Bay Buchanan provided an "extreme makeover" of Hillary and Chelsea Clinton's 9-11 accounts
SUMMARY: On CNN's Situation Room, Bay Buchanan falsely claimed that Hillary Clinton said "her daughter [was] out jogging" on September 11, 2001, "and stopped near the [World Trade Center] towers." Buchanan asserted that Clinton "fabricated" this story. However, Clinton did not say that her daughter jogged near the World Trade Center that day.
In a May 24 appearance on CNN to promote her book The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton (Regnery, May 2007), Bay Buchanan, a Republican strategist and senior adviser to presidential hopeful Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), falsely claimed that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) said "her daughter [was] out jogging" on the day of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks "and stopped near the [World Trade Center] towers." Buchanan asserted that Clinton "fabricated" the story. In fact, in the interview Buchanan was referring to, Clinton did not claim that her daughter had jogged near the World Trade Center that day.
On the May 24 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, Buchanan claimed that Clinton, following 9-11, "went on national television and fabricated where her daughter was, talked about how her daughter [was] out jogging that morning and stopped near the towers, heard the planes crash. You could imagine how traumatic that would be for this young woman, and we all feel enormous compassion." Buchanan continued: "It was fabricated. It was all made up. Chelsea herself says she never left the apartment that morning. And so what kind of character would get on national -- a mother would get on national TV and make up stories about her daughter?"
Buchanan's account is inconsistent with the statements of both Hillary and Chelsea Clinton. Sen. Clinton said the following on the September 17, 2001, edition of Dateline NBC:
CLINTON: She'd gone, what she thought would be just a great jog. She was going to go down to Battery Park, she was going to go around the towers. She went to get a cup of coffee and -- and that's when the plane hit.
JANE PAULEY (host): She was close enough to hear the rumble.
CLINTON: She did hear it.
PAULEY: And to see the smoke in person, not on television.
CLINTON: No. Of course, Bill was in Australia. And, you know, he was so upset by what he was seeing on television that I didn't want to tell him that I couldn't find her until I found her. I told him that, you know, everything's fine, don't worry. But I couldn't do it with the level of assurance that I needed until I could find her a couple of hours later.
As the transcript reveals, Sen. Clinton did not say -- as Buchanan falsely claimed -- that Chelsea was "out jogging that morning and stopped near the towers, heard the planes crash"; rather, that Chelsea "was going to go around the towers." In addition, Buchanan's assertion that Chelsea said she "never left the apartment that morning" is contradicted by a November 9, 2001, UPI article about a piece Chelsea wrote in Talk magazine:
"When the World Trade Center collapsed on Sept. 11, I was 12 blocks away, (and) nothing has been the same since," Clinton wrote in the December/January issue of Talk magazine, on sale Friday in New York.
[...]
Clinton had been staying with her high school friend Nicole Davison in her apartment near Union Square for a few days in September before she went to England to study at Oxford. After they had coffee together, Davison went to work and Clinton returned to the apartment.
Davison called Clinton with the news of the first plane that crashed into the World Trade Center. Clinton turned on the television and watched the second plane crash into the second WTC tower, and tried to reach her mother in Washington, but after speaking to her assistant, the phone line went dead.
[...]
Panicked, Chelsea Clinton left the apartment and found herself running toward downtown "in the direction everyone else was coming from," in search of a public telephone. She was desperate to call her mother and her father, who was on a speaking tour in Australia.
Chelsea Clinton was downtown in line at a pay phone when she heard the rumble of the second tower collapsing. Later she found Davison and another friend, and the three spent the day walking uptown. Chelsea Clinton wrote that she had an "irrational medley of thoughts" running through her head.
According to the UPI account of Chelsea's article in Talk, she did leave the apartment that morning: first to have coffee, as her mother later recounted on Dateline, and again after she heard that the World Trade Center had been hit, when she attempted to find a pay phone and heard the rumble of the towers collapsing; she claimed that she was 12 blocks away from them.
After Lanny Davis, former special counsel to President Bill Clinton, challenged Buchanan's version of the events on The Situation Room, she responded: "It's all documented in the book." However, the account in The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton is also flawed:
As a United States senator, Hillary dropped another fictitious family story on the press. On NBC's Dateline, Senator Hillary Clinton reported that Chelsea was near danger the morning of September 11:
"She had gone on what she thought would be a great jog," Hillary explained. "She was going down to Battery Park, she was going to go around the Towers. She was going to get a cup of coffee and that's when the plane hit. ... She did hear it. She did."
