Chris Wallace Grills CIA Director John Brennan on ISIS & Iran … “Didn’t You Give the American People and the President Give the American People a False Sense of Confidence Back in 2012 about Our Fight Against Islamic Terrorists at a Time”
Chris Wallace asks, Director, can we really say ISIS is losing?
Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace interviewed CIA Director John Brennan and asked some very direct questions when it came to the treats from both Iran and ISIS. Wallace asked why the Obama administration refuses to call or enemy for what they are, “Islamic extremists” and why President Obama and John Brennan have rejected identifying them for what they are. Brennan replied that ISIS was simply “a corruption of the Islamic faith.” REALLY? Director Brennen might want to read the Koran. It is not a corruption of the Islam, it is an interpretation that many agree with.
Brennan said the vast majority of Muslims reject ISIS’ actions. Wallace then directly confronted Brennan over why he and the president won’t openly talk about “Islamic extremism.” He asked why the administration is “ignoring” confronting them like that.
Brennan simply insisted that “it is a corruption of the Islamic faith.”
Sadly, the CIA director sounded more like a shill for Barack Obama than truly understanding and caring about the safety and protection of the United States. There were far too many references to touting Barack Obama and John Kerry during this interview as compared to folks like formal CIA director General David Petraeus and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who are persona non grata with the Obama administration.
WALLACE: Do you really think that the U.S. and Iran share interests?
BRENNAN: I think what’s Daesh, ISIL has been doing in the region is something that is counter to U.S. interests as well as counter to Iranian interests. And the Iranians are now engaged with their Iraqi partners to try to push back these forces of terrorism inside of Iraq.
So, Iran does have an interest in preventing further Daesh, ISIL terrorist attacks. At the same time, I think they need to be responsible as far as what they’re doing inside Iraq and not further inflaming that situation.
WALLACE: But your immediate predecessor in this job, General David Petraeus, said this week Iran is not an ally. It’s part of the problem, not part of the solution. And Benjamin Netanyahu, when he spoke to Congress, said the enemy of your enemy is not your friend, he is your enemy. [...]
WALLACE: General Lloyd Austin, the head of the U.S. Central Command, told Congress recently that ISIS is losing. But ISIS is still dug into Iraq and Syria. They now have affiliates across North Africa. They were possibly responsible for these terrible attacks this week in Tunisia and Yemen.
Director, can we really say ISIS is losing?
BRENNAN: Clearly, ISIS momentum inside of Iraq and Syria has been blunted and it has been stopped. So, they are not on the march as they were several months ago. And so, our working with the Iraqis and the Iraqis now trying to push back against it, it is having some great, I think, progress.
At the same time, this phenomenon of Daesh throughout the entire region is something that we need to work with our partners. We see what’s happening in other countries, in these franchises that are blowing up in Libya and other areas. They — they’ve claimed responsibility for attacks in Tunisia and Yemen.
This is something that clearly is not just restricted to Iraq and Syria. So, we cannot relent. We have to continue working with our partners in the region.
WALLACE: Here is what you said in 2012.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BRENNAN: If the decade before 9/11 was the time of al Qaeda’s rise and the decade after 9/11 was the time of its decline, then I believe this decade will be the one that sees its demise.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Director Brennan, weren’t you just flat wrong about that?
BRENNAN: No. And when we look at al Qaeda and we look at what has happened to al Qaeda and particularly the core of al Qaeda that was in the area of Afghanistan and Pakistan, they have taken some really big hits.
WALLACE: But — but, respectfully, sir, when you were saying this is the decade of al Qaeda’s demise, I don’t think most people thought you meant, well, yes, but there will be an offshoot called ISIS which spreads across the Middle East.
BRENNAN: This phenomenon that Daesh represents right now is a new one. It is one that has grown up in the past two years.
WALLACE: But it’s an offshoot of al Qaeda.
BRENNAN: We’ve done a lot against al Qaeda. We’ve been able to push them back. We’ve been able to prevent their attacks.
But there are these offshoots, as you say. This is a phenomenon that we’re going to have to deal with. And I do think over the next decade, this is going to be a long, hard fight.
WALLACE: I guess what I’m asking is didn’t you give the American people — and the president give the American people a false sense of confidence back in 2012 about our fight against Islamic terrorists at a time, perhaps not so coincidentally, when the president was running for reelection?
BRENNAN: What we said was al Qaeda was on the run. We said that al Qaeda was really bloodied and it was not the same organization that it was in 9/11, as well as in the years after that.
