Illinois Minister Tells ABC News That Clinton Staffer Asked Him to Pose a War Question

[ariesgem]

Another Question Planted by Clinton Campaign
Illinois Minister Tells ABC News That Clinton Staffer Asked Him to Pose a War Question

By ELOISE HARPER
Nov. 10, 2007

One day after Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign confirmed that a staffer planted a question for the presidential candidate at a recent campaign stop, another person has come forward with a similar story.

Geoff Mitchell, a minister who recently moved to Hamilton, Ill., from Iowa, told ABC News that he was approached this spring by Clinton's Iowa political director Chris Haylor to ask Clinton a question about war funding.

Mitchell, 32, said that the request "this did not sit well with me in the tradition of the Iowa caucus."

"I grew up in Iowa and I value the tradition of the caucuses of answering the questions of the people," Mitchell said.

Mitchell said he introduced himself to Haylor because he had heard of him before and knew that he had worked on Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh's campaign.

Before the campaign event, Haylor asked Mitchell if he would pose a specific question about Iraq. The question was about how Clinton would be tough on President Bush about funding the Iraq war, Mitchell said.

The event, however, ran out of time before reaching a question-and-answer period.

Mitchell said he figured that the Clinton campaign was looking for an opportunity to highlight the difference between her position on Iraq and her Democratic rival Sen. Barack Obama's position on the war.

The Clinton campaign confirmed to ABC News that Clinton's staffer and Mitchell did speak about a possible Iraq question.

"Chris Haylor and Geoff Mitchell knew each other and they started talking and the subject of Iraq came up," Clinton spokesman Mo Elleithee said, "and Chris suggested that he ask a question about Iraq."

The revelation today about a campaign-prompted question comes just one day after the Clinton campaign admitted to planting a question this week in Iowa.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3848826&page=1

[Ian David]

1. Talk about the pot calling the kettle Gannon. n/t

[MethuenProgressive]

10. It'll blow over soon - because all candidates do it,

The faux outrage is from the underinformed.

[Joe the Revelator]

11. All candidates don't get caught...

give the media an excuse and they'll take it. Hillary was obviously way to caviler with he she asked to shill for her.

[calteacherguy]

13. Edwards and Dodd are two (so far) who have stated they do not. nt

[papau]

16. interesting - have they posted the written instructions telling their staff not to? n/t

[papau]

15. I agree - the media is desparate to take down Clinton - folks I talk to think it'll backfire n/t

[Mojambo]

2. When it comes to the political/PR machine there is little difference between the Bushes and Clintons

IMO

[jefferson_dem]

8. They are more alike than different.

Can't we be done with both the Bushes and the Clintons? Please.

[mike_c]

3. manufacturing the message....

I realize that this is probably common practice among campaigning politicians, but that doesn't make it any less repugnant IMO.

[calteacherguy]

4. Sounds to me Clinton's "conversations" are well-scripted commercials. nt

[AtomicKitten]

5. bingo

Which is why Obama is hammering her on authenticity.

[gateley]

6. This.....

Mitchell said he introduced himself to Haylor because he had heard of him before and knew that he had worked on Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh's campaign.

differs from this:

"Chris Haylor and Geoff Mitchell knew each other and they started talking and the subject of Iraq came up," Clinton spokesman Mo Elleithee said, "and Chris suggested that he ask a question about Iraq."

If they "knew" each other, why would Mitchell have to introduce himself to Haylor?


That statement by Mo Elleithee is painful to read -- "....and the subject of Iraq came up".

[nancyharris]

7. This is a quite detestable practice for any candidate

Many people attending political events go to hear the candidate's speech and get a sense of how well they react to questions posed by the audience. If a campaign does not inform the public that the questions have been suggested by the campaign staff they are deceiving the people attending the event in a most egregious manner. The staff (hopefully not the candidate) are perpetrating a lie.

[Cooley Hurd]

9. ABCNews.com - the same outlet that claimed there were no one "important" on the DC Madam's list?

...when a sitting-Senator. David Vitter, was a prominent client?

Let's not even discuss ABC's "The (untrue) Path to War."

Trust me, I'm NOT a Hillary supporter, BUT I will question the veracity of ANYTHING coming from ABCNews...

[PurityOfEssence]

12. "Shillery": it does sort of have a ring to it...

One is responsible for the actions of one's staff, after all. In the other incident, she somehow knew which people to call upon, so even if she didn't know that the person was a deliberate plant, she DEFINITELY knew she was a "friendly" questioner. Since the event is being portrayed as Senator Clinton standing up honestly to "the people" and taking whatever questions come her way, this is deception by definition.

Screening pushes the boundaries of acceptable depiction of the openness of a forum when done in any form, but it's not really a leap of logic to presume the worst. Fair or not, the more shady crap this inevitability bandwagon gets caught at, the worse the assumptions will be.

[jenmito]

14. Or "Slick Hilly" n/t

[illinoisprogressive]

17. this was originally reported by Ben Smith in april. The same thing he told now.

he was very angry that this would happen as he said it is not democracy to do this.