- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Clinton 'Planted Questions' Story Grows
November 12, 2007 9:00 AM
ABC News' Eloise Harper Reports: A spokesman from Hillary Clinton's campaign refused to comment Tuesday after new reports surfaced furthering the charge that the Clinton campaign planted questions during a Veterans Day town hall meeting in Iowa.
According to reports on CNN, Muriel Gall-Chasanoff, the student who was asked to ask the Democratic frontrunner a question about global warming, says a Clinton staffer opened a binder holding a sheet of paper with about eight questions on it and told her to ask the question about global warming. Next to the question, Gallo-Chasanoff said, the sheet read "college student." She also alleges that there was another man who asked a planted question about jobs-in light of the recent closing of the Maytag plant closing in Newton, IA.
Clinton spokesman Mo Elleithee said: "We've addressed this incident repeatedly over the past several days. The Senator had no idea who she was calling on, and this is not acceptable campaign process moving forward. We've taken steps to ensure that it never happens again."
During the Sunday event in Waterloo, Iowa, Clinton took questions from the audience after her speech, focused primarily on veterans. The campaign was clear when asked, that no questions had been planted. The Senator was asked about the recent mini-scandal that was unveiled that a student was approached by the campaign to ask the senator a question last week in Newton, Iowa.
It was later reported that there had been another instance of a staffer approaching someone back in April to ask the Senator a question about Iraq.
"Well it was news to me and neither I nor my campaign approve of that - and it will certainly not be tolerated," Clinton was also asked if these two instances that have been reported were the only ones she knew about. Clinton said "you know everything I know."
Clinton was also asked about the sharpening attacks from Senator Edwards and Senator Obama on the heels of the Jefferson Jackson dinner and how that will affect her electability. "I think you have to evaluate this on an ongoing basis and that's what I intend to do. I intend as I said last night to attack the problems on the country and turn up the heat on the Republicans."
Clinton was read Senator Obama's comments from the Jefferson Jackson dinner. Obama had said that he wants to be driven by principle and not by polls; not by calculation but by conviction, Clinton was asked if she thought those remarks were aimed at her and questioning her integrity. "I don’t know what he is addressing. He has never been specific so I can't really draw any conclusions."
Clinton was joined on stage with Retired Major General Paul Eaton who has endorsed Clinton for president. The Senator addressed issues that concerned veterans and announced 36 new co-chairs to its Veterans and Military Retirees For Hillary Committee. "Everyone of us ought to say a prayer and a thank you to these extraordinary young people who are serving with such distinction," Clinton said referring to the troops serving in Iraq and abroad.
November 12, 2007 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (82)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Does anyone have a video of this?
Would be great!
Posted by: John | Nov 12, 2007 10:34:57 AM
I don't believe for one minute that HC did not know of the planted questions. She probably initiated it herself. She is just that devious!!
Posted by: Janice | Nov 12, 2007 10:42:24 AM
The clinton campaign has used this as far back as the '92 election... and HC was in charge of that ...do not believe for a minute her fingerprints are not on this. The used the same tactics in Colorado 3 weeks ago.
Posted by: jlt | Nov 12, 2007 11:02:03 AM
Even if we give Hillary the benefit of the doubt and pretend that she is ignorant of this, is it reasonable to trust a candidate that surrounds herself with such devious staffers? Are we to believe she called on just the right questioners by accident? This is THE scandal that will ruin her candidacy in Iowa, because the practice of planting questions is a blatant violation of the integrity of the electoral process.
Posted by: Karl | Nov 12, 2007 11:18:58 AM
Hillary's staffers were pointing out to her which students to take questions from. They were pointing out the students with planted questions. Hillary was part of the entire orchestrated question-planting charade. Don't tell me she was unaware.
Posted by: Shaniqa | Nov 12, 2007 11:23:45 AM
If Hill said she didn't know anything about it...well then by-gosh she didn't know anything about it! So what if she loads the deck anyway. What right do the people have to challenge her? How does challenging an individual help anybody? How does challenging a candidate tell you anything more about them then what they tell you!? Listen, we must remember -- It's not what she "doesn't know" that's important...it's how she positions herself "between the issues" to be able to walk the line inbetween YES and NO, never committing to anything that she may later regret. That's what important. You don't need to "know" anything to do that. All you need to do...is forget. Forget. Forget.
Posted by: Duped Voter | Nov 12, 2007 11:44:26 AM
The process of staged questions appears to be used by both parties with all candidates.
Isn't that a function of canned consultative politics? That's what they are paid for, and the manner of today's politics, plastic as they are.
Plastic politics and media bytes is the rule, not the exception now.
Posted by: Pat | Nov 12, 2007 12:13:27 PM
For someone who is unaware of just about everything (where the Rose Law Firm records are, husband cheating, Shu being on the lam for 10 years, planted questions, etc., etc., etc.) how can the American people possibly expect her to "be aware" of anything else going on in the world? She doesn't seem be be aware of anything, ever.
