NY Post reported "Clinton volunteered to personally negotiate" with hostage-taker, but not her pledge to cooperate with law enforcement
In a two-sentence December 3 article discussing the November 30 hostage situation at the Rochester, New Hampshire, presidential campaign office of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) in which the hostage-taker reportedly demanded to talk to Clinton, the New York Post reported: "Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton volunteered to personally negotiate with the crackpot who took over one of her New Hampshire campaign offices, she revealed yesterday. Clinton offered to speak directly to suspect Leeland Eisenberg, 46, in the hours he was holed up with hostages he took at her Rochester headquarters on Friday, she said." However, the Post did not quote Clinton directly, nor did it report that, in a statement released during the hostage situation, the Clinton campaign said that Clinton was acting at the direction of state and local authorities, and that, according to the Associated Press, Clinton said that law enforcement officials told her she could not talk to Eisenberg.
As Media Matters for America documented, the Clinton campaign released a statement during the hostage situation that said, "There is an ongoing situation in our Rochester, NH office. We are in close contact with state and local authorities and are acting at their direction. We will release additional details as appropriate." Additionally, a December 2 AP article reported, " 'I offered to talk to him,' Clinton said Sunday. 'I offered to go up there and meet with him. I offered to do anything to help this end peacefully.' But law enforcement officials said 'I absolutely could not talk to him.' " Further, during the December 2 edition of ABC's World News Sunday, correspondent David Kerley reported: "The suspect demanded to talk to Clinton. She told police she was willing, but authorities declined the offer." Kerley also reported that, during the hostage incident, Clinton was "on the phone with state police" and aired a statement from New Hampshire State Police director Col. Frederick H. Booth saying that Clinton "offer[ed] her services in any way that she could."
From the December 2 edition of ABC's World News Sunday:
DAN HARRIS (anchor): Hillary Clinton's campaign office in Rochester, New Hampshire, is still closed tonight, two days after a hostage drama unfolded there. Tonight, we're going to take you inside this crisis, a crisis now being closely examined for clues about Hillary Clinton's leadership style and political instinct. ABC's David Kerley is in Rochester tonight.
[begin video clip]
KERLEY: 12:35: a man walks into Clinton's campaign office in this small New Hampshire town, saying he has a bomb strapped to his body. Moments after hearing the news, Hillary Clinton is on the phone with the governor -- the first of eight calls.
GOV. JOHN LYNCH (D-NH): She offered to do everything possible, including coming up right away, if that's what was suggested or recommended.
KERLEY: Clinton was asked to stay put in Washington, but she quickly cancelled all campaigning, including a speech in Virginia. She was on the phone with state police, as they were deploying officers.
BOOTH: I was impressed in the fact that she would at least reach out and talk to us at our level and offer her services in any way that she could.
KERLEY: The suspect demanded to talk to Clinton. She told police she was willing, but authorities declined the offer.
CLINTON: He kept telling my staff, "I need to talk to her because I have to have help. I tried to get help but nobody will help me."
KERLEY: Clinton did dedicate half her staff to get in touch with the hostages' families. Just after 3 o'clock, the first of the three hostages was released. Over the next couple of hours, Clinton made calls to the Secret Service, the FBI, and the families.
CLINTON: Those are the most emotional ones, I have to tell you, calling them in the first instance to tell them what had happened. Some of them had already heard it from the media.
KERLEY: At 5:30, another hostage released, followed 10 minutes later by the final staffer walking out. Their names have still not been released. Within a couple of hours, Clinton was in New Hampshire, meeting face-to-face with the families.
Every move by a presidential candidate can have political overtones, and the Clinton campaign was well aware of that from the very beginning of the standoff in this office.
MARK HALPERIN (ABC News political analyst): It's rare in the context of a presidential campaign to get a chance to show yourself in a moment of crisis, right before voters' eyes, right when they're making decisions about who to vote for. Hillary Clinton got that opportunity, and she made the best of it.
