AP, FNC's Hume Pick Up Hillary's Bosnia Fib; Will Rest of Media Follow?

Photo of Rich Noyes.
By Rich Noyes | March 20, 2008 - 11:58 ET

On Wednesday, Fox News became the first news network to pick up on the contradiction between claims made by Senator Hillary Clinton about her 1996 trip to Bosnia and the reality reported by journalists at the time. In a speech on Monday, Clinton asserted that “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 no news outlet mentioned sniper fire at the time, and TV news footage from the day of Clinton’s visit, which was first posted Tuesday on NewsBusters, shows Clinton and her daughter walking around without helmets, greeting various people including the acting President of Bosnia and a Bosnian child who read a little speech for the then-First Lady.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

On FNC's March 19 Special Report, anchor Brit Hume picked up on the NewsBusters item and credited the Media Research Center: “And the controversy continues over whether Hillary Clinton, as she said again this week, had to duck sniper fire while arriving in Bosnia back in 1996. The comedian Sinbad, who was with her, has ridiculed the idea, but the Clinton camp has said he was just being funny. Now, though, the Media Research Center has scanned the coverage at the time by reporters who were on the trip, and found no mention of any shooting. The CBS report even showed her arriving in Bosnia smiling and walking alongside daughter Chelsea. Senator Clinton had claimed there was no greeting ceremony and, quote, ‘we just ran with our heads down.’ But the network pictures showed her being greeted by the acting President of Bosnia and a group of Bosnian children."

So far, only a few in the mainstream media have reported on the discrepancy. The Associated Press on Monday put out a detailed comparison of what they termed “The Spin” being provided by Mrs. Clinton and her campaign, compared with “The Facts” as ascertained by the Associated Press. After noting the claim of sniper fire Clinton made in her speech, the AP related how she stuck by her version afterwards:

Questioned about it later at a news conference, Clinton said she was moved into the cockpit of the C-17 cargo plane as they were flying into Tuzla Air Base, Bosnia-Herzegovina. "Everyone else was told to sit on their bulletproof vests," she said. "And we came in, in an evasive maneuver. ... There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars. Now, that is what happened."

She gave a somewhat different account in her book, "Living History."

In it, she said there were reports of fire but does not mention hearing or seeing it on her way to Tuzla.

"Due to reports of snipers in the hills around the airstrip, we were forced to cut short an event on the tarmac with local children, though we did have time to meet them and their teachers and to learn how hard they had worked during the war to continue classes in any safe spot they could find," she wrote.

Under the heading of “The Facts, ” the March 17 dispatch pointed out:

An AP story at the time reported: "Security was tight — fighter jets accompanied her C-17 cargo plane to Tuzla — but officials said the first lady took no extraordinary risks on the trip." There was no mention of sniper fire....

AP reported that on the plane into Bosnia from Germany: "Mrs. Clinton chatted with journalists and crewmen during the 90-minute flight, wandering around the spacious plane in a black pantsuit — a contrast to the blue jeans and other road-ready clothes worn by most everybody else on the plane.

"The first lady spent quite a bit of time in the cockpit, with pilot Cheryl Beineke, one of just four female C-17 pilots in the U.S. Air Force."

As for the rest of the media, ABC’s Jake Tapper briefly blogged about the issue in his “Political Punch” blog, as did the New York Daily News’s Mark McAuliff and the Wall Street Journal’s Amy Chozick, who noted how Clinton stuck by her story when pressed: “There was no greeting ceremony and we were basically told to run to our cars. Now that is what happened.” (The Washington Post's Mary Ann Akers wrote about Sinbad's pooh-poohing of the dangers in Bosnia before Clinton's speech on Monday.)

Yesterday afternoon, the Wall Street Journal’s Susan Davis measured Mrs. Clinton’s claims against just-released logs of her activities as First Lady:

According to the first lady’s personal schedule detailing the trip, just two of the more than 11,000 official pages of personal schedules released today, this is what the day looked like:

Clinton landed at Tuzla Air Base at 8:45 a.m. on March 25, 1996. She was greeted by Bosnian officials and a seven-year-old Bosnian girl whose name was redacted, and a 7th grade class. The girl read Clinton a poem. Clinton and her aides had a 10-minute meeting with acting Bosnia President Ejup Ganic and his aides. There was an hour-long “notables roundtable” moderated by then-Ambassador John Menzies followed by a 30-minute closed-door meeting with the heads of unnamed non-governmental organizations, and a 30-minute closed door meeting with military officials.

The first lady also toured Camp Alicia, ate lunch with the troops, toured Camp Bedrock, attended the USO show where the aforementioned Sinbad and musician Sheryl Crow (misspelled “Crowe” in the schedule) performed, followed by an hour visit at the general’s house before it was wheel’s up at 5:45 p.m. and Clinton was on her way to Italy. The schedule doesn’t indicate Sinbad was with Clinton at any of the meetings or events outside of the USO performance. There is no mention of security threats.