Posted by: Corrie | Nov 12, 2007 12:41:32 PM
New Research shows Obama beating Clinton in online participation
Highlights:
*Obama’s blog is updated almost three times as frequently as Clinton’s and has generated 73,566 comments over the course of the campaign – 64,186 more than Clinton’s 9,380 comments.
*Obama’s lead in internet participation has grown in recent months as Clinton’s has fallen. Last month, users of Obama’s website posted 20,665 comments to Clinton’s 868. One possible explanation of the gap is the different policies the campaigns utilize on their websites. Obama's campaign posts all comments and allows users to flag inappropriate comments for review. Clinton's campaign makes use of a moderator, not posting comments until they have made it past the campaign's censor.
Posted by: MacKenzie | Nov 12, 2007 1:03:37 PM
It was obvious to any literate person that they were doing this during Bill Clinton's "invitation only town-hall meetings" during his first Presidential campaign. People in the audience were lobbing "soft balls" underhanded that could be easily "hit out of the park".
Can we believe a thing she says? Listen to the track record... lie: "I did not have sex with that woman"... truth: DNA from sained blue dresses tell the story. Alibi: "Well, oral sex really isn't sex"... and "it depends on what the definition of the word "is" is. Hillary's story: "I had no clue that Bill was doing interns all that time." Just like she had no clue that the "lobbed softball" questions were planted in the audience.
Let no one believe that ruthless and wretched liar Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: Ken | Nov 12, 2007 1:07:08 PM
It's predictable that Hillary supporters will claim that "everybody does it."
Well, does everyone do it and then lie about it, like Hillary is lying about it? Her staff plants questions and tells Hillary which people to accept questions from, and Hillary denies knowing about it?
And the best defense you people have is that possibly everyone does it?
I like to believe bad things about politicians, too, but these Clintons claim that every bad thing they do and every lie they tell is something that everyone else is doing.
Can car thiefs and murderers and rapists get out of jail if they prove someone else has previously done the same thing they're in jail for???
Posted by: Shaniqa | Nov 12, 2007 1:47:49 PM
If Mrs. Bill Clinton is the smartest woman in the world, why does she know nothing about anything when in hot water. Playing dumb is probably a skill she honed while dealing with her husband's serial adultery, but I don't think it works to well when running for President.
Posted by: Steve | Nov 12, 2007 1:59:52 PM
Lies, lies and more lies. Hillbill is going down.
Posted by: Lawrence Talbot | Nov 12, 2007 2:45:47 PM
If Senator Clinton was unaware that her staff was planting questions for her to answer, what does that say about her leadership abilities? What does it say about how nervous her staff is about her performance on unscripted questions? This sounds like Bush, JR. all over again.
Her staff certainly has reason to be anxious about her performance; her speech in Des Moines (available on CSPAN) was terrible. She looked like a third rate actress playing a role. She did not look natural or comfortable at all.
The last six years show that you can't expect too much when you elect people based upon their last name. All of the other candidates in the race (for both parties) got there on their own abilities. Despite the fawning press, Clinton's performance so far shows that she doesn't have the chops for the job. Most of us don't, but not very many of us are running for President.
Posted by: George | Nov 12, 2007 3:01:55 PM
People are people and as far as I'm concerned, what they do on their personal time, is their own business. I am more concerned with what they do with this country. The Clintons did a hell of a lot better than the Bushes. The democrats do for all while the republicans do for themselves(mostly the rich). Ask yourself if most of these "God abiding,Gay-bashing,gay republicans, did't get rich of the sweat of the poor?
Posted by: Norma | Nov 12, 2007 3:28:45 PM
Norma - So, you have nothing to defend Hilary on, so you must bash Bush? You do realize there is not a Bush running for president, do you not?
Posted by: Corrie | Nov 12, 2007 4:01:44 PM
I think the Bush Administration did a lot worse when they planted Male Prostitute Jeff Gannon in the White House Press Corps.I Wonder what other services he provided? I did'nt see half the hate spin I see on Hillary. Or how about the Fema press conference? The Hill haters sure don't hold their BOYS to the same standard, Swiftboat anyone?
Posted by: Rude | Nov 12, 2007 4:03:52 PM
Rude - Again, so all you have to defend Hilary is "everybody does it"? Bush is not running for president, Hilary Clinton is. If she wants my vote, she has to show me that she is capable of being the most powerful leader on the planet. So far, she is "unaware" of just about everything anyone asks her about. That may be good enough for you, but it is not good enough for me.
Posted by: Corrie | Nov 12, 2007 4:11:26 PM
She claims she didn't have anything to do with this??? Sure.........
Posted by: June | Nov 12, 2007 4:22:48 PM
What would be the point of her staffer planting a question that she was unaware of?
Posted by: Patrick | Nov 12, 2007 4:59:37 PM
Post a comment