KERLEY: With a tightening race, it could make a difference. David Kerley, ABC News, Rochester, New Hampshire.
Maybe it's just me...but what are we supposed to be upset about here? Where is the "conservative misinformation?"
This may be a subtle one, hard to spot without the broader context of the cottage industry which is the demonization of Hillary Clinton. It is quite possible that her offer ot negotiate would be considered a sign of "appeasement", unless accompanied by the caveat that she made the offer to the authorities as a gesture of cooperation.
I think that's really reaching. Must be a slow day for "conservative misinformation."
Hey, how about an article on Michael Savage suing CAIR today?
There's one for you MMFA!
Its a news story not a media misinformation story. If the Wienerdog begins LYING about CAIR THEN it will be an MMFA story. Considering the Weinerdogs predeliction for lying its possible
I agree, Ripper76.
If you volunteer to personally negotiate, isn't that the same as volunteering to cooperate??
Where's the "misinformation"?
You're right, Ripper76. It must be a slow day in the "conservative misinformation" biz.
My 2 cents. Thank you.
You are WAY overcharging yes she was offering to co-operate WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT. I cant believe how dumb you are willing to look in your zeal to say ANYTHING no matter how stupid to attack Hillary. What I find most amusing about that is there are REAL issues that she can be attacked on legitimatly and you guys ignore them for this kind of juvenile inanity
shoes, this is the kind of molehill that your side makes a mountain out of. let's cut to the limbaugh show:
"yeah, pick up those three bottles of oxycontin at the denny's parking lot, and that viagra for the christmas holidays in the dominican republic....what?...on the air?....[computer sounds of papers shuffling and pounding on desk]...and i was saying folks, this is the kind of stuff that proves liberals want to coddle criminals....what's going to happen when hillary goes nose to nose with the iranians...."
I would add that, to the Conservative mind, it is an easy leap to picture Clinton, as president, wringing her hands and offering to negotiate with Terrorists instead of killing them. Subtle stuff, I admit.
Not that subtle. Undercutting Law Enforcement in this kind of situation would show bad judgement and, that impression is an easily made inferrence without mentioning she was co-operationg with Law Enforcement.
RIPPER,
The misinformation is that this so-called reporter is trying to delve into Hillary's leadership skills when it is obvious that her's wasn't needed or wanted by the authorities on site.
I commend MMFA for bringing up this useless bit of journalism as Hillary's leadership skills have absolutely nothing to do with it mainly because: 1) She wasn't there and 2) She offered to help, was told, 'no thanks' and backed off.
If anything, this whole scenerio proves that Hillary knows when to jump in and when to back off!
I'm still wondering though when Rush or Ann or Savage, et al will start claiming that this was all a set up by the Hillary camp, if it hasn't started already and I just haven't seen it?
My guess is that it fits in with the O'Reilly claim of "how convenient!". Like it was manufactured to make Hillary look good. Victim of attack steps in and ends hostage crisis becomes the right's gateway to say this was set up by Clinton on purpose.
The "conservative misinformation" lies in portraying Clinton as immediately ready to accede to the demand of the hostage-taker and make an end run around police, when in fact she did no such thing.
That her actions could be misconstrued for political effect can't be questioned, as Dick Morris did exactly that, suggesting on "Your World with Neil Cavuto" on November 30 that if she changed her schedule "in light of the hostage situation," then she'll be seen as "weak in the face of terrorism."
(As a footnote, it's admittedly speculation on my part, but I would not have been surprised that had she not made any changes, it would have been cited as proof of "cold indifference" to her staff, that kind of heads I win, tails you lose "logic" being endemic to the right half of our political spectrum.)
Uh oh; here it comes. The Flying Monkey Liars are going to find a way to make a story out of this. Can't wait to hear how Rush and Sean spin it to make Hillary guilty of .....something.
You're probably right, Nerzog, that this will somehow be used by the tinfoil hat rightys as ammo against HC.Then again, they can use a weather report to slam non-Republicans, so I'm almost aboard the WITH patrol boat here.
