Clinton's direct quote: I would NOT favor raising retirement age"

[KittyWampus]

"I would not favor raising the retirement age"

She goes on to say she favors raising the cap.

So why are there now THREE threads in this forum blatantly lying about what Clinton said?

[HassleCat]

1. I would not favor giving you twenty bucks

But I'm open to it. See how that works? It's the politician's way of leaving options open.

[upaloopa]

14. You don't have any real points so you will make some up

See how that works?

[HassleCat]

33. I will ignore your smartass attitude and explain my point

I'm going to assume you are interested in a discussion. I hope I'm not being too charitable. My point is quite real. Clinton says she's not in favor or raising the retirement age. She also says she's open to it. This is what politicians do. They state their support or opposition in ways that allows them to go either way later on. They don't like to be pined down until they're sure they're safe in moving one way or the other. They don't lead. They follow. If you think Hillary Clinton is any different than other politicians, you are incorrect. Support her, admire her, worship her, or whatever you feel appropriate. But do not forget she is a politician.

[artislife]

83. Very charitable, like a real Dem. nt

[jkbRN]

85. Good on you for explaining! I see no response..

That's quite sad from the person that responded to your comment in the first place. I guess it's to be expected.

I wish people would understand the use of language, and especially how lawyers use it to their advantage--my brother does it all the time.

[Phlem]

84. !!!

"I would not favor raising the retirement age" does not equal "I will not raise the retirement age".

Fucking der.

[Fred Sanders]

88. Semantical arguments, so this is what DU is reduced to.....the whole site is being made pathetic

by pathetic speculative sightings of words unspoken.

[Phlem]

92. OK Colonel.

Try again next time. We'll still be PAYING ATTENTION.

[leftyladyfrommo]

2. That seems to be happening a lot

And not just about Clinton but also about Obama.

Makes me wonder who's really behind it all.

[MineralMan]

10. What's behind it is blind hatred of Hillary Clinton.

Too bad. What will they do when she is inaugurated in 2017? I shudder at the thought.

But, we have a taste of it. Attacks here on Barack Obama began apace the day after the inauguration, and never stopped. Maybe I should go look at who was making those attacks in 2009. I wonder if there's a connection...

[leftyladyfrommo]

39. There was an Obama one just lately.

There was a thread about how he was going to cut Medicare and blah,blah, blah. And none of it was true. It was just totally inflammatory.

You can't believe anything here until you fact check it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

54. LOL ...

Maybe I should go look at who was making those attacks in 2009. I wonder if there's a connection...

That made me laugh.

[Scootaloo]

57. Skip back to 2008, tell me what your search produces.

[MADem]

81. It's obvious and shameful, too. Wonder what horrid name will come to the fore for her?

Obama was likened to a segment of excrement who was also a purveyor of vintage automobiles....!

He knew how to brush it off.

She does, too!

[Unknown Beatle]

96. Theodore Roosevelt

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”

We're all democrats here, hence why we joined this site, Democratic Underground or DU for short. Are we just supposed to stay silent or heap praise on politicians just because they have a D next to their name but never criticize or question their motives? If that's what this site is about, never to criticize and question our politicians, then I'll quit and go seek another site where I'm allowed to express my feelings, question and/or criticize the politician with a D next to their name.

[Scuba]

105. +1,000

[ViseGrip]

3. THANK YOU so much for posting this! I heard her in the debate.

These posts made me wonder if she changed her mind! SHE HAS NOT!

Thanks Kitty!

[NCTraveler]

4. Extreme desperation. Seeing more an more of it.

I just read one where they said they won't vote for Hillary in the General because of the offensiveness of her supporters. I must have missed where a Hillary supporter accused the LGBQT community and POC of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome simply because they support a progressive.

[MineralMan]

5. Because some people don't like the words she used, I guess.

Since a President cannot really do either of those things without Congress passing a bill, it's all theoretical anyhow. No President can actually say, "This is what I will do about Social Security." There's really not much a President can do. It's up to us, really.

If we elect people to both houses of Congress and get Democratic majorities, then it actually becomes an issue. I wouldn't predict that outcome in 2016, though. We might get a slim majority back in the Senate, but I see no chance of a House majority. I do think we'll pick up some seats, though.