There was no sense that I think either I or the president or others gave to the American people that terrorism was going away. But we’ve made great progress against a lot of these groups that had plans in place to carry out attacks.
WALLACE: You talked recently of the ideology — your word — that fuels ISIS.
What is that ideology?
BRENNAN: It is a very twisted, perverted interpretation of a religion that they purport to represent, but in no way do they represent. It’s an ideology of violence. That’s what it is. It is not a religious ideology.
WALLACE: Well, Islam is certainly a part of it, isn’t it?
BRENNAN: They purport to be Muslims. But as I said, the overwhelming majority of Muslims throughout the world roundly denounce and condemn what they’re doing. And that’s why we should not give them any type of religious legitimacy.
WALLACE: This gets to your refusal and the president’s refusal to talk about Islamic extremism. (MORE)
Judge Jeanine Pirro: We Need a Woman President, But Not this Woman … Does Hillary Clinton Have The Integrity To Be President?
THE ANSWER IS NO …
Judge Jeanine Pirro slammed Hillary Clinton in her opening monologue on ‘Justice with Judge Jeanine’ stating, “As much as I want a woman president … But not this woman.” Judge Jeanine Pirro ripped Hillary Clinton for not having the integrity to be president of the United States. Hillary Clinton does not have what it takes to protect America and our Constitution, she is only concerned with covering her behind and protecting herself. The rules have never applied to Hillary. How could anyone think that she is what America needs after 8 years of Obama?
“As much as I want a woman president, the latest news of deleting emails and keeping communications with her highest level staff outside of government servers, ignoring it until it became clear it wasn’t going away, tells me that Hillary Clinton is not about transparency and is not about integrity,” Judge Jeanine stated.
My personal opinion is, if Hillary Clinton becomes president in 2016, this country is finished. It is bad enough that presidents do unethical things and lie while in office. But to knowingly elect Hillary Clinton, an individual who has a past of lies, unethical behavior and hiding things from the American people would mean this country does not care anyone. It would mean, as long as you are the first of anything, like Barack Obama being the first black president or Hillary, the first female president, everything else that makes up someone being an ethical and qualified candidate does not matter. Or as Hillary would say about her past and lack of qualifications … what different does it make.
Alright, so she used her private email and she communicated with her top level staff through their private emails. Who cares? Will this impact your decision on whether to vote for Hillary Clinton for president?
Of course not. You won’t even remember this kerfuffle next year. But the question is much deeper than that. The question becomes: does Hillary Clinton have the integrity to be the President of the United States of America, the leader of the free world? Does Hillary Clinton have the instincts to protect us, someone other than herself?
And as much as I want a woman president, the latest news of deleting emails and keeping communications with her highest level staff outside of government servers, ignoring it until it became clear it wasn’t going away, tells me that Hillary Clinton is not about transparency and is not about integrity, that she does whatever she wants regardless of the rules.
And nobody knows scandal or loopholes better than this woman who has danced with special prosecutors, federal investigators and subpoenas for most of her professional career. It’s simply part of her history.
Now Congressman Trey Gowdy, head of the Benghazi Committee, wants to give her the benefit of the doubt, saying but “it wouldn’t be reasonable for her to be on her way to Libya to discuss Libyan policy and there are no emails from the trip.”
And I’m going to shock you tonight, in spite of my law enforcement background, to me this email investigation is almost irrelevant.
Hillary Clinton knows exactly what she’s doing. What matters to her is making history by becoming the first woman president. The rules simply don’t apply to her.
Congressional Committee Investigating Benghazi Officially Requests Hillary Clinton Hand Over her Email Server
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE, RIGHT HILLARY?
The House committee investigating Benghazi headed by Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) has officially requested on Friday that Hillary Rodham Clinton turn her email server over to an independent third party to determine whether she and the Obama administration complied with open-records laws. At the heart of the issue is whether Hillary Clinton has previous complied with committee requests in turning over any and all documents when it comes to Benghazi, where four Americans, including US Ambassador Stevens. Seeing that Hillary Clinton had all of her emails on her own private server and has stated that she would not hand them over to a third party for review, it would appear that this request will fall on deaf ears.
Emails. what emails?
The committee investigating Benghazi formally requested Friday that Hillary Rodham Clinton turn her email server over to an independent third party so it can be scrutinized to determine whether she and the Obama administration complied with open-records laws.
Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy sent a letter to the former secretary of state’s personal lawyer making the request, which he said only comes after “exhaustive efforts” to get a look at her communications during the time of the 2012 terrorist attack on the diplomatic post in Libya’s second-largest city.
“Though Secretary Clinton alone is responsible for causing this issue, she alone does not get to determine its outcome,” the South Carolina Republican said.
House Republicans have sought access to the server since the news earlier this month that Clinton used a private email for official purposes during her time at State and her documents were not stored within the State Department, but instead on a private server off-site.
Clinton regained control over those emails but turned over thousands of pages of documents to the State Department for release — except personal emails that Clinton said during a press conference focus on more mundane matters like yoga, her daughter’s wedding and family vacations.
But the exclusion of thousands of emails from the State Department’s review prompted questions from Republicans that Clinton may have withheld official correspondence from her time at State. Gowdy was one of the first Republicans to call for Clinton to make the server available for review — a request Speaker John Boehner joined earlier this week.
“The committee must have objective assurances it, and by extension the House of Representatives as a whole, has received all relevant information requested and necessary for a thorough investigation into what happened before, during and after the attacks in Benghazi, Libya,” Gowdy wrote in the letter.
This scandal is going to dog Hillary all the way to 2016.
The State Department Finally Admits There is No Record of Hillary Clinton Signing the OF-109 Separation Statement (Video)
I would say UNREAL, but this is Hillary Clinton we are talking about …
The Politico is reporting that the State Department is finally admitting that they have no record of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s signed OF-109, a standard separation staement form declaring that she surrendered all official records before leaving her post in 2013. Imagine that. For the past week or so State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki has been performing the 5 D’s of dodge-ball (Dodge! Duck! Dip! Dive! And… dodge) that even Patches O’Houlihan would be proud of when it came to answering whether the form had been signed by Hillary. Hmm, wonder why someone wouldn’t sign a form declaring that they surrendered all official records before leaving their post when they had all their emails on their own personal server? But as Hillary would say, What difference does it make.
The State Department has no record that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed a standard form declaring that she surrendered all official records before leaving her post in 2013, a spokeswoman said Tuesday.
Critics of Clinton, including the Republican National Committee, said she might have committed a crime by signing the form despite having tens of thousands of work-related emails in a personal account. She provided copies of those emails to her former agency in December.
“We have reviewed Secretary Clinton’s official personnel file and administrative files and do not have any record of her signing the” form, State spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters at a regular briefing.
State Department: Hillary Clinton Did Not Sign Exit Statement
Sorry, but there is no way this woman should ever even be considered for the office of the presidency when you can’t even trust her as Secretary of State. After 8 years of Bill Clinton America was just so scandal weary and having just spent 8 years of Obama with too many scandals to name, how could this country stomach another Clinton?
Hillary Clinton Bombs in Email-Gate Presser … ‘Opted for Convenience’ … Will Not Allow Independent Commission to Examine All of the Emails or Server
IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT PRIVATE DELETED EMAIL IS …
Hillary Clinton underwhelms during presser on Email-gate. Her prepared
statements spin was one thing. Her Q & A was a disaster. If she thought she was going to put out the fire created by this controversy, she might want to think again. During her press conference she admitted to deleting person emails. Really, who is to say they were person, Hillary? Why should we be surprised? This is what it was like during the 8 years of the Bill Clinton presidency, one set of rules for us and a second set for the Clinton’s. So Hillary not only uses a private email account, by a private server as well. All this while she told members of the State Department to use government email. Same old Clinton games.
“When I got to work as secretary of State, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two,” she said, referring to the use of one mobile phone to check her email. “Looking back, it would have been better if I’d simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn’t seem like an issue.”
Clinton spoke at a highly anticipated Tuesday press conference that clocked in at just under 21 minutes, after keynoting a Women’s Empowerment Principles event at the United Nations in New York. The room she spoke in resembled a mosh pit, with dozens of reporters, along with 20-some cameras, packed inside. The former secretary of State appeared undaunted by the barrage of questions throughout the press conference. She opened with comments about the Clinton Foundation’s work to advance women’s rights, a nod to her preceding speech and a thinly veiled suggestion to the press to focus on something other than her emails.