"At that moment, she was not just a senator, but a concerned parent," the Today show's Katie Couric told viewers.
A few weeks later, an article appeared in Talk magazine in which Chelsea described where she was the morning of September 11. It was nowhere near the Towers, and bore no resemblance to what Hillary reported earlier on NBC. Chelsea was alone at a friend's apartment when the friend called to tell her what had happened. She then "stared senselessly at the television."
Buchanan claimed Sen. Clinton said, "She was going down to Battery Park, she was going to go around the Towers," when, according to the Dateline transcript in the Nexis database, Clinton actually said, "She was going to go down to Battery Park, she was going to go around the Towers." Buchanan's version of the quotation inaccurately implied that Clinton said Chelsea was on her way to Battery Park when the attacks occurred. Also, while Buchanan is correct in her statement that Chelsea was "alone at a friend's apartment" when she first learned that a plane had struck the World Trade Center, she did not mention that Chelsea left the apartment to get coffee earlier that morning, and got close enough to hear the rumble of the towers collapsing afterward.
The only source Buchanan cited to support her claims is syndicated columnist Dick Morris' book, Rewriting History (Regan Books, 2004), which Media Matters for America has also debunked.
During the same segment, Buchanan claimed that "after three years" as first lady, "52 percent of Americans believed she [Clinton] was a liar and 68 percent believed she had violated the law or done something wrong. She had done this on her own, yet she takes no responsibility for any of this." Buchanan repeated this claim during the May 28 edition of The O'Reilly Factor: "In three years in the public limelight as a first lady of the United States, half of America thought she was a liar, and two-thirds thought she had broken the law. Why is that? Or done something wrong."
Buchanan was apparently referring to a USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll conducted January 12-15, 1996. But in simply asserting that this survey found that most Americans believed "she was a liar" and "had violated the law or done something wrong," Buchanan left out the context of the poll: The questions pertained specifically to the Whitewater controversy, a series of investigations into a 1978 real estate deal involving the Clintons.
The poll asked:
Question qn26 (January 1996 Election Benchmark) 1/12/1996-1/15/1996
(Now we have a few questions about Whitewater and other matters that are being investigated concerning the Clintons.) Which of the following statements best describes your view of Hillary Clinton's actions in these matters -- Hillary Clinton did something ILLEGAL; she did something UNETHICAL, but NOTHING illegal; she did not do anything seriously wrong; or are you unsure?
Question qn29b (January 1996 Election Benchmark) 1/12/1996-1/15/1996
In your view, is...Hillary Clinton...telling the truth about Whitewater and the other matters being investigated, or is she lying?
Moreover, the poll was conducted during the Senate Whitewater hearings, which lasted 13 months and ended in June 1996, and less than two weeks before Hillary Clinton's January 26, 1996, testimony before a grand jury on the same matter. In September 2000, however, independent counsel Robert Ray concluded a six-year, $60 million investigation, which found that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the Clintons had committed any crimes in connection to the Whitewater controversy. According to the statement from Ray that accompanied the independent counsel's final report:
This office determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either President or Mrs. Clinton knowingly participated in any criminal conduct involving Madison Guaranty, C.M.S., or Whitewater Development or knew of such conduct. The evidence relating to their testimony and conduct, in connection with this investigation and other investigations involving the same entities, was also, in the judgment of this office, insufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that either of them committed any criminal offense, including perjury or obstruction of justice.
In addition, during the May 28 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, guest host John Kasich asked Buchanan why several Republican senators had praised Clinton's character and ability if she is "nothing but a chameleon," as Buchanan asserted in her book. Buchanan replied: "[I]n this town, if you bat your eyes a little bit and smile at some of these men, ego plays and they think, 'Isn't this terrific, this superstar likes me.' "
From the May 24 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
WOLF BLITZER (host): Bay, let's start with you. The title -- The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton -- you put "Rodham" in parentheses. Here's what you write on page 8: "Hillary Rodham Clinton is going to run for president as someone she is not. This talk of an evolving Hillary is part of an extreme makeover to get the old Hillary remodeled -- remolded, that is -- and repackaged into a marketable political force for 2008." All right, give us one piece of evidence why you say that.
BUCHANAN: Well, it's clear. There's an attempt here not only to hide the fact that she is a liberal, that she's from the far left part of her party, but also the character herself.