[ismnotwasm]

6. Plus a million

[lovemydog]

13. Yes.

That's where we keep up the pressure, regardless of who we support in the presidential primary and who wins in the general election.

[jeff47]

20. Nah, we just bothered to read ALL the words she used

instead of stopping at the first sentence.

[azurnoir]

75. No it's because people hear all the words she said

not just the 'hook'

[SunSeeker]

7. I guess because she didn't punctuate the sentence with "Death to oligarchs!"

[in_cog_ni_to]

8. Clinton's direct quote:

If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it.

Cherry picking sucks.

[MineralMan]

11. But, see, there is no way to do that.

Last edited Fri Oct 30, 2015, 02:56 PM - Edit history (1)

So, it won't happen. Besides, Presidents can't cut Social Security in the first place or remove the cap.

[jeff47]

19. Sure there is.

Make it so that people who have not-physically demanding jobs have to retire 4 years later.

Ta-da!

Besides, Presidents can't cut Social Security in the first place or remove the cap.

Hrm...if only they had some sort of influence on members of the branch that can do that. Or if there were these people called "voters" who might listen to what a president says.

Oh well!

[PoliticAverse]

37. Sure they can, by signing congressional bills that contain provisions to do so. n/t

[KittyWampus]

52. Then go on to the next PARAGRAPH where she says she favors lifting the cap-

[frylock]

59. Direct quote, please?

[George II]

72. Oh, c'mon...get real. Once "the" point is made that they want to make they don't want to....

....disprove that point by quoting the entire comment.

(of course I'm being sarcastic by telling you to get real!)

[workinclasszero]

9. Desperate people do desperate things

Like make things up about their opponent.

[PoliticAverse]

12. Because she also said, in the same explanation, "I would consider it".

Thirdly, we do have to consider ways to make sure that the funding of Social Security does maintain the system. I think we have a number of options; this would be something that I would look at, I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable

From:
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/say-it-aint-so-hillary-clinton-youre-open-idea-raising-retirement-age

[upaloopa]

18. How about her last sentence added to that?

Hillary maybe uses too many words to explain her positions.
She is after all speaking to supposedly intelligent people who would understand her meaning.
Of course her real meaning does not fit the narrative some people have prepared for her so they take her words out of context to make their case.

[Armstead]

45. There are things you have to be either for or against

Sure circumstances might change -- but bottom line is people deserve to know whether a candidate stands here or there on an issue.

No, I will refuse to raise the retirement age becaue Social Security is a sacred trust we have to honor

or

Yes. We will probably have to raise it to ensure the long term viability of the system.

Pretty straightforward.

[99th_Monkey]

61. "I have YET to find any recommendation (raising ret. age) I would think would be suitable"

Sorry, but it suggests to me like she may still be looking for a way to raise ret. age, so
once she DOES find a way .. then waa-laa .. she can still support it, due to "new information" ..
and when she does, it wouldn't exactly be a lie, now would it?

That's how weasel wording works. She was an attorney, after all, before she became
a politician.

[Autumn]

15. PART of Clinton's direct quote: I would NOT favor raising retirement age"

Talking about the entire quote isn't lying.

[Armstead]

16. Hillary's DIRECT QUOTE....Filled with "ifs, ands or buts"

If you can figure what ultimately that means beyond "maybe, maybe not" please let me know:

Thirdly, we do have to consider ways to make sure that the funding of Social Security does maintain the system. I think we have a number of options; this would be something that I would look at, I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

And I want to look at raising the cap. I think that’s something we should look at how we do it, because I don’t want it to be an extra burden on middle-class families and in some parts of the country, there’s a different level of income that defines middle class. So what do we skip and what level do we start at? And we have to consider that. So those are my three priorities in looking at Social Security.

[bkkyosemite]

38. It's called a sales pitch

" I don’t want it to be an extra burden on middle-class families and in some parts of the country, there’s a different level of income that defines middle class."

Raising the cap because some people are in a different level of middle class...come on....the majority of people make less than $50,000 per year. She is white washing it. That different level that defines middle class is her interpretation of what that middle class is. Her statements are not sincere in my opinion. Wordy and trying to dance around the issue.

We have to consider that too. Do we want a person who speaks truth (Bernie Sanders) or one that uses many words with really no commit to anything.