The item is about a pretty small omission, but the "strange coincidences" that have our conservative friends so hysterical lately (Gen. Kerr, etc.) show that our media and those who love our media don't need much material to work with.
The Post is wrong. Hillary did do the right thing by complying with local and State law enforcemnet agencies. W did the right thing also, by complying with local, State, and the Feds during 9-11 by not returning to DC. Nobody knew what was going on then, either. Putting him in the air would've been a mistake also.
Cowered in a bunker with a security blanket is a more apt description of Bush on 9-11.
Well this is the first time I'm hearing that Hillary offered to personally negotiate with this nutjob.
This is new news. Since we already heard from Hillary on the day of the hostage taking that she was cooperating with law enforcement perhaps repeating that wasn't necessary?
I'll give Hillary kudos for volunteering & upon hearing that she wasn't to have any contact, respectfully let law enforcement handle the situation.
J,
I am sure most readers, including those of the NY Post, understand that it's pretty much of a given that when a breaking news, much publicized event such as this occurs, that the high profile person involved would be directly working with, and most likely, taking their direction from law enforcement.
Tommy, I think you're giving far too much credit to the readers of the NY Post.
I'm not sure if it's available in CA but here in the New York area, day old dead fish have been rumored to re-animate and crawl out of NY Post when wrapped in it.
Jeter,
Personally, I feel her offer to talk to the hostage taker showed a real lack of judgement at best and political gamesmanship at worst.
If it is the former, you can imagine every crackpot with a beef taking hostages so they can talk to Hillary.
If it is the latter, she was simply posturing, knowing full well she wouldn't be allowed to speak to the guy.
In the overall scheme of things it doesn't mean much. Hillary is tanking in Iowa as people start paying attention. She can try to fool some of the people all of the time, but when there is 24/7 coverage, it is much harder.
No it doesnt. Had she made that offer publicly or undercut Law Enforcement it would but she didnt. She made it to the Law. That is she let them know she was willing to do WHATEVER they asked.
Solon,
Like I said, it is a minor matter, but I do believe she tried to get political mileage out of it by her statements. I don't fault her for going to NH afterward. Why she had to tell us at some point that she offered to negotiate? It seems fairly obvious tome that she was trying to make political hay from the situation.
Her observation that as "It affected me not only because they were my staff members and volunteers, but as a mother, it was just a horrible sense of bewilderment, confusion, outrage, frustration, anger, everything at the same time," Clinton said." was another bit of pandering in my opinion.
What the heck does being a mother have to to do with it? Is that how she's going to react as President? As a mother? Obvious to me she was pandering to women.
Feel free to disagree.
Those hostages also had mothers its called EMPATHY a concept you rightwingers seem oblivious to. AFTER the situation was over is it a shock she tried to make political gain off of it? I mean not to the extent Rudi and Gump used 9/11 for political gains but a bit shamelessly? That is politics. That wasnt your original objection to. You said she showed poor judgement by telling Law Enforcement she was willing to talk to the guy IF they wanted her to. That is another thing she didnt make it public THEN so no it doesnt, it only shows she was willing to do anything they asked, that is the RIGHT thing to do, tell them it was THEIR call and she would co operate. That is NOT poor judgement. What she did afterwards is another issue alltogether but being a rightwinger after what YOUR guys did about 9/11 are you REALLY going to complain about someone using something politically?
Solon,
I'm not complaining about Hillary, just expressing my opinion. I think this whole episode is simply a blip on the radar. That being said, it seems to me that saying Hillary said it to the law enforcement during the hostage taking does not relieve her of the lack of judgement in this matter because she brought it up after.
Can she not think a few steps ahead? Would she have remained mum about it had she been allowed to 'negotiate'? You are entitled to your opinion, but my guess is if had she negotiated and it were a good outcome, somebody somewhere would have published the story. Had that occurred, I think my original scenario of encouraging crackpots across the country, (and elsewhee,) to try to employ the same tactics.