After reviewing which emails to send to State, Clinton said she deleted personal correspondence, which her office says totaled 31,830 messages—more than half of the total emails she sent or received during her time as secretary of State. “I chose not to keep my private, personal emails—emails about planning Chelsea’s wedding or my mother’s funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends, as well as yoga routines, family vacations—the other things you typically find in inboxes. No one wants their personal emails made public, and I think most people understand that and respect that privacy.”
The HUFFPO has 13 questions for Hillary Clinton.
Yet in an act of defiance certain to stoke a new round of questioning, Clinton said she had no intention of turning over any of the approximately 30,000 emails she deemed “personal” for the sake of her family’s “privacy” — exchanges she said included planning for her daughter Chelsea’s wedding and her mother’s funeral, correspondence with her husband and her yoga schedule.
“Going through the emails, there were over 60,000 in total, sent and received. About half were work-related and went to the State Department, and about half were personal,” said Clinton. “I had no reason to save them, but that was my decision.
“For any government employee, it is that government employee’s responsibility to determine what is personal and what is work-related.”
When a reporter asked Clinton if she planned to allow an independent commission to examine all of the emails on her personal server, she responded with a flat — no way.
“The server contains personal communications from my husband and me,” Clinton said of the system, which was originally set up to handle Bill Clinton’s post-presidential correspondence. “And the server will remain private.”
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Admits President Obama Knew Hillary Clinton Had a Private Email Address
LIAR IN CHIEF ALERT: THAT DIDN’T TAKE LONG FOR THE WH TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN OBAMA’S LIES ON SUNDAY THAT HE JUST LEARNED ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON’S EMAILS …
Shocker … White House spokesman Josh Earnest stated today that President Barack Obama was aware of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email address, even though the Barack Obama himself said he first learned about her private account from news reports during an interview with CBS News yesterday. Can you say pathetic? As opined at The Blaze, Earnest tried to explain Monday what Obama really meant in an interview with CBS News, when asked if that mean there were no emails between the two. Seriously America, why would Obama, the do-called great orator need Earnest to explain Monday what he really meant? What’s the matter Barack, was your teleprompter not handy during the interview?
“The president, as I think many people expected, did over the course of his first several years in office trade emails with the secretary of state,” Earnest said. “I would not describe the number of emails as large, but they did have the occasion to email one another.”
“The point the president was making was not that he didn’t know Secretary Clinton’s email address. He did,” Earnest said. “But, he was not aware of the details of how that email address and that server had been set up or how Secretary Clinton and her team were planning to comply with the federal record law.”
Bull, the question was, when was the first time he learned that Hillary Clinton was using an email system outside the US government for official business while she was Secretary of State? Obama answered, the same time everybody else did. Sorry Charlie, you have passed yourself off as the first tech savvy, Internet using, social media, blackberry using president. You knew damn well that an email account not ending in .gov was not on a government server. To say otherwise not only make you a liar, but a bold-faced liar.
THIS ADMINISTRATION IS INCAPABLE OF TELLING THE TRUTH.
Mark Halperin Says, “I Now Think she’s not only easily the most Likely, I don’t think she’s any more the most Likely”
Mark Halperin of Bloomberg News expresses his now skepticism that Hillary Clinton is the most likely Democrat nominee for the 2016 presidential race. The libs on the ABC This Week panel scoffed at the notion; however, a recentt Fox News poll shows Hillarty Clinton’s honesty rating drop. Just 44% say the label “honest” describes her, while 52% disagree. This is down from just a year ago, by a 54-42 percent margin, voters said Clinton was “honest and trustworthy”. Emails are not a wonky subject, everyone can pretty much understand the issue at hand. Liberals think that this is a media driven scandal, but is it? After 8 years of a faux-transparency presidency, are Americans really going to want 4 more years of the same?
Bloomberg News’ Mark Halperin has changed his mind over Hillary Clinton’s chances of becoming president because of the news that Hillary used a private email while at the State Department and told ABC’s This Week, that she’s all but done as a candidate. That’s a pretty big turnaround over a story that hasn’t birthed any damning information about the former first lady at his time.
Halperin is now the unofficial leader of #ItstheEndOfHillaryClintonAsPresidentHooah! club.
MARK HALPERIN, BLOOMBERG NEWS: I said a few weeks ago on this show that I thought she was easily the most likely president of the United States. I now think not only is she because of this as a symptom and a cause, I now think she’s not only easily the most likely, I don’t think she’s any more the most likely.
I think it’s important to hold all politicians accountable for their actions, but Halperin’s breathless condemnation of Hillary Clinton is off the wall.