Just think back a few years ago, Wolf. She was the first lady of the United States. After three years in the public limelight, 52 percent of Americans believed she was a liar and eighty -- 68 percent believed she had violated the law or done something wrong. She had done this on her own, yet she takes no responsibility for any of this.
She has to make that image over, and she's done a very, very good job, but character stays with you. You don't move to another job and leave your character behind. And that's a critical aspect when you're running for president. We must know her true character.
[...]
BUCHANAN: This is a woman after 9-11 as a U.S. senator went on national television and fabricated where her daughter was, talked about how her daughter out jogging that morning and stopped near the towers, heard the planes crash. You could imagine how traumatic that would be for this young woman, and we all feel enormous compassion. It was fabricated. It was all made up. Chelsea herself says she never left the apartment that morning.
And so, what kind of character would get on national -- a mother would get on national TV and make up stories about her daughter? This is somebody --
BLITZER: I'm not familiar -- are you familiar with that story?
DAVIS: Not only --
BUCHANAN: The facts are there.
DAVIS: -- not only am I not familiar, but I do know with absolute certainty that both Clintons were dreadfully worried about not being able to reach Chelsea Clinton on the occasion of 9-11, and she was in the downtown area. I don't know where Bay is getting her facts, all right, but let me just go back to --
BUCHANAN: It's all documented in the book.
From the May 28 edition of The O'Reilly Factor:
JOHN KASICH (guest host): You've got [Sen.] John McCain [R-AZ], who says, and I quote, "I have no doubt that Senator Clinton would make a good president." Senator Lindsey Graham [SC], Republican, says she is smart, prepared, serious. [Sen.] John Warner [VA], sort of the dean of the United States Senate, Republican, conservative, says she has a remarkable core of inner strength. These are people who have worked with her for seven years. So if you got Republicans saying that, why do you say that she's nothing but a chameleon?
BUCHANAN: Because the extreme makeover began many years ago, John. She's been doing this. And in this town, you know, if you bat your eyes a little bit and smile at some of these men, ego plays and they think, "Isn't this terrific, this superstar likes me." But listen, in three years in the public limelight as a first lady of the United States, half of America thought she was a liar and two-thirds thought she had broken the law. Why is that? Or done something wrong. It's because of her own actions, decisions, poor judgments that she made. It's important that we examine that before we allow somebody to move ahead who has shown such poor judgment as she has in important positions. She's failed miserably at one thing after another.
"The only source Buchanan cited to support her claims is syndicated columnist Dick Morris' book, Rewriting History"
I think that explains it.
I wonder if Buchanan is equally as skeptical of Giuliani's "Thank God George Bush is President" comment?
Bay Buchanan is a political hack of the worst kind. She is trying to make money on a smear hit piece full of lies and distortions and even now bringing Chelsea Clinton into it. Does this women ahve any respect for even children of politicians. Chelsea is not a public official why is Bay even discussing her. Bay is a deplorable person.
Hold on.
While I think this latest Buchanan fib is rather pathetic I don't agree with your outrage regarding Chelsea. It is quite clear that wasn't "brought into it", she was simply the subject of a story, she was not the target of Buchanan's criticism.
Who are these mythical "Clintons," who are the Axis Around Which The Entire Universe Revolves?
Minutia irrelevancies by Buchanan in a book that will be lucky to be found in a used bookstore bargain bin by fall.........and dissected here as if it rises above that level.
Tommy,
I hate to agree with you but, Bay Buchanan (Senior Advisor to Tom Tancredo) and Tom are two of the most irrelevant republicans on the list.
Why does Blitzer even have her on?
Because Bay may be owed a favor by her CNN friends?
Yea, conservative CNN.
Buchanan's irrelevant. She's just a partisan preaching to the choir.
And all this minutia about Chelsea was here or there or whatever, who cares.
There are plenty of important issues to go after Senator Clinto n on.
but don't expect that from the far right. Their hatred of the Clintons clouds all rational thought just like the far left's hatred of Bush clouds theirs.
except i have very good reasons to dislike bush.
EHull's simply up to his old copying off his neighbor's answer sheet.
Tommy seems to have tired of being told that his nonsense about "why is this here, because it sure isn't important enough to be here" was not worthy of "being here".
Now EHull is taking his place like the good rightwinger he is.
Actually, it's being promoted on CNN as if it rises above that level, and that's why it's here.