Unless there's something I'm missing, Mrs. Clinton appears to have been caught in a fib. Now, will the rest of the media attempt to hold her accountable, or will she go on regaling campaign audiences with tales of her bravery under fire in Bosnia?

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

In the spirit of her hubby,

In the spirit of her hubby, Slick Willy, it all depends on what you consider "under fire". My head is spinning with so many installments of "Lies of the Libs"...

she WAS under fire!!!!!

From the vast right wing conspiracy!!

hey keep me outta this...

...I swear I wasn't there...

v

You just don't get it

I can't believe you don't understand the truth behind Hillary's claims.  It's so obvious she is telling the truth.  You see, the sun is made of fire and the arrived when the sun was in the sky.  Therefore they were "under" fire when they landed.  How dare you dare question the integrity of a Clinton.  You should be ashamed.

 

 

 

 

There are 10 types of people.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Eyewitness

I was there the day she landed at Tuzla. The reason there was no greeting party is simple. Colonel Patton requested a few hundred airmen to form up on the tarmac. I was with him in his office when his exec told him they couldn't find any volunteers.

He chose not to order the formation...good call.

Chaplain Lee M. Thompson

ROFL....Good call indeed.

ROFL....Good call indeed.

Will the msm hold Hillary

Will the msm hold Hillary accountable to her intentional lies?

Have they ever?

They never have before, in fact they cover or embellish for the Clintons they aren't going to start calling for the truth now...it would be up to one of the candidates to bring this outrageous lie out and bring attention to the matter.

I'm not holding my breath....

And even if they did... all

And even if they did... all she'd have to do is get one of Obama's speech writers to write a speech about how we don't understand because we simply aren't her. T hen we could put her up there with Lincoln and call it a day! ;-D -Suzanne

jg... As they

jg...

As they say...spot-on.

ROFL! 

"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide"

the definition of fire

It depends on what the meaning of the word "fire" is. You see, if by "fire" she really meant "applause" then her statement was true. But if you take "fire" to literally mean "fire" then her statement was false.

I shall leave it to the American people to decide what context she really meant.

Come one guys...  I

Come one guys...

 I think the spitball snipers from the 7th grade class count.  Someone could have taken out an eye.

 Lostone

I'll post it again...

You can tell when a Clinton is lying because their lips are moving.

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

Another Lie

"Clinton said she was moved into the cockpit of the C-17 cargo plane as they were flying into Tuzla Air Base, Bosnia-Herzegovina."

That's another lie by Mrs. Clinton. Why would the First Lady be moved to an area of the plane that is the most obvious target? The cockpit would be the LAST place the First Lady would enter if there were a threat of small arms fire. C-17's do not have armored cockpits or bulletproof windows. C-17’s rely on speed and maneuverability to minimize the effects of anti-aircraft fire on the plane and it’s occupants. As the cockpit is in the front of the plane, it would receive the majority of small arms fire.

If anyone has received military training (as I have), they would understand just how hard it is to hit a target that is moving 100 miles an hour or more and is several hundred feet in the air, let alone moving rapidly up and down and/or side to side like planes do when on approch. If you were lucky enough to hit your target, the rounds would not hit the center or aft part of the plane, they would strike the front as the plane would literally fly into the rounds and not vice versa.

Also, a sniper rife is the last weapon of choice against a rapidly moving target like a plane. You need a fully automatic weapon that is capable of firing hundreds of rounds just to have a small chance of hitting your target. A single shot sniper rifle wouldn't be used unless you A) wanted to waste ammunition and B) reveal your firing position to ground forces. I don’t know anyone who would be willing to do that just in the hope of scoring a one in a billion shot against an aircraft. Unlike Mrs. Clinton, Serbian troops were not that stupid.

(on edit: That's C-17's and not C-47's)

Sit on your butt.

"Everyone else was told to sit on their bulletproof vests"

Another lie that's straight out of Hollywood! If under fire, the occupants wouldn't be told to “sit on” their flack jackets as the floor of an aircraft is composed of multiple layers of aluminum skins, struts, braces, fittings, tubing, wires, etc. That puts a lot of metal between you and a bullet. This enormously decreases the chance of a bullet penetrating the body of an aircraft and striking an occupant.

In comparison, the sides of an aircraft is composed of a single, thin layer of aluminum and regularly spaced struts that are less than a few centimeters thick and is, therefore, a lot less likely to protect you from small arms fire. If you were to be subject to small arms fire while aboard an aircraft, you would be told to wear your bulletproof armor and crouch down as low as possible as to put as much metal between you and any possible bullet. You wouldn't be told to sit on your armor as that would negate any and all possible protection from that armor.

Thanks Cobra! I thought,

Thanks Cobra! I thought, in the last thread on this topic, Snipers? What the heck could snipers (single bullet to the head?) do against a plane? (single bullet to the head?) would be usesless against a plane, but hey, what do I know?

