In an October 10 article, Washington Post staff writers Anne E. Kornblut and Dan Balz reported that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), in a Washington Post interview, was “vague about how she would handle special interrogation methods used by the CIA.” The article added: “She said that while she does not condone torture, so much has been kept secret that she would not know unless elected what other extreme measures interrogators are using, and therefore could not say whether she would change or continue existing policies.” The article went on: " 'It is not clear yet exactly what this administration is or isn't doing. We're getting all kinds of mixed messages.' Clinton said. 'I don't think we'll know the truth until we have a new president. I think [until] you can get in there and actually bore into what's been going on, you're not going to know.' " However, blogger Greg Sargent later reported that, according to a transcript of the interview he had received from the Clinton campaign, Kornblut and Balz omitted from their article Clinton's statement during the interview that “I think we have to draw a bright line and say 'No torture -- abide by the Geneva conventions, abide by the laws we have passed,' and then try to make sure we implement that." While Kornblut and Balz wrote that Clinton said “she does not condone torture,” they did not report her specific reported pledge “to draw a bright line” and abide by the Geneva conventions and by U.S. statute.

As Media Matters for America previously documented, in a July 16, 2006, New York Times article, Kornblut, then with the Times, falsely reported that Clinton criticized her fellow congressional Democrats “for taking on issues that arouse conservatives and turn out Republican voters rather than finding consensus on mainstream subjects.” In fact, Clinton did not say that the Democrats were “wasting time,” but rather that the Republicans in charge of Congress at the time were doing so by focusing on “controversial ... things that try to inflame their base so they can turn people out and vote for their candidates.” In a July 18, 2006, “Editor's Note,” the Times acknowledged that Kornblut's assertion that Clinton criticized Democrats in Congress for “wasting time” and “for taking on issues that arouse conservatives and turn out Republican voters” was false. The “Editors Note” attributed the falsehood to “a misinterpretation of a passage in [Clinton's] speech in which she first referred to the Democrats' agenda in the Senate and then went on to criticize the actions of the Republican majority in Congress.”

From Kornblut and Balz's October 10 Washington Post report:

Clinton was similarly vague about how she would handle special interrogation methods used by the CIA. She said that while she does not condone torture, so much has been kept secret that she would not know unless elected what other extreme measures interrogators are using, and therefore could not say whether she would change or continue existing policies.

“It is not clear yet exactly what this administration is or isn't doing. We're getting all kinds of mixed messages,” Clinton said. “I don't think we'll know the truth until we have a new president. I think [until] you can get in there and actually bore into what's been going on, you're not going to know.”

From the interview transcript Sargent reported receiving from the Clinton campaign:

Q: Can I ask you a follow up? You mentioned Blackwater, you've said that at the beginning of your administration you'd ask the Pentagon to report. When it comes to special interrogation methods, obviously you've said you're against torture, but the types of methods that are now used that aren't technically torture but are still permitted, would you do something in your first couple days to address that, suspend some of the special interrogation methods immediately or ask for some kind of review?

HRC: Well I think I've been very clear about that too, we should not conduct or condone torture and it is not clear yet exactly what this administration is or isn't doing, we're getting all kinds of mixed messages. I don't think we'll know the truth until we have a new President. I think once you can get in there and actually bore into what's been going on, you're not going to know. I was very touched by the story you guys had on the front page the other day about the WWII interrogators. I mean it's not the same situation but it was a very clear rejection of what we think we know about what is going on right now but I want to know everything, and so I think we have to draw a bright line and say 'No torture -- abide by the Geneva conventions, abide by the laws we have passed,' and then try to make sure we implement that.