Oh, c'mon Tommy. Just come out and say it. C'mon, I know you want to say it; 'where's the misinformation?'
tommy, you have major news organizations hosting this woman and calling hillary a liar for inventing a story she never invented. if you see something wrong with attempting to correct a lie, then you have a problem.
Then Tommy should say
"Houston, we have a problem", because he does.
--"BLITZER: I'm not familiar -- are you familiar with that [jogging] story?"--
Sheeesh. How pathetic on Blitzer's part (not to mention the fast-and-loose-with-the-facts Buchanan). I've been aware of it for, what---at least a year or two. Needless to say, I am not paid a six or seven-figure salary by CNN to be a political expert.
This will perhaps be deemed the LEAST distorted account in the book.
What I want to know is when MMFA is going to dissect the chapter on Clinton's numerous lesbian sex parties.
Now that's entertainment.
Randy
"But listen, in three years in the public limelight as a first lady of the United States, half of America thought she was a liar and two-thirds thought she had broken the law. Why is that? Or done something wrong. It's because of her own actions, decisions, poor judgments that she made."
Could someone please elaborate on this, I hear it as a talking point a lot, but it's rarely backed up with facts. Besides her war vote, why is she the devil woman to so many republicans?
Why? Because Hillary has a good chance of winning, that's why. And because if she nails the democratic approval to be the front runner, it'll be another nail in the ever phony "big tent" claim the republicans claim to be. Hypocrite right wing is as hypocrite right wing does...
They demonize their toughest opponents because they cannot attack them fairly and succeed. They scolded Kerry because he was a flip-flopper. He didn't change his mind all that much, but it's a good thing to change your mind when circumstances warrant. They demonized him for being thoughtful and nuanced instead of a black-n-white thinker like Bush!
They attack their opponents' strongest points, like Kerry's military record, because if they fought on level ground, Bush's military record and actions on 'national security' would have clearly identified him as a fool and a coward!
John Edwards is a good looking man, so they attack him for it, as though it's a bad thing to be good looking, because they know that some voters might be swayed by his handsome appearance! That's one of his strengths, although a minor one, but they attack on multiple fronts. They nibble away when they can.
Hillary's a big threat against any Republican, so they are waging a war of words against her. Anything they say against her is likely a distortion of one of the things they think are her strengths!
Hillary had a personal story to tell about 9/11. Her daughter was in Manhattan that morning. The person she had coffee with that morning called her about the plane crashes. Chelsea was so upset about the events that she went out to find a phone when she couldn't reach her mom, and while out, her daughter heard the rumble of the buildings coming down and saw the smoke firsthand.
They want to minimize that personal story, so they claim she fabricated that personal involvement to make her look like a hypocrite. Why? Because having that personal involvement makes her look more human and caring! They are attacking a strength of hers because they cannot confront it directly without looking like a fool.
Bush, on the other hand, hid from people for hours. I think that might have been the reasonable thing to do at that time. We do need to keep our leadership safe, even if it is crappy leadership, but he doesn't have that personal story. Giulani has a personal story too about 9/11. They cannot let Hillary share that limelight with Rudy!
Mmmmmm.....now I've heard a few different *versions* of Chelsea's whereabouts that morning, including that she was at a friends apartment and saw it all on TV. Another words she didn't see smoke or hear the rumble [other than on the screen] and didn't smell the smoke at all. I've also read/heard Chelsea never even left her own apartment that morning to go jogging or get coffee.
I would like to think Hillary wouldn't fabricate or embellish the story she recounted.
As far as what Bay Buchanan wrote...it's off a bit...but can hardly be described as an "Extreme Makeover" as editorialized here by MMFA.
And who or what is the source for these "other" accounts? Hillary or news outlets? Is Hillary offering conflicting accounts or the media? They are not one in the same.
Randy
Well Randy since it was over 5 1/2 years ago, I can't remember exactly where I heard and/or read the accounts I mentioned [try & google it--I'd do it, but you seem far more interested]
BUT they were allegedly Chelsea Clinton's version of the story and were being repeated around the time Hillary gave her statement about her daughter's whereabouts that morning.
Probably rumors, but I figured I'd at least mention that there were a few different accounts being touted out there.
As I wrote, I'd rather believe Hillary's recollection. I'd hope she wouldn't lie about it, just to gain some [political] empathy.
Jeter, I think it's a little weak to throw an allegation out there and then put the onus on others to verify or disprove it. I mean, why even bother bringing it up in the first place?
For what it's worth, I think Hillary would eat Chelsea's brains for an AFL-CIO endorsement, but she's far from unique among politicians...
Val,
My point was simply that beyond Hillary & Bay's account of Chelsea's whereabouts that morning, there were other versions being floated out there.
My suggestion that Randy google it was only meant as a suggestion IF he was interested in looking into them.
I couldn't care less where Chelsea was, and I tend to believe Hillary on this one....though that might be a tad nieve of me ;-)
Well
if you "couldn't care less", why go into details of these other accounts? sorta having it both ways, isn't it?
You heard it here first. Chelsea was actually playing in a pick-up ice hockey game at Sky Rink at Chelsea Piers, 23rd Street at West Side Highway. She was passing as a guy, wearing a beat-up old Red Army uniform, and if you skated near her you came away with splinters.
So somehow those other versions should be given similar weight (or any weight at all) to the versions from the people directly involved?
That's nonsense.
Hillary knows what she knows, and Chelsea was where she was. Other inaccurate versions of those two things are, well, inaccurate, and don't deserve retelling!
Chelsea heard the rumble from the building crashing down. She didn't hear the plane crashing into the building. She went out with a friend for coffee, down near Battery Park, before the incident happened. She was in the apartment when her coffee-drinking friend called her and told her about the incidents.
Jeter,
I agree with the some of the others on the level of Bay’s influence. At best Bay Buchanan is a C-list conservative pundit, but she has been making the rounds with this stupid and irrelevant book of hers, I mean who cares where Chelsea Clinton was on 9-11. I was way too busy trying to figure out where in the hell the president and the vice president were on that day and Chelsea or Hilary Clinton never crossed my mind.Lynn,
It doesn't matter where Chelsea was, unless Hillary embellished the story to add some drama to the situation in order to garner some [political] gain...read that empathy from the American public.
I doubt she'd do that, but of course the far-Right would love to paint Hillary as a phony.
Now what I've always found more vexing is why I've never actually seen Bay & Pat pictured together. Mmmmm?
Could they be one in the same???? ;-)
..well they do look exactly alike right down to the sneer.
I've decided to rename her - from here on out she will be known as Big Buttcannon. Kinda catchy, dontcha think?
Well, thankfully Chelsea wasn't hurt or killed by jogging around the tower.
However it does seem to me, looking at the transcript, that Hillary was trying to leave the impression that Chelsea was intending that day to jog around the World Trade Center.
A quick search shows that "the jog" from Union Square to battery park and back around the WTC is about a six or seven miles. Maybe its true as I see where Chelsea is saying she'll be running the NYC marathon.
Of course we are talking about five years ago. Was Chelsea jogging miles through lower Manhattan so soon after her father left office? It really doesn't pass the (sneaker) smell test if you ask me.
New York Times February 27, 2001, Tuesday Late Edition - Final, Section B, Page 2, Column 3, 623 words:
ABSTRACT - Chelsea Clinton says she is training to run in New York City Marathon in November...
Thanks for feeding AA his own foot Val!
Looks like AA and Dickie (The Authority) Morris have something in common.
Foot in... apply directly to your mouth
Foot in... apply directly to your mouth
Foot in...(pause)
Foot in, I hate this commercial, but your product is amazing!
Foot in... In stores now!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dDe39iqKIU&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0HAmqYTJqo&mode=related&search=
Hey, AntiAmerican, remember this for future use:
"A CLOSED MOUTH GATHERS NO FEET !"
--"Hillary was trying to leave the impression that Chelsea was intending that day to jog around the World Trade Center. "--
It's really you who seems to be "trying to leave an impression"--an impression that Hillary was being sneaky or coy. Hillary, in fact, did come right out and say flat out that Chelsea was going to go around the towers. There was no indirect inference about it.
AA.....
Amazing what you can find on the internet: A NY Times article from the Metropolitan Desk by James Barron, Feb. 27, 2001 says that Chelsea Clinton is training for the NY Marathon in November. That would be November 2001 since the article is in Feb. 2001. I am guessing she would easily jog 6-7 miles in Sept. in preparation for the November marathon.
AND.....WNYC New York Radio had a great article on this June 7, 2004 "Chelsea Clinton's Sept. 11th. experience". It discusses how DICK MORRIS started this whole thing by accusing Hillary of making this up. They describe how he got his information from a press release about Chelsea's article, and that release didn't mention details of the jogging.