Just because someone else had the good sense to turn down her offer does not, at least in my mind, absolve Hillary of using poor judgement or, which is much more believable to me, using the incident to make political hay.
You are entitled to your opinion about Rudy. He certainly attained a much higher profile because of his actions after 9/11. If you want to lump Hillary in with Rudy, be my guest.
That is only your partisan NEED to slam her. AND its ludicrous. You make it sound like she was begging to run over there and negotiate with the guy. She let them know she was available and willing to do whatever it took, those were her people. Your NEED to turn nothing into something derogatory is weak. She did NOT show any lack of judgement and you keep trying to blur the distinction between WHEN it was ongoing and AFTER it was over. If you think it is bad that she tried to make political hay afterwars fine but like I said. Guliani and Bush make that pure hypocrisy coming from anyone on your side. During the situation she did EXACTLY what she was supposed to do. Made it clear she was willing to help and leave it all up to them
Real lack of judgement?
Seems she has all that's required to sit in the oval office as proven by the lump who sits there now.
Personally, I feel her offer to talk to the hostage taker showed a real lack of judgment at best and political gamesmanship at worst.
Well AA you could be right. Or maybe just cynical? Of course with Hillary being cynical comes easy ;-)
Had she stepped up to the microphones while the hostages fate was still in doubt & made her offer known to the media/public, then I'd agree it would have been political gamesmanship.
Her offer to law enforcement was done in private. I don't think that I'd define it as a lack of judgment, she was simply volunteering if she were needed. After all no one knew just how dangerous the situation was or if the guy really had a bomb.
Jeter,
I think her statement to the press, saying she offered to negotiate, shows her lack of judgement.
It looks to me like all she did was badger law enforcement over the phone to get updates. I would have thought that she would simply leave a number for someone to call her would have sufficed.
But you are correct, when it comes to Hillary, I am cynical. In this particular case, how can you not?
And your evidence she badgered them rather than just calling to let them know she was available to co-operate is WHAT? Got statements from the FBI saying they were being badgered or did you pull this from the Hate Hillary section of your rectal database?
Solon,
Sorry you didn't like my use of the word badger. Feel free to say,
"I knew I was bugging a lot of these people, it felt like on a minute- by-minute basis, trying to make sure that I knew everything that was going on so I was in a position to tell the families, to tell my campaign and to be available to do anything that they asked of me," the New York senator said.So she was keeping up. There are people in those situations whose job it is to EXACTLY keep everyone informed. Since it was HER campaign staff and she had a lot of people to keep informed herself again that is the right thing. YOU made it sound like she was badgering those DOING the negotiation and tactics trying to get them to let her take over or to let her do something she could take advantage of. So to recap NO you DONT have any evidence to back up your claim of badgering. Keeping in touch with the proper representative just flat doesnt fit the bill so you DID pull it direcly from your hate Hillary rectal database.
Solon,
If you want to keep believing it, go ahead.
However Hillary herself said, "I knew I was bugging a lot of these people...".
And I think you are referring to your database and not mine.
I only opined that she either showed poor judgment or made political hay out of it. As I said, you are free to disagree. Further discussion shows Hillary, based on her own testimony, bugged a lot of people. I called it "badgering". You are free to describe it in your own terms.
All in all, your characterization of my notes as hateful are simply misguided. Thanks for the discussion.
You are still being dishonest in your zeal to think negatively about Hillary. Do you have any evidence that she was badgering the people that were actually dealing with the situation? Did she call the negotiator away to talk to HIM? Did she get the Agent in charge and try to coerce him to let her do something for political gain? It doesnt show bad judgement to be bugging the information guy the mayor of the town her state campaign people... That is what she SHOULD have been doing if she took the situation seriously. As for trying to make political hay out of it that can be your opinion as to whether it was bad judgement. I dont think so. There is NOTHING Hillary can do that wont look bad to you. She could run into a burning building and carry orphans out on her back and YOU would say she was grandstanding and is funny looking when she runs so your take doesnt mean much. It is also a completely seperate issue as to how the SITUATION was handled. She talked about this AFTER the crisis was over. Your Hillary derangement syndrome is apparant for anyone to see.
