Digging herself in deeper
HRC's statement on the Bosnia fib:
I was just watching the (frequently repeated) video of the landing and ceremony on CNN, and I'm struck by one thing that seems to make her explanation unlikely: the way the group proceeds out of the plane and down the tarmac. If there was any threat of sniper fire, 1) I doubt the secret service would have let her depart, but 2) if they did, they'd be flanking her a little more closely, wouldn't they?
Further, if there's any threat of being shot what mother would 1) let her leave the plane or 2) let her walk down the tarmac with that much space between them? I could understand trying to play it cool for the cameras, but I know that my mom, whether or not she was trying to look relaxed, wouldn't let me be out of reach if she thought the situation was even slightly dangerous.
Last, I don't see any hustle to the group's procession down the carpet, and no hesitation to talk to the little girl. It just doesn't look like she stopped to "take her stuff" and leave.
I like to believe that when you're used to the camera being trained on you night and day, that you become pretty good at making things look relaxed when they really aren't, and I want to believe that no one would knowingly lie when it's just to easy to catch someone in that lie (and what a dumb thing to lie about!). But, I just feel like she's digging herself in deeper by following up with this explanation. The video just doesn't match what she's saying. Anyone else? Any thoughts?
Now let me tell you what I can remember, OK -- because what I was told was that we had to land a certain way and move quickly because of the threat of sniper fire. So I misspoke -- I didn't say that in my book or other times but if I said something that made it seem as though there was actual fire -- that's not what I was told. I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire. I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I greeted her, I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it.
I was just watching the (frequently repeated) video of the landing and ceremony on CNN, and I'm struck by one thing that seems to make her explanation unlikely: the way the group proceeds out of the plane and down the tarmac. If there was any threat of sniper fire, 1) I doubt the secret service would have let her depart, but 2) if they did, they'd be flanking her a little more closely, wouldn't they?
Further, if there's any threat of being shot what mother would 1) let her leave the plane or 2) let her walk down the tarmac with that much space between them? I could understand trying to play it cool for the cameras, but I know that my mom, whether or not she was trying to look relaxed, wouldn't let me be out of reach if she thought the situation was even slightly dangerous.
Last, I don't see any hustle to the group's procession down the carpet, and no hesitation to talk to the little girl. It just doesn't look like she stopped to "take her stuff" and leave.
I like to believe that when you're used to the camera being trained on you night and day, that you become pretty good at making things look relaxed when they really aren't, and I want to believe that no one would knowingly lie when it's just to easy to catch someone in that lie (and what a dumb thing to lie about!). But, I just feel like she's digging herself in deeper by following up with this explanation. The video just doesn't match what she's saying. Anyone else? Any thoughts?
