Democracy Now: Human Rights Activist Re: Hillary Clinton: "She's Baldly Lying"

[amborin]

"She's Baldly Lying": Human Rights Expert on Hillary Clinton's Defense of Her Role in Honduras Coup

Wednesday, 13 April 2016 00:00 By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! | Video Interview

As Hillary Clinton seeks to defend her role in the 2009 Honduras coup, we speak with Dana Frank, an expert on human rights and U.S. policy in Honduras. "This is breathtaking that she'd say these things. I think we're all kind of reeling that she would both defend the coup and defend her own role in supporting its stabilization in the aftermath," Frank says. "I want to make sure that the listeners understand how chilling it is that a leading presidential candidate in the United States would say this was not a coup.... She's baldly lying when she says we never called it a coup."

TRANSCRIPT:

AMY GOODMAN: For more on Honduras, we are joined by -- Hillary Clinton and the legacy of the 2009 coup -- Dana Frank, is professor of history at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and an expert on human rights and U.S. policy in Honduras.

Professor Frank, it's great to have you with us. Well, Hillary Clinton said a lot in this five-minute exchange with Juan González. Respond.

DANA FRANK: Well, I just want to say this is like breathtaking that she'd say these things. I think we're all kind of reeling that she would both defend the coup and defend her own role in supporting its stabilization in the aftermath. I mean, first of all, the fact that she says that they did it legally, that the Honduras judiciary and Congress did this legally, is like, oh, my god, just mind-boggling. The fact that she then is going to say that it was not an unconstitutional coup is incredible, when she actually had a cable, that we have in the WikiLeaks, in which U.S. Ambassador to Honduras Hugo Llorens says it was very clearly an illegal and unconstitutional coup. So she knows this from day one. She even admits in her own statement that it was the Honduran military, that she says, well, this was the only thing that was wrong there, that it was the military that took Zelaya out of the country, as opposed to somehow that it was an illegal thing we did -- that the Honduran government did, deposing a president.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to turn to that WikiLeaks cable on Honduras. The U.S. Embassy in Tegucigalpa, the capital of Honduras, sent a cable to Washington on July 24, 2009, less than a month after the coup. The subject line was "Open and Shut: The Case of the Honduran Coup." The cable asserted, quote, "there is no doubt" that the events of June 28, 2009, "constituted an illegal and unconstitutional coup," unquote. The Embassy listed arguments by supporters of the coup to claim its legality, and dismissed each of them, saying, quote, "none ... has any substantive validity under the Honduran constitution." The Embassy went on to say the Honduran military had no legal authority to remove President Zelaya from office or from Honduras. The Embassy also characterized the Honduran military's actions as an "abduction" and kidnapping that was unconstitutional. Again, this was the U.S. Embassy memo that was sent from Honduras to Washington. Professor Frank?

DANA FRANK: Well, I want to make sure that the listeners understand how chilling it is that the leading presidential -- a leading presidential candidate in the United States would say this was not a coup. The second thing is that she's baldly lying when she says we never called it a coup; we didn't, because that would mean we have to suspend the aid. Well, first of all, they repeatedly called it a coup. We can see State Department statements for months calling it a coup and confirming, yes, we call it a coup. What she refused to do was to use the phrase "military coup." So, she split hairs, because Section 7008 of the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for that year very clearly says that if it's a coup significantly involving the military, the U.S. has to immediately suspend all aid. So she -- they decided to have this interpretation that it was a coup, but not a military coup. So, she, Hillary Clinton -- and Obama, for that matter, I want to make clear -- in violation of U.S. law, that very clearly said if there's a coup, they have to cut the military aid and that -- all other aid to the country, she violated the law, decided, well, it wasn't a military coup, when of course it was. It was the military that put him on the plane, which she says in her statement.

snip

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35623-she-s-baldly-lying-human-rights-expert-responds-to-hillary-clinton-s-defense-of-her-role-in-honduras-coup

[ViseGrip]

1. That was a very good show to listen to yesterday....this is being kept from Americans

yet this discussion is taking place everywhere else!

[felix_numinous]

2. K&R for visibility.

[pantsonfire]

3. K&R + 2.

[BernieforPres2016]

4. Interesting that the press jumped on Bernie non issues within hours of his NY Daily News interview

But it took nearly a week for this one to get any notice, and even now the mainstream press won't acknowledge it. The other things Hillary said in that interview that aren't getting any play are her explanation of why no Wall Street executives were prosecuted after the 2008 financial and economic collapse (we don't really have laws that address it adequately) and on how we still don't know what kinds of risks hedge funds pose to our financial system.

[amborin]

5. yes, agree; otherwise, here

is an interesting study:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9680/index1.html

[BernieforPres2016]

7. The hedge fund Long Term Capital Management just about took down the economy in the late 90's

It took an emergency meeting of all the major banks, the Fed and the Treasury Department during the Clinton administration to keep a hedge fund nobody outside of Wall Street had ever heard of, Long Term Capital Management from blowing up and potentially taking the financial markets down with it. There was a good book on it called "When Genius Failed" by Roger Lowenstein.

Hillary casually dropped that almost 20 years later, we still don't understand the risks hedge funds pose to our financial system. And it isn't even considered newsworthy. I only know about her comment because I listened to the 80 minute audio of her interview with the NY Daily News editorial board (with owner Mort Zuckerman sitting quietly in the room). I haven't seen it reported anywhere.

[Fumesucker]

6. K&R