QUEEN OF FAKE NEWS: 8 Times Hillary Fabricated Stories to Help Her Image

hillaryOh, where to begin with this one. Hillary is no stranger to lying. She doesn’t know what’s a lie and what’s the truth anymore. They’ve become one and the same to her. So it’s no surprise she’s generated a couple “big fish” stories in her time. All for her own personal gain, of course.

Get ready for some REAL news.

Clinton told D.C. lawmakers this week that they need to act on “fake news.” Breitbart’s Charlie Spiering reported:

“The epidemic of malicious fake news and false propaganda that flooded social media over the past year — it’s now clear that so-called fake news can have real world consequences,” Clinton said. “This isn’t about politics or bipartisanship. Lives are at risk.”

Trending: WATCH: City Inspector Demands Store Owner REMOVE U.S. Military Flags, Insults Veteran at Store

Clinton called for Congress to pass legislation to stop it and for tech moguls in Silicon Valley to continue searching for a way to block it from entering readers’ Facebook and Twitter feeds.

“It’s a danger that must be addressed and addressed quickly,” Clinton said.

Yet Clinton is not an authority on fighting “fake news” — only an expert in spreading it. Here are some of the biggest whoppers she sold the American people during her ill-fated political career.

1. “Landing Under Sniper Fire”

This one is a classic. In 2008, she said of her 1996 trip to Bosnia: “I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.”

This whopper went down as the most memorable moment of her first doomed presidential campaign.

2. Her grandmother was an immigrant

In the first week of her second doomed presidential campaign, Clinton told an audience in Iowa that “I think if we were to just go around this room, there are a lot of immigrant stories. All my grandparents, you know, came over here and you know my grandfather went to work in lace mill in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and worked there until he retired at 65.”

Even the left-wing PolitiFact had to shut her down — with a caveat that “it’s possible that she misspoke” by getting 3 out of 4 birthplaces in the wrong hemisphere.

Clinton’s paternal grandfather, Hugh Rodham Sr., was born in England, but her three other grandparents were born in the United States.

Hugh Rodham’s wife, Hanna (also Hannah) Jones Rodham, was born in Scranton, Pa., to Welsh parents a couple years after they emigrated. Census, civil and military records show Clinton’s maternal grandparents, Della and Edwin Howell, were born in Illinois. (Della’s mother was the one great-grandparent born in the United States.)

3. A recruiter shut down her attempt to join the Marines because she was a woman

A longtime campaign trail anecdote finally died this year — the one Hillary has been telling since the ’90s about a sexist Marines recruiter:

“You’re too old, you can’t see and you’re a woman,” Mrs. Clinton said she was told, adding that the recruiter dismissed her by suggesting she try the Army. “Maybe the dogs would take you,” she recalled the recruiter saying.

Yet thanks to Wikileaks, we learned that she told a different story at a pricey paid speech in 2013:

Question from the audience: Is it true that until 1975 you applied for the Marines and they told you no because you were a female?

Hillary: No. Here is what did happen: It was actually — there was a recruiting station, and I thought, you know, maybe I should consider serving my country by joining the military. So I walked into the recruiting station, and the person on duty was a Marine. And I think I was 26, maybe 27, so, an older potential recruit. I said to the young Marine, I said, “Well, you know, I’d be interested in getting some information to see whether I could maybe serve. I’m a lawyer. Maybe I could help in some way.” He says, “Well, I think you are too old for the Marines but maybe the dogs will take you.” I said, “The dogs?” He goes, “Yeah, you know, the Army.” I said, “Well, it doesn’t sound like I’m going to be welcome so…”

4. The Benghazi attack was a protest against a YouTube video

We all know how this one played out.

Patricia Smith and Charles Woods, parents of Sean Smith and Ty Woods, said Hillary met with them days after the attack and vowed the government would arrest the video maker — which did happen! Fake news can have real world consequences.

While that happened, Hillary told the Prime Minister of Egypt and her daughter (we’ll just ignore Hillary’s disregard of security for the moment) that the attack was terrorism. She actually had this to say the day after the attack:

“We know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack – not a protest.”

She was lying to protect her own skin.

5. She never sent or received classified email on her homebrew email server

Clinton could have faced serious legal trouble for sending and receiving all of her emails as Secretary of State from an unsecured server installed in her Chappaqua home, rather than the secured state.gov system. When the story claim to light, she claimed without any caveats that she never sent or received classified material

“I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.” — March 2015

“I never sent or received any classified material.” — February 2016

FBI Director James Comey found Clinton’s excuses — and later modifications of them, as more information came to light — to be categorically false.

However, Comey shockingly declined to prosecute Clinton for transmitting classified material over the open Internet, claiming that she had no “intent” to break the law. Rep. Trey Gowdy later referred to Clinton’s debunked claims as “false exculpatory statements,”which prosecutors can use to argue that a defendant knows he or she is guilty.

6. Russia was behind Wikileaks’ release of John Podesta’s emails

At the third presidential debate, Clinton deflected from the content of her paid private speeches by attacking the source, Wikileaks. She said that the federal government had “confirmed” that Russian hackers planted the emails of Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta with the publisher and its editor-in-chief Julian Assange:


What’s really important about WikiLeaks is that the Russian government has engaged in espionage against Americans. They have hacked American websites, American accounts of private people, of institutions. Then they have given that information to WikiLeaks for the purpose of putting it on the Internet. This has come from the highest levels of the Russian government, clearly, from Putin himself, in an effort — as 17 of our intelligence agencies have confirmed — to influence our election.

At the time, Breitbart’s Joel Pollak argued that no one had proved anything — and Obama has previously provided fake information for political purposes:

The fact that the Obama administration has pointed the finger at Russia is not, as lawyers like to say, “dispositive.” The Centcom scandal showed that the Obama administration is fully prepared to alter intelligence — even battlefield reports — to deliver a politically convenient result. And there is nothing more convenient than to lay the embarrassment of Wikileaks at the feet of the Trump campaign. 

Fred Fleitz of the Center for Security Policy more directly attacked Clinton’s assertion as “false”:

What Clinton said was false and misleading. First of all, only two intelligence entities – the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – have weighed in on this issue, not 17 intelligence agencies. And what they said was ambiguous about Russian involvement.

Saying we think the hacks “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts” is far short of saying we have evidence that Russia has been responsible for the hacks. Maybe high-level officials would have authorized them if Russian hackers were responsible, but the DNI and DHS statement did NOT say there was evidence Russia was responsible.


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.