Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame (Woodward’s other half) is penning a book on Hillary Clinton titled “A Woman in Charge,” but couldn’t wait for its release to share his thoughts on the presidential candidate’s shaky relationship with the truth.

In light of evidence that her descriptions of landing in Bosnia under “sniper fire” were fabricated, Hillary and her campaign staff have chalked the incident up to a simple “misstatement” among millions of words. But as Hillary’s entire candidacy is based on the premise of having superior foreign policy experience to her opponents, and that claim has been revealed as a farce. When Barack Obama uttered words once spoken by Governor Deval Patrick, Hillary made a tremendous stink, claiming that if Obama’s campaign was based on words, the words should at least be his own. Then by your own judgement, Senator Clinton, your claimed foreign policy experiences should be your own.

An excerpt from Carl Bernstein’s forthcoming book indicates that this may not be only one misstatement, but the latest in a pattern of lies in Hillary Clinton’s public life.

“Since her Arkansas years, Hillary Rodham Clinton has always had a difficult relationship with the truth… [J]udged against the facts, she has often chosen to obfuscate, omit, and avoid.  It is an understatement by now that she has been known to apprehend truths about herself and the events of her life that others do not exactly share…

“Almost always, something holds her back from telling the whole story, as if she doesn’t trust the reader, listener, friend, interviewer, constituent—or perhaps herself—to understand the true significance of events…” (Bernstein, “A Woman in Charge”)

Today, on the Anderson Cooper 360 blog at CNN.com, Bernstein offered further analysis regarding Hillary’s Bosnia lies:

“When the facts surrounding such characteristic episodes finally get sorted out — usually long after they have been challenged — the  mysteries and contradictions are often dealt with by Hillary Clinton and her apparat in a blizzard of footnotes, addenda, revision, and disingenuous re-explanation: as occurred in regard to the draconian secrecy she imposed on her health-care task force (and its failed efforts in 1993-94); explanations of what could have been dutifully acknowledged, and deserved to be dismissed as a minor conflict of interest — once and for all — in Whitewater; or her recent Michigan-Florida migration from acceptance of the DNC’s refusal to recognize those states’ convention delegations (when it looked like she had the nomination sewn up) to her re-evaluation of  the matter as a grave denial of basic human rights, after she fell impossibly behind in the delegate count.”

Personally, I think the reaction by her campaign is almost more tasteless than lying about something that could so easily be refuted by numerous witnesses. Their response was to send an email citing specific “misstatements” Senator Obama had made. These charges, reports the New York Times, included Obama “saying that he was a law professor — he was a senior lecturer.”

When Obama said he was a law professor (and for the record, numerous lecturers refer to themselves–and are referred to by their students and colleagues–as “professor”), it wasn’t as though it turned out that he had actually been a janitor at a law school or the career counselor. He taught law. People commonly refer to those who teach at universities as “professor.” That was not a misstatement; it was word choice. Hillary’s misstatement was an outright lie.

“I made a mistake and, you know, I had a different memory,” she after the backlash in the media. Basically, prettier language than “I lied.” Remembering something differently and broadcasting your false memory as a means of furthering your candidacy are two very different “mistakes.”

“I have written about [the Bosnia experience] in my book and talked about it on many other occasions, and last week, you know, for the first time in 12 or so years misspoke,” she said on the air at a Pittsburgh radio station.

In a later press conference, the media jumped all over that 12-year claim. “I was joking — I mean, you know, gosh, lighten up guys,” she responded. “Obviously I say millions of words every week. There is a lot more room for error when you are talking as much as I am talking.”

“Lighten up guys?” “More room for error?” Look, your highness, whether you say five million words a day or fifty, a lie is a lie is a lie. We have had eight years of an administration that lacks any semblance of respect for the truth. We can’t afford eight more.

Hillary has excused herself, saying that the misstatement just “proves I’m human.”

Actually, Senator Clinton, it just proves that you’re a liar.


3 Responses to “Carl Bernstein: Hillary has “difficult relationship with the truth””  

  1. 1 jerry

    Wow, You’ve summed up my thoughts on the Bonsia thing perfectly.

    I was thinking, If I had been shot at I would remember it, I once had the police draw their guns at me and i freaked, but I remember it.

    When you read her statements about the harrowing corkscrew landing followed by the scurry to cover under fire, and compare them with the video, She clearly is lying about it.

    It isn’t a misstatement, it is a full blown non-litte white lie.

  2. 2 Anastacia Wilde

    Carl Bernstein, though a noted journalist, is another Hillary basher with good writing on his side. Eye witnesses on the same aircraft as Hillary and Chelsea 12 years ago stated publicly and on the record that there was sniper fire in the area where the Clintons were landing. They also reported that the original welcoming group had been moved from the tarmac for safety reasons. That once they landed the situation had changed and become safer does not remove the fact that it was a dangerous area and there was known sniper fire to be avoided. I find Bernstein’s over-reporting and exaggeration of the incident as bad as his stabbing at her consistently through his book, A Woman In Charge. I think the real reason Bernstein hates Hillary Clinton so much is because she wouldn’t grant him an interview. And why should she? Bernstein, like much of the mainstream press corps, have proven to be biased, vile, rude, and sexist vipers who would sell their grandmother for a dirty story about Hillary Clinton. Where I once had respect for him as one of the men who uncovered the Nixon Administration’s corruption, I have nothing but pity for him as another of the low-life animals who forget that barking foxes like himself are no match for the lion king that is Hillary Clinton. Long live Hillary!

  3. 3 montana_urban_legend

    Oh, ok Anastacia. So the queen you wish long life to isn’t a liar, she just couldn’t make the same case these uncited “eye witnesses” you mention did and instead just stated that she “remembered it differently”. And I’m supposed to be something other than underwhelmed by a candidate not strong enough to even do that? No wonder Obama keeps picking off her advantages. Unlike Obama, not only can Hillary not stand up to any special interest, she can’t even stand up for herself. And regarding Watergate, this might be illuminating. Of course, you can always call the charges sexist if you don’t like them. Which is nice.

Leave a Reply