Here is the WNYC article. http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:sNREm1SdiqAJ:www.wnyc.org/blog/lehrer/archives/2004_06.html+hillary+clinton+chelsea+jogging+2001&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us
Sorry about that! I havn't been on here for quite some time, and I didn't know how to add a link properly. I used the insert link buttons, but oh well..........
Anyway, the WNYC article is great and it gives some more insight to this, since Dick Morris started this mess after hearing only part of Chelsea's story.....go figure.....Dick Morris running off with only part of the facts.
Dick heard the word jogging which got him thinking about feet. When that happens, it gets hard for Dick. So don't blame him, he is a victim of the evil TEN TOES who has no Soul and is quite a Heel.
From the WNYC article about Dick Morris
Take that as an index of character and personality. Do you want a president who completely and utterly, makes out of whole cloth, not an exaggeration, fabrication, makes something like that up in order to bond more closely with the rescue workers, the cops, the firemen who booed her offstage?
As I said in another post, they want to eliminate the strength Hillary might have from having a personal experience on 9/11.
They distorted reality because they cannot effectively dismiss reality. She had that personal experience. Hillary didn't know where her daughter was. It turns out that her daughter was in lower Manhattan the day the planes hit. It turns out her daughter was close to the towers when they collapsed, because she was trying to find a pay phone to call her mom and reassure her that she was okay, and verify that her mom was okay too! Most of us watched that morning, and will forever remember where we were. Hillary and Chelsea have a much more personal experience of that day than most of us. That's a strength that they cannot diminish in a fair way, so they use unfair methods!
I can understand why Bay Buchanan is working for Tom Tancredo - they're both low-life, lying scumbags.
And the Clintons were not?
No, they weren't.
Tell that to Paula Jones.
I already did.
The saintly Paula Jones who posed nude for $ in Penthouse? The epitome of integrity who was on Celebrity Boxing? The one Ann Coulter called "trailer trash"?
So to you it is ok for a women to be raped by a man as long as that man is a Democratic Governor?
I must have missed that ... when was he charged and convicted of rape? The judge in the Paula Jones case even said Paula hadn't been sexually harassed, let alone raped.
Pigpen, looks like you've been STYmied.
A bit ham fisted, Prince, but Pigpen deserved that chop. I never saw such a deserving recipient, you reap what you sow.Like watching a mutt and a cat go at it, a pretty poor scene overall for your friend.
(I got six bad puns in there, I guess I'm off the wagon)
How vile. And how typical. If you can't argue the facts, do what Rush Limbaugh does--make something up!
Let's take a quick look back. Filegate, Troopergate, the Christmas card scandle, Paula Jones, Kathlee Wiley (sp?), White Water, Vince Foster, blah blah blah blah blah. What were they convicted of? NOTHING. Not even lying about a blow job (which he did).
All these "illegal" activities, yet not one conviction. Either Bill and Hillary are innocent, or the Republican party is incompetent. Either way, you're one big loser.
PigPen, please provide a link about this rape.
Is it ok for men to be LIED about like you just did or baselessly accused of rape if they are Democrats.
Wow......I didn't even know Chelsea was running for president!
Just another hate-wing a**hole doing what hate-wingers do best: lie about Hillary (since no story is too extreme to resonate with the hate-wing audience, so long as it hits "Clinton" somewhere in the accusations).
at least the picture of butcannon is a true depiction of her inner self...
That woman looks capable of ripping a man's leg off and beating him with it.
If Bill has any stones left he'll confornt this Buchanan piece of excrement head on. I'm sure his people can engineer a confrontation in public with the mikes and cameras running if they put their mind to it. It's hard to imagine Bay coming out on top of that fantasy match up, especially after Colbert laid waste to her.
I don't know which side is telling the truth on this one. Both above, and on the right-wing hit-sites, the Dateline quote starts part of the way into the interview.
I wish that someone could print a more complete piece of the Dateline transcript, including the question Hillary was responding to.
OKAY, KAY, I'm convinced now convince yourself.
..and she has the audacity to speak of judgement?
Just how smart does one have to be to be willing to risk lying for all the world to see, when accusing someone elase of being a pernicious liar!
Show us what you're made of Bay - have the balls to apologize publicly while promising to leave the children of politicians out of your future smear campaigns, Not that Chelsea needs it from the likes of you , but you owe it to yourself! Integrity beckons!
As usual, Republicans NEVER let the truth get in their way when they feel it necessary to "swift boat" a Democrat.
If it wasn't for her brother Pat, people would be saying "Bay, who?"