Has Sen. Clinton ever been under sniper fire, anywhere? If not, I don't see how she could have "misspoke" on this experience without either fabrication or confabulation.

Sent by Sylvia | 3:33 PM ET | 03-24-2008

I would hope any politician would not exaggerate their accomplishments, but they all do to some extent. I personally don't care as long as they don't out-right lie. There is a distinction I believe. Obama is the same way and McCain is the worse. I will not believe the word of one reporter that Clinton is lying though. There are too many personal agendas out there.

Sent by Kris | 3:37 PM ET | 03-24-2008

"Over-Emphasized"? How about flat out lied? Once you have been under actual fire, it is something you never forget--never. That leads me to conclude that Mrs. Clinton knew that she was lying about being under sniper fire when she made the remarks to puff up her otheriwse undistinuished foreign policy resume.

Sent by Long Tall Texan | 3:41 PM ET | 03-24-2008

Clinton did not misspeak. When Sinbad, who accompanied her, said the only red-phone moment was deciding where to eat Clinton blew him off as just a comedian. Perhaps, as Roger Clemens accused Andy Petite, she just misrembered the incident. But then how can we trust any of her claims to experience she gained while her husband was in the White House? Your reference to the Post article is an improper attempt to minimize Clinton's falsehood by suggesting that this is just another example of something both (or all) candidates do. Lying about sniper fire is not comparable to overstating the amount of credit for accomplishments that one deserves. Is NPR still gun-shy of Clinton's claim of unfavorable media coverage?

Sent by Dennis Harvey | 4:22 PM ET | 03-24-2008

Fantasy. Fairy tale. Whopper. Call it what it is.

Sent by Marla | 4:22 PM ET | 03-24-2008

I was in Greece in 96 about then when she was making a speech in Olympia right after Greece officially lost the 2000 Olympics to Atlanta. The crowd wasn't happy but she didn't back down. This nitpicking her credentials is stupid. Obama has NO credentials at all. He doesn't even take his duties as Chair of the Afghanistan Committee seriously. Heck, I'm a Republican running for Congress and I'll give her that credit. Want to zing her? Ask about the Rose Law Firm books disappearing and miraculously reappearing.

Sent by Trevor Lowing | 5:32 PM ET | 03-24-2008

DUH...?!

Sent by George Gekas | 6:03 PM ET | 03-24-2008

Hmmm...prevaricator, or republican? Prevaricator or republican?

This one's gonna be a tough call, I'll have to get back to you.

Just remember, the devil you know is better than the one you don't.

Sent by Wolf | 6:05 PM ET | 03-24-2008

My only concern with Hillary is her inconsistency in telling the truth. With this pattern or lies, little lies, white lies, half truths, and fabrications it's hard to accept what if anything that resembles the truth will come from the senator. Stop it with taradiddles Hillary.

Sent by Roger | 6:06 PM ET | 03-24-2008

She's heading into Gore and Kerry territory with these tall tales. What's with the penchant for telling easily disputable lies? Do they have no idea that the internet exists?

Sent by deek | 10:44 PM ET | 03-24-2008

So, this is clearly a lie. No sniper fire, no running with her head down, and yes, there WAS a greeting ceremony -- a ceremony that included an eight year-old girl reading a poem.

In fact, from the context this was clearly never going to be a dangerous situation, otherwise why would you bring a comedian, pop singer and your teenage daughter with you?

I'll hasten to add -- and I know this is a bit overblown -- if it's as dangerous as Clinton now says it was, what kind of judgment does it show to bring your teenage daughter into a war zone with sniper fire? Will she do ANYTHING for a photo-op?

Sent by davidconnell | 8:47 AM ET | 03-25-2008

The CBS lead news story (and video) on HRC's lies about "sniper fire" in Bosnia:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4

Sent by Frank | 12:36 PM ET | 03-25-2008

Misspoke!! What I heard is a full paragraph!! I doubt it!!

Sent by anser | 12:38 PM ET | 03-25-2008

It's not a misstatement, it's a lie.

Even if you're married to a man who isn't sure what the meaning of the word is is.

Sent by Kevin | 1:00 PM ET | 03-25-2008

TRAVELS WITH HILLARY -- WAS IT SAFE? WAS IT FOREIGN POLICY?

I accompanied the First Lady on this trip while serving as the Director for Southern Europe at the State Department. We had been warned shortly before landing in Bosnia of security concerns on the ground (although I do not recall whether the possible threat was snipers). Mrs. Clinton and her daughter were moved to the C-17's cockpit, it was suggested that staff sit on their flak jackets and our aircraft did conduct a rapid and sharp descent to land at Tuzla Air Base. On the ground the 1st Armored Division's extraordinary security measures were readily visible, including strategically placed armored vehicles and Apache attack helicopters hovering just above the airfield to ensure our protection. While a greeting ceremony did take place on the tarmac, my recollection is that it was briefer than had been originally planned.

As has been reported, there was a USO component to this visit that included Sheryl Crow and Sinbad (I, in fact, accompanied Sinbad for his performances at forward base camps). To reach the troops at these locations we traveled in a helicopter that flew an evasive zig-zag path just above the trees --I was told -- to avoid potential ground fire. That, however, had been clearly deemed by the US Army to be insufficient for Sinbad's safety. We were accompanied throughout the day by Apache gunships to deal with any possible anti-aircraft threats or snipers. The flight into Tuzla, the helicopter rides across the wasteland of destroyed villages and farms, the security measures of the US armed forces, and the need to have 1,000s of armed US troops to maintain order would convey to no one a sense that it was particularly safe during Hillary Clinton's visit to Bosnia.

Was it foreign policy? Questions about relative safety have been accompanied by doubts about the significance of such foreign engagement by Senator Clinton. The March 25, 1996 Tuzla visit was part of a much larger program of stops in Germany, Italy, Bosnia, Turkey and Greece. The purpose of this trip was multifaceted, encompassing a wide range of domestic and foreign policy issues. First and foremost the intent was to show support for the US troops serving in Bosnia (and their families who had remained behind in Germany when they were forward deployed), as well as those forces supporting our Bosnia operation from Aviano Air Base in Italy. The stops in Turkey and Greece -- which included meetings with the new political leadership in both nations -- were designed to underscore the importance of US relations with these two key NATO allies in advance of visits by President Demirel, President Stephanopoulos and Prime Minister Simitis to Washington. In Turkey, Clinton also held meetings to show support for pressing women's issues and helped advance a groundbreaking interfaith dialogue among a broad group of religious leaders in Istanbul. Finally, in Olympia, Clinton represented the U.S. at the ceremony lighting the torch that would be used to open the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games. There should be no doubt that such travel and activities advance the foreign policy interests of the United States.

Sent by Carey | 10:17 PM ET | 03-25-2008