[jeff47]

17. Because she didn't stop with that one sentence.

In the exact same paragraph you quote, Clinton says she is open to raising the retirement age, but has not seen any proposals she likes.

[Broward]

21. Exactly, this isn't that complicated. I think some are being deliberately obtuse.

[upaloopa]

23. No she did not say she doesn't see any she likes

Those are your words.
She laid out conditions which would never happen so therefore she says she doesn't see any an that meet those conditions.
In short hand she doesn't favor razing the retirement age.
She doesn't just say something that fits a sound bite she explains her case
But that opens her up to her detractors who take her words out of context.

[jeff47]

26. "But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable."

Boy, that is totally and utterly different!!!

Here's the two relevant sentences:

If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

Feel free to explain how "I would consider it" means "I would never consider it", as you claim.

She laid out conditions which would never happen so therefore she says she doesn't see any an that meet those conditions.

Workers with jobs that are not physically demanding have to wait an additional 2 years.

Ta-da! I just met her conditions.

[bvar22]

46. Raising-the-Cap would hurt NONE of those people. They could retire On Time with FULL benefits.

It would "hurt" Hillary's RICH friends ONLY,
and they wouldn't even notice it.

[jeff47]

48. And yet she couldn't even support that completely.

And I want to look at raising the cap. I think that’s something we should look at how we do it, because I don’t want it to be an extra burden on middle-class families and in some parts of the country, there’s a different level of income that defines middle class. So what do we skip and what level do we start at? And we have to consider that.

[bvar22]

51. Here. I'll let Obama explain it from 2008:

[Armstead]

28. Let's try this slowly

"No...I....,don't....support...raising....the...retirement.....age."

"I believe Social Security is a sacred trust that is available to everyone, and that everyone should have the ability to retire at the age we have long agreed on."

OR if you choose:

"Yes. people are living longer and they are healthier at 65 than they used to be, and many are working longer. So I believe it's important to raise the age to protect the long trm viability of Social Security."


Take your pick. Either one lets people know what they're getting if they vote for her.

[riversedge]

31. she was talking about raising the cap in that paragraph-Not the retirement age.

[jeff47]

34. Wrong.

Here's the whole paragraph.

Thirdly, we do have to consider ways to make sure that the funding of Social Security does maintain the system. I think we have a number of options; this would be something that I would look at, I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

Please point to where she is talking about the cap, and not retirement age...you know, the thing she explicitly said, and then continued to allude to it being difficult for older people to do certain jobs.

Why do you think we don't actually have the entire paragraph?

[George II]

78. And you just confirmed the point of the OP, thanks:

"I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them."

Glad we're on the same side.

[riversedge]

82. Thanks. just saw it so will leave it.

[jeff47]

99. Nope. Try reading allllllllll the way to the end of the paragraph

I know, it's tricky, but I'm confident you can.

[KittyWampus]

53. Right- she went on to say she favors raising the CAP, not retirement age.

I mean, if you want the FULL context and quotation.

[frylock]

58. She said she wanted to LOOK at raising the cap.

Where did she say she FAVORS raising the cap?

[jeff47]

65. She said she was open to raising the retirement age, and then moved on to "looking at" the cap. (nt)

[George II]

93. Nope. As many times as you repeat it, that won't change what she said:

I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them.

[jeff47]

100. I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable

You have to go alllllll the way to the end of the paragraph to read the part where she's open to raising the retirement age.

[mcar]

22. Thank you Kitty

The others should delete their OPs.

[Armstead]

24. And Another Thing....

I thought her strength is that she's Ready to Go on Day One, and is ultra prepared and has everything in order.

Then why the hell on most issues of importance are her favorite phrases: "I will have to consider that"...."We have to study that more"....."That is certainly a topic we as a nation have to consider..."

Most o these issues are NOT NEW. These are not some sudden crisis that recently emerged.

One would think, with all of her experience, and preparation, etc. that she would have made up her mind on SOMETHING, anything.

[riversedge]

29. She did not say any of that for SS yesterday at the town hall

[Armstead]

30. I did not see or listen to her Town Hall if it was a differernt one

If she said an unequivacal NO, without any qualifiers, then that's good. If so, I'm glad she took a stand...finally.

