Even if Bernie Sanders doesn't win the primary, he has given every indication that he will

[Jarqui]

81. Is David Johnson of the NYT ok?

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/05/us/memo-places-hillary-clinton-at-core-of-travel-office-case.html?pagewanted=all

In the memorandum, apparently intended for Thomas F. McLarty, who was the White House chief of staff, Mr. Watkins wrote that "we both know that there would be hell to pay" if "we failed to take swift and decisive action in conformity with the First Lady's wishes."

Now, what exactly did Mr Safire get wrong in that example of Hillary's deception. Not a damn thing.

LA Times better?
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jun/23/news/mn-44043

Mrs. Clinton maintained that she played no part in the firings.

"Mrs. Clinton does not know the origin of the decision to remove the White House travel office employees," her lawyers told congressional auditors in 1994. They added that the first lady "did not direct that any action be taken."

Mrs. Clinton told Congress in 1996 that the earlier answers "were accurate."

But later that year a memo surfaced from then-presidential aide David Watkins stating that the first lady had been behind the firings. The matter was then referred by Atty. Gen. Janet Reno to Starr, who began submitting evidence about the controversy to a federal grand jury.

Specifically, Starr examined whether Watkins perjured himself during a congressional investigation of the episode when he insisted under oath that Mrs. Clinton had not played any role in the firings.

During lengthy hearings by a Republican-led House committee, the White House later surrendered memos written by Watkins that suggested Mrs. Clinton had instigated the firings at the urging of Hollywood producer Harry Thomason, a longtime friend of the Clintons who was seeking a share of the White House travel business.

The nonpolitical travel office, staffed by career employees, is in charge of making all travel arrangements for the White House press corps, whose members reimburse the office for expenses incurred in covering the president on his travels throughout the world.

President Clinton later apologized for the firings and offered other jobs in the government to most of those who had been dismissed.

Is there anything there that materially contradicts William Safire's example?

Nope.

You can go through each one of those examples in my post. There is video and/or documentation to back them up. I refer to the Washington Post Pinocchios. Politico. The set of four email lies. The Bosnia sniper lie. the Irish peace lie. NAFTA lie. etc. None of those references relied on Goldberg or Safire or the right wing. But we're supposed to ignore all of Clinton's lying because Safire and Goldberg also observed it and took the time to describe it with real examples? Ridiculous. Not everything everybody says is wrong unless you like them and embrace their point of view. Safire and Goldberg made their case with real examples of Hillary's deceitful behavior. Shooting them as messengers is not going to change that in the eye of the public. Either Hillary lied or she didn't. In the cases I noted that they brought up, the vast majority of the public would regard them as Safire & Goldberg did: as lies. It doesn't matter who wrote about them - Hillary lied.