How did Ron Brown come into

How did Ron Brown come into this?

v

You're welcome!

You're welcome!

Snipers would never fire at planes, trains, or even automobiles. That only happens in Holywood.

Do you really know whether

Do you really know whether it's a fib or not without having talked to someone in authority?

Are you kidding me Bal?

Hillary's exact account of the incident went like this:

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.

Yet the original footage clearly shows her strolling slowly along, waving at fans, Chelsea following without so much as a guard standing next to her.

 

Right, candance...doesn't

Right, candance...doesn't look to me like they are running, heads down, to the vehicles. (Do you think the Secret Service would have allowed that?) And even if the adults didn't care, what moron would have brought that little girl out there if there was sniper fire?

So there's NO WAY you could

So there's NO WAY you could have this wrong.

no Bal

The video shows her leaving the plane at the airport, clearly not acting in the way she described.

And I find it very hard to believe that it was a slipup of memory. Someone would remember the difference between sniper or no sniper.

Jeez, bal, video isn't good

Jeez, bal, video isn't good enough for you? How the heck do you equate standing there smiling, shaking hands, with running with heads down to the cars???? Did they run, heads down, after the little greeting on the tarmac? Or before? I guess there's no way to prove they're not all just holograms.....

Well, candance, I guess if you weren't there in person, you don't have a leg to stand on. And who are you going to believe...Hillary or your lying eyes?!?!?!

OK, bal, how about this: Sinbad, who was with her, told a WaPo blogger in an interview:

I never felt that I was in a dangerous position. I never felt being in
a sense of peril, or 'Oh, God, I hope I'm going to be OK when I get out
of this helicopter or when I get out of his tank.'"

At what point, if any, short of HRC herself admitting, it would you admit she might be, shall we say, exaggerating?

 

Here you go, bal...why don't

Here you go, bal...why don't you watch the video, and tell us if YOU see anyone running with their heads down....

That's easy

How do we know that she's fibbing? That's easy. We simply use the available visual and written evidence and apply logical reasoning to arrive at a conclusion. That's call "deciding for yourself" and it is how juries make determinations as to someone's honesty and truthfulness in their testimony. And guess what? It works well!

On the flip side, do you have any evidence at all that Mrs. Clinton is NOT fibbing about this matter? What evidence, other than her word, do you offer in support of her statements? Did you, or anyone else, talk to someone in authority and conclude that she was being truthful? Did Mrs. Clinton, or any MSM reporter, go to the Balkans and find the sniper that was supposed to be threatening her with sniper fire? Is there any documentary evidence that shows a sniper was even in the area during the time in question? Is there any evidence AT ALL that would tend to support her statements, including supporting statements by her own daughter who accompanied her on this allegedly hazardous trip?

Someone in authority? 

Someone in authority?  Meaning whom?  Hillary herself?  One of Hillary's erstwhile staff lackeys who now happens to be one of her campaign lackeys?  Yeah, we should expect a credible answer from one of them, eh?  Every time Hillary tries to take credit for something she didn't achieve or hardships she never overcame, Clinton apologists insist that the Sinbads and the David Trimbles of the world are the ones who are to have their accounts called into question.  Hillary was once just an annoyance, now she's a laughingstock.

YEAH! JUST ASK SINBAD!

He might be a goofball, but he's no serial liar, murderer & rapist like the Clintons.

Let's see, we have

Let's see, we have Hillary's own words now contradicted by every report of the facts of the event, including here own schedule, and pictures and video. What, do we need the DNC to release a statement that she lied before you can accept the obvious truth?

www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.

"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi

Bal, that wasn't very well

Bal, that wasn't very well thought out, even by the undemanding standards of typical liberal "wisdom."

How about - accounts by eyewitnesses? Subject matter experts weighing in? Video footage? How about the preponderance of her past veracity?

...someone in authority? 

(Dr. Evil Voice: "...right...")

Take your choice

One of two thing must be true:

A)  She is lying about how dangerous this trip was, or

B)  She is a criminally bad parent for unnecessarily putting her only child in mortal jeopardy.

Checkmate

Perfect summation.  Pantsuit and her lackeys have effectively tied themselves in the proverbial Gordian Knot over this issue.   

She's a Lawyer, Sorry "One of the Smartest Lawyers"

Ask her the typical trial lawyer question:
"Mrs. Clinton, is it true you have stopped throwing lamps & ashtrays at your husband?"

Photo Op?

What comes to mind is a previous photo of Mr. Kerry with combat gear being shot at.  Hilary has no credibility just as Kerry and all his "war and combat awards" for his "bravery" in Viet Nam.  One would assume that Hilary is in line to be awarded a military Combat Award for her bravery under fire.  That would make me puke!

 

Come to think of it, she and her scum bucket hubby make me puke on a regular basis.  Pass the antacid pills.