[bvar22]

49. Hillary?

Taking a firm, unambiguous STAND on anything?
Never happen.
She has learned too well from the Master.

[Sheepshank]

25. I have been hearing this very same crappola regarding Obama.....and it NEVER eventuates

over and over, the hair on fire, find anything to complain about, jumping to all sorts of erroneous conclusions are always posted and the same crowd reccing the hell out of the post. At some point you'd think they'd be tired from all the jumping to conclusions...but no, apparently shame has no place in reality base conversations.

All of the issues just like raising the retirement age, reducing benefits, cutting benefits...non of it ever eventuated, but it didn't stop the falsehoods from being perpetuated. I got pretty sick of hearing about it all for 8 years, I can see the primers are already in place for another 4. Some people just dont want to learn.

[Armstead]

42. People with hair on fire make a difference in some cases

I suspect, for example, if people didn't have their hair on fire, awful new Internet deregulation and Media Mergers would have sailed through quietly with nary a peep -- until people started feeling the affects after it was too late.

[bvar22]

50. Same with Social Security.

The Obama Admn. sent up Trial Balloons early in his administration,
and they didn't do well. Americans with their hair on fire shot them down,
while the placid majority remained in their recliners.

If cutting YOUR Social Security and giving it to Wall Street does NOT light your hair on fire,
you aren't paying attention.

[riversedge]

27. I think it started with the posting of the Alternet story-The headling was misleading but it you

read the story it contradicted the headline!!

[jeff47]

36. As long as you stopped reading before the part where she said she'd consider it. (nt)

[riversedge]

41. You obviously should work on your reading comprehension including the context of the story

[Armstead]

43. How is a quote different than context?

[jeff47]

44. Really. Here's the paragraph.

Thirdly, we do have to consider ways to make sure that the funding of Social Security does maintain the system. I think we have a number of options; this would be something that I would look at, I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable

The best summary being the last sentence-and-a bit.

I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

Now, please explain how "this would be something that I would look at" and "I would consider it" means "I would never do it", oh master of reading comprehension.

[riversedge]

91. Her last sentence gives you your answer. bye now. Enough!

[KittyWampus]

55. as long as you consider the paragraph that came before and AFTER it...

you can pretend she favors raising the retirement age.

[jeff47]

64. The paragraph before is about adding means testing, and after is about lifting the cap.

Here's all three paragraphs.

Secondly, I am concerned about those people on Social Security who are most vulnerable in terms of what their monthly payout is. That is primarily divorced, widowed, single women who either never worked themselves or worked only a little, so they have either just their own earnings to depend on or they had a spouse who also was a low-wage worker, and the first and most important task I think is to make sure that we get the monthly payment for the poorest Social Security recipients up. So that would be the first thing I would look at.

Thirdly, we do have to consider ways to make sure that the funding of Social Security does maintain the system. I think we have a number of options; this would be something that I would look at, I would not favor raising the retirement age. And I don’t favor it because it might be fine for somebody like me, but the vast majority of working people who have worked hard and have had a difficult, maybe last couple of decades trying to continue to work, it would be very challenging for them. If there were a way to do it that would not penalize or punish laborers and factory workers and long-distance truck drivers and people who really are ready for retirement at a much earlier age, I would consider it. But I have yet to find any recommendation that I would think would be suitable.

And I want to look at raising the cap. I think that’s something we should look at how we do it, because I don’t want it to be an extra burden on middle-class families and in some parts of the country, there’s a different level of income that defines middle class. So what do we skip and what level do we start at? And we have to consider that. So those are my three priorities in looking at Social Security.

The paragraph before is about her proposal to add a means-tested "bonus" to Social Security, so the poor get more money. (Btw, this will be fantastic ammunition for those seeking to end all of Social Security)

The paragraph after is about lifting the cap.

Only the paragraph in the middle talks about raising the retirement age.

[Luminous Animal]

86. Not now but she might consider it in the future.

Those were her words, also.

[restorefreedom]

35. "favor" is a bs doublespeak term

like not liking the tpp "as it is now".. gives them an out to change their mind.

and we know what a fan clinton is of changing her mind

[C Moon]

67. Agreed: I hate it when politicians use that word. There's no conviction behind using that word.

[restorefreedom]

95. but its perfect for those who want wiggle room. nt

[Vattel]

40. Close, but not quite.

She said that she wants to "look at" raising the cap, and after she said that she listed some of the pitfalls that certain ways of raising the cap might have. That is a bit different from her saying that "she favors raising the cap." It does suggest that she is very open to proposals to raise the cap, but it leaves her plenty of room to reject any such proposal.

You also omit the qualifications to her claim that she would not favor raising the retirement age, qualifications that give her some room to accept the right proposal for raising the retirement age. She does suggest, though, that she would not support proposals to raise the retirement age for everyone. It's hard to imagine a system where the retirement age depends on the nature of one's employment, but maybe such a system is possible.

Basically, I understand her to be indicating her general inclinations without closing off too many options. Why she doesn't want to promise to veto any bill that would raise the retirement age, and why she doesn't want to promise to fight for raising the cap, is arguable. It may be that she is just unsure what the best approach is, or maybe she wants to leave herself some wiggle room to move to the center for the general election. It is hard to say.

[jeff47]

66. It's not that hard to imagine.

We already have official "job codes" on various government forms. Declare some of those "physically active", and others "not physically active". If your job is "not physically active", then you have to wait 2 years.

What is hard to imagine about that?

[fbc]

47. This is HUGE

For someone as slavishly devoted to the billionaire class as Hillary Clinton to come out so strongly against an idea favored by Republicans and The Third Way... wow, maybe she is starting to get it.

[99th_Monkey]

62. You are kidding, right?

Do you think her statement is any kind of clear unequivocal opposition to raising retirement age?

Please consider this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=745824

[frylock]

56. I WOULD not favor raising retirement age..

Rather than "I DO not favor raising retirement age." Lots of wiggle room there. As with Obama, learn to read between the lines.

[CharlotteVale]

63. Yep. She always leaves herself loopholes big enough to drive a truck through.

[RoccoR5955]

60. Are you sure she will not change her mind on this

As she has on so many other issues?
I don't know if I can trust her, her opinions have changed so many times.

[George II]

68. Desperation.

[iandhr]

69. Because DU should be called Bash Clinton or Bash Obama underground.

Any positive facts towards the President and the former Secretary of State are not welcome here.

Today good news about the ACA could break. Tomorrow the top rated thread will be POTUS is a sellout because it not single payer.

But if you post something factual about Bernie's record your post gets hidden 7-0

[frylock]

73. Heaven forfend we discuss issues and use the past words and actions of our candidates..

to form an opinion. Why can't we just take her word at it and hope she doesn't "evolve" on the issue?

[David__77]

70. "Would" strikes me as conditional.

And so I ask: what is the condition? If she said "I DO not..." that would occur to me as a different statement, and it is, indeed, a different statement.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

71. Because as her lead in the polls grow her opponents will become more vitriolic...

Because as her lead in the polls grows her opponents, on both sides of the aisle, will become more vitriolic and untethered from reality in their attacks.

[stonecutter357]

74. +1

[JoePhilly]

76. +1

[DemocratSinceBirth]

79. Some are at the point where they are just making stuff about her.

It's actually amusing ...

[JoePhilly]

102. When ...

... Hilary wins the primary, it should get very interesting around here. Bernie, Warren and everyone else will get behind her, and these folks will be even more disgruntled than usual.

Might need to set up a hot line.

[Gman]

77. Hillary is a war mongering Wall Street loving

Red meat eating, meat eating, cow murdering Round Up loving corporatist or something like that. If I got it right. And Sanders isn't so it can't be true.

I think that's how it goes.

I probably left some stuff out.

[Eric J in MN]

80. Hillary Clinton is worried the raising the cap

...would be too tough on some individuals with income over $118,500 (the current cap).

I want to look at raising the cap. I think that’s something we should look at how we do it, because I don’t want it to be an extra burden on middle-class families and in some parts of the country, there’s a different level of income that defines middle class.

[Phlem]

87. I see this thread is sorely lacking in critical thinking and heavily

reliant on assumption.

[Hoyt]

89. Sounds pretty strong to me. Surprised anyone is questionong what she said.

[Phlem]

94. Uhh maybe because politicians talk out their asses.

I can only imagine a Republican saying this and getting completely torn apart. But hey, maybe your logic is all based on assumptions.

[Hoyt]

97. