Posted by Jed Lewison on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 5:25 AM Pacific

Hillary Clinton did not misspeak -- she spoke deliberately

You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement.
-- Hillary Clinton's "explanation" of her false tale

Hillary Clinton made false claims about her trip to Bosnia not just once, but several times -- in at least three different months. That's not misspeaking, it's not an accident. It's a deliberate pattern. Let's review:

Jan. 2, 2008: HRC tells Vieira she was first American in post-war Bosnia


Bill Clinton was in Tuzla two months before his wife, on Jan. 13, 1996

1. January 2: Clinton told NBC's Meredith Vieira "I was the first high-profile American to go into Bosnia after the Dayton Peace Accords." That claim was false -- Bill Clinton visited Tuzla on January 13, 1996, one month after the Dayton Peace Accords were signed.

2. February 29: Clinton said that during her trip to Bosnia the welcoming ceremony "had to be moved inside because of sniper fire," a claim we now know to be false.

3. March 17 speech: Clinton repeated the Bosnian sniper fire tale, throwing in some additional detail about running from the plane to the cars -- another false claim.

4. March 17 press availability: Clinton stood by her version story, even when pressed by reporters.

5. Also on March 17: Clinton twice used former Army Secretary Togo West to defend her version of events, first in the introduction to her speech and then during her press availability.

I don't know how anyone could look at that and say Clinton's excuse adequately addresses the reality of what happened. On multiple occasions during a three-month span, she made similar false claims about the same event -- and it's possible she made others of which we are unaware.

It's clear that her statements were deliberate, and her use of both Togo West and Lissa Muscatine as third-party validation of her version of events underscores that point.

That does not mean, however, she lied. It's possible that she essentially imagined a different version of events. She may have convinced herself her story was true and created a false memory.

At this point, one can only speculate what real story is. But it's absolutely clear that Clinton's spin yesterday about misspeaking was inadequate.

This is an important issue because it goes straight to the question of foreign policy experience and judgment that she claims to have in such abundance.

If she was lying, why was she lying? If she believed something to be true that was in fact false, did anybody around her try to refresh her memory? Both Togo West and Lissa Muscatine surely knew that Clinton's claims were false.

If they did say something to Clinton, were they rebuffed?

If they didn't try to correct the record was it because they were afraid?

One thing is certain after George W. Bush -- we need a Commander-in-Chief who is firmly grounded in reality. When he or she makes a mistake, as will happen, he or she must also possess the type or personality and character that encourages subordinates to correct that mistake.

If the people around the President are afraid to speak truth to power, how will we ever get out of Iraq without making things worse than they currently are?

And if Clinton's statement turn out to have merely been lies, do we want another President in whom we can place not trust?

We know Clinton was wrong. What we don't know is whether she was lying or imagining things that were untrue. And isn't that the story of the Bush Presidency?

Hillary Clinton did not misspeak -- she spoke deliberately
You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement.
-- Hillary Clinton's "explanation" of her false tale

Hillary Clinton made false claims about her trip to Bosnia not just once, but several times -- in at least three different months. That's not misspeaking, it's not an accident. It's a deliberate pattern. Let's review:

Jan. 2, 2008: HRC tells Vieira she was first American in post-war Bosnia


Bill Clinton was in Tuzla two months before his wife, on Jan. 13, 1996

1. January 2: Clinton told NBC's Meredith Vieira "I was the first high-profile American to go into Bosnia after the Dayton Peace Accords." That claim was false -- Bill Clinton visited Tuzla on January 13, 1996, one month after the Dayton Peace Accords were signed.

2. February 29: Clinton said that during her trip to Bosnia the welcoming ceremony "had to be moved inside because of sniper fire," a claim we now know to be false.

3. March 17 speech: Clinton repeated the Bosnian sniper fire tale, throwing in some additional detail about running from the plane to the cars -- another false claim.

4. March 17 press availability: Clinton stood by her version story, even when pressed by reporters.

5. Also on March 17: Clinton twice used former Army Secretary Togo West to defend her version of events, first in the introduction to her speech and then during her press availability.

I don't know how anyone could look at that and say Clinton's excuse adequately addresses the reality of what happened. On multiple occasions during a three-month span, she made similar false claims about the same event -- and it's possible she made others of which we are unaware.

It's clear that her statements were deliberate, and her use of both Togo West and Lissa Muscatine as third-party validation of her version of events underscores that point.

That does not mean, however, she lied. It's possible that she essentially imagined a different version of events. She may have convinced herself her story was true and created a false memory.

At this point, one can only speculate what real story is. But it's absolutely clear that Clinton's spin yesterday about misspeaking was inadequate.

This is an important issue because it goes straight to the question of foreign policy experience and judgment that she claims to have in such abundance.

If she was lying, why was she lying? If she believed something to be true that was in fact false, did anybody around her try to refresh her memory? Both Togo West and Lissa Muscatine surely knew that Clinton's claims were false.

If they did say something to Clinton, were they rebuffed?

If they didn't try to correct the record was it because they were afraid?

One thing is certain after George W. Bush -- we need a Commander-in-Chief who is firmly grounded in reality. When he or she makes a mistake, as will happen, he or she must also possess the type or personality and character that encourages subordinates to correct that mistake.

If the people around the President are afraid to speak truth to power, how will we ever get out of Iraq without making things worse than they currently are?

And if Clinton's statement turn out to have merely been lies, do we want another President in whom we can place not trust?

We know Clinton was wrong. What we don't know is whether she was lying or imagining things that were untrue. And isn't that the story of the Bush Presidency?

The Jed Report Home Page

© Jed Lewison