Barack Hussain Obama, The Most Uninformed President Ever …. Claims He Learned of Hillary Clinton Used a Private, Nongovernment Email Account as Secretary of State Through News Reports
SORRY OBAMA, YOU CAN ONLY USE THAT SAME EXCUSE 7 TIMES, NOT 8 …
From the most transparent presidency ever comes yet another scandal, this time its Hillary email-gate. Barack Obama was asked by Bill Plant of CBS News in a sit down interview when was the first time he learned that Hillary Clinton was using an email system outside the US government for official business while she was Secretary of State? Obama’s response, more BS … “Ah, the sane time everybody else learned it through news reports“. Seriously Mr. Obama, is that your final answer? Let me just say this … YOU ARE A LIAR! We are supposed to believe that Barack Obama, the most tech savvy president ever, never received an email from Hillary Clinton from her private email account for official business? REALLY? No one believes that. You mean the tech savvy Obama doesn’t know that a government account ends in .gov? But then again, the Obama presidency is the most transparent ever, because the Liar is Chief says so. Are we really supposed to believe that if there was no news outlets, Obama would know nothing?
President Barack Obama said it was through news reports that he first learned that Hillary Rodham Clinton used a private, nongovernment email account while serving as his secretary of state.
In an interview Saturday with CBS News, Obama said he’s glad that Clinton has instructed that those emails about official business be disclosed. He also maintained that his administration remains the most transparent ever.
Clinton has drawn criticism for using a private server during the four years she was the nation’s top diplomat. Her sidestepping official government email also raises questions about whether all pertinent messages have been preserved as well as turned over for congressional investigations and lawsuits.
President Obama only learned of Hillary Clinton’s private email address use for official State Department business after a New York Times report, he told CBS News in an interview.
CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante asked Mr. Obama when he learned about her private email system after his Saturday appearance in Selma, Alabama.
“The same time everybody else learned it through news reports,” the president told Plante.
Mr. Obama’s comments follow a long week of media scrutiny surrounding Hillary Clinton’s private email address and the “home-brewed” server that hosted it.
“The policy of my administration is to encourage transparency, which is why my emails, the BlackBerry I carry around, all those records are available and archived,” Mr. Obama said. “I’m glad that Hillary’s instructed that those emails about official business need to be disclosed.”
Barack Obama is either the biggest and most pathetic liar we have ever had the misfortune as having as President of the United States or he is the stupidest, most uniformed and laziest one. Take your pick America. Barack Obama is telling us once again that he just learned about the latest scandal during his presidency regarding Hillary Clinton using private email account and server from the media. Sound familiar, as Yogi Berra would say, “its like deja vu all over again”. Didn’t Obama use this same lame excuse and lie for the following scandals:
- WH spox Carney says that President Obama only found out about the VA scandal recently from news reports. (VIDEO) But he of course was lying, he knew since 2008.
- Obama said that he first learned about IRS-gate from the the same news reports that I think most people learned about this.
- Obama and his surrogates have claimed he learned of several other scandals from broadcast or print news stories also include Operation Fast and Furious.
- Obama also said he only learned in the news the DOJ’s seizure of two months of Associated Press phone records.
- NSA Denies Obama Knew Of Spying On German Leader
- HHS Chief: President Didn’t Know Of Obamacare Website Woes Beforehand
- Obama Claims He Didn’t Know About the Petraeus Investigation
Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Department … Possibly Breaking Federal Records Act
HILLARY CLINTON, YOU GOT STATE DEPT EMAIL …
Hillary Clinton has not even announced that she is running for president in 2016, but the scandals are mounting. The New York Times is reporting that Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state. How is this possible that a Secretary of State could be allowed to use private email and no one noticed at the time? With all the emails that Hillary sent to conduct government business no one noticed the Hotmail account? So how do we know that all of Hillary’s emails are accounted for and any FOIA requests are legitimate?
Who knew I was supposed to use a govt email account?
Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, State Department officials said, and may have violated federal requirements that officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record.
Mrs. Clinton did not have a government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department. Her aides took no actions to have her personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the Federal Records Act.
It was only two months ago, in response to a new State Department effort to comply with federal record-keeping practices, that Mrs. Clinton’s advisers reviewed tens of thousands of pages of her personal emails and decided which ones to turn over to the State Department. All told, 55,000 pages of emails were given to the department. Mrs. Clinton stepped down from the secretary’s post in early 2013.