"She can try to fool some of the people all of the time, but when there is 24/7 coverage, it is much harder"
AA,
For all your presumption that this would make life harder for Hillary, you'd be correct but wouldn't it also be correct for you to believe the same thing as it pertains to all the political posturing and lies and deceit and run-a-round by BushCo if it had 24/7 coverage to make these things posible?
Just wondering where you stand on that.....
Capt,
I disagree with your presumption about lies.
Of course you do. You are determined to because no matter how often we prove conclusively that Bush has lied about this or that you just WONT believe it. Not because it isnt true, there is no reasonable argument Bush isnt a stone liar who has lied about MANY things including WMDs, rather because you prefer your comfortable delusions to factual reality. We have had this discussion before. Bush is a liar.
Solon,
You have only proven it in your own mind. It is the same thing over and over. You think a report here or there proves Bush was lying, but you never acknowledge evidence that proves otherwise. I think you underestimate the vast complexity of information that has to be sifted through, analyzed, and interpreted as it moves it's way up to the President.
If you want to believe Bush is a liar, go ahead. Pardon me if I don't accept your rather partisan interpretation.
You mean you refuse to see plain FACTS. It is a lie to say I refuse to aknowlege the SPIN about the IAEA report I dealt with each one several times since NONE of their excuses include the claim Bush made, since the one that was settled on the IISS report wasnt even OUT at the time and he began the statement "I WOULD REMIND YOU" They are all bunk. I totalled them when you brought them up but that is one lie among many. Bush continued to say the Prescription drug benifit would cost 400 billion even though five months earlier the study they did on it said it would cost OVER 500 billion and the head actuary was threatened to be FIRED if he told anyone. A YEAR after our scientists at Oak Hills that is OUR experts on Gas Centrifuges reported that it was unlikely the aluminum tubes would be used at ALL for GCs and were most likely rocket bodies, Bush CONTINUED to say they could ONLY be used for Gas centrifuges. He has more than once said that we had to invade Iraq because Saddam wouldnt let the inspectors in. Bush lies almost constantly for you to pretend at this late date he hasnt been caught in several lies shows only your commitment to ideological blindness there is no rational argument that Bush didnt lie.
I think AA's response to this proves my point...there are some out there who will spin this to criticize Hillary, especially if they only know part of the story. AA knows the whole story, and STILL manages to dig out the Evil-Hillary nugget.
My take is that she was just making a statement as a public relations move. If she had remained silent about it, the Flying Monkeys would accuse her of not caring, or of being in cahoots with the "bomber". They'll slam her no matter what she says. And, yes, I know that I treat President Numbnuts the same way...but he DESERVES it.
My take is that she was just making a statement as a public relations move. If she had remained silent about it, the Flying Monkeys would accuse her of not caring, or of being in cahoots with the "bomber". They'll slam her no matter what she says.
Exactly! Also, it's a LIE to say that she offered to personally "negotiate" with him. She never said that. Her offer was to "talk to or meet with", not "negotiate". Big difference!
Nerzog,
My criticism is only with the her going public with her offer to talk with the hostage taker. I personally think it was pandering but if not, I feel it was poor judgment by Hillary to make that point known.
I think I said earlier, I had no problem with her going to NH. I am very happy the situation ended without serious injury or death.
I had to laugh at your last sentence. :-)
Jeff,
If you want to substitute "meet with" or "talk to" a hostage taker during this crisis where I used the word 'negotiate' please do. It doesn't change my criticism one bit.
Nothing could because it is based on nothing but pure baseless partisan hatred. Hillary derangement syndrome
Hahaha... Now that is funny! Thanks for the laugh.
Laugh all you want its obvious. HDS seek professional help
A new perfume has been named after Sen. Clinton
REPUBLANS OBSESSION...........
It may not cover thier odor but they just LOVE TO HATE IT.
Nice try but that didn't make any scents at all. :-)