? Oh I forgot we're taking about Hillary "Rambo" Clinton, this was just another day's work for her, getting shot at is just another hazard of the job when your the "Commander in Chief , Super Hero, First Lady" Gee, we never really know how safe we were when Hillary was protecting our backsides .
I'm convinced that Hillary is a pathological liar. She doesn't need the White House, she needs a good shrink.
Politicians are not saints. Obama is a politician too.
You are missing the point. She lied to bolster her 35 years of experience. Why do her lies not bother you? That story she told with such great detail a week ago, was just that, a story.
All of this time I thought she was lying, but it appears she needs to see a Doctor.
Got cut off. First, she states she and Joe Wilson traveled to Africa, which "paved the way for the president's trip the following year, which was historic." This was not true. Then, she negotiated opening Macedonia's borders in 1999 to let in refugees fleeing violence in Kosovo. However, the borders were opened the day before she got there. Now, she remembers 'landing under sniper fire...and ran to the vehicles', when actually she had a photo-op ceremony with a little girl. I have to think she actually has a memory problem. Seriously.
Really it's worse than that. When confronted with the fact that she was overstating her foreign policy experience she chuckled and said, "well, it's still more than Barack's."
Sorry, indie17, but it is true that Clinton traveled to Africa in a trip which "paved the way for the president's trip the following year, which was historic." Joe Wilson came along on that 2nd (11-day) trip more than a decade ago rather than on the first trip. I agree on the other two that Macedonia's borders were opened the previous day and though perhaps there were reports of snipers near the airport, as her memoir said 5 years ago, she most certainly did not land under fire and run to the vehicles.
How about Obama weasling himself into the immigration bill? Was that a character thing?
How about Hillary lying about her landing in Bosnia? Was that a memory thing or did she really believe it was sniper fire and there was no greeting ceremony? I know, left is right and black is white.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