Is this what America needs, another president who has no understanding of transparency? HARDLY. Sorry, this woman has way too much baggage to even think of running for president. America needs to heal, not go down a further path of destruction.
I know, Benghazi, far right wing conspiracy, no nothing Senator, do nothing Secretary of State, taking money from foreign countries while acting as Sec. of State … What difference does it make.
WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARD … Hillary Clinton Lied Too About Taking Sniper Fire … Do We Hold News Anchors to a Higher Standard Than a Presidential Wannabe?
HOW GREAT IS THE BELOW VIDEO … NBC’S LYIN’ BRIAN WILLIAMS COVERING A NEWS STORY ABOUT LIAR HILLARY CLINTON AND HER BOSNIA “SNIPER FIRE” LIE …
Can you say double standard? How is it that we hold a news anchor to a higher standard than that of a presidential wannabe? The below VIDEO is a classic and should have already been made into a 2016 political ad to run against Hillary Clinton. Remember when Hillary Clinton lied about being caught in “sniper fire in 1995″ during her 2008 presidential campaign when she got off a plane in Bosnia? But it gets even worse for Hillary Clinton, her own bubby, Bubba Clinton blamed her Bosnia mistake on age and fatigue. OUCH! Bill Clinton said back in 2008, “some of them [women] will forget something when their tired at 11 o’ clock at night.” I wonder how former President Bill Clinton feels about that same comment in 2015, seven years later?
Even though coverage of the Clinton fib was dying down, Clinton spoke in defense of his wife, bringing back up the subject multiple times on the campaign trail. He said that his wife’s age might have played a part in the error while as she fought Barack Obama, a much younger and more energetic opponent in.
We are still waiting for the MSM to call Hillary Clinton out and go after her lie in the same manner that they did with Brian Williams. And we are still waiting. I know, I know … “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE.”
Sharyl Attkisson: Why Did Hillary Survive a Brian Williams-like Tale?
Emmy Award-winning journalist Sharyl Attkisson, who covered the story of Hillary Clinton’s lie about being shot at in Bosnia, says she can’t understand how the former secretary of state weathered the scandal while NBC News anchor Brian Williams may not.
“To me, part of the irony is if Brian Williams isn’t able to survive it — that we think it’s important enough when somebody gives this kind of story that he would lose his career — yet we didn’t care enough to have it matter that much with someone who became our secretary of state,” Attkisson said Monday on “The Steve Malzberg Show” on Newsmax TV.
“[A person] we relied on for honest answers and truths in the aftermath of Benghazi and so on.”
Sorry Hillary, no one, no one would ever misremember being shot at by a sniper …
Video shows tarmac welcome, no snipers. … Poilitifact rules Hillary Clinton’s pantsuit on fire.
How is it that we would hold NBC new anchor Brian Williams to a higher standard? Seriously, does one who aspires to the the President of the United States get a free pass because she is Hillary Clinton even though she has pretty much claimed the same lie as Brian Williams? Where is the MSM clamoring for her head?
During an introduction to a foreign policy speech on Iraq on March 17, 2008, Sen. Hillary Clinton reminisced about her days as first lady and a trip to Tuzla, Bosnia, she made in March 1996.
“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.”
But that’s not what happened, as demonstrated by CBS News video that shows Clinton arriving on the tarmac under no visible duress, and greeting a child who offers her a copy of a poem. The Washington Post Factchecker also turned a skeptical eye on Clinton’s comments, reporting that a review of more than 100 news stories from the time documented no security threats to the First Lady.
CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson, who covered Clinton on the Bosnia visit, wrote of her memories of the trip : “To be sure, it was not the ‘safest’ trip for a first lady to take: there were serious risks in traveling to Bosnia, even for the president’s wife under the vigilant protection of the U.S. military. It took some guts for her to go. But I don’t recall, and did not note, any close calls on this trip with sniper fire or any other dangers. “
Immediately after the speech that day, a reporter asked Clinton about remarks from others on the trip who suggested the trip was for photo opportunities rather than foreign policy and she stood by her account of sniper fire. “There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars. Now, that is what happened,” she said.
But she retracted the remarks a week later, telling the Philadelphia Daily News editorial board on March 24, 2008, that she “misspoke,” correcting herself to say she had been told there was a threat of sniper fire in the area. The next day she told reporters, “So I made a mistake. That happens. It shows I’m human, which for some people is a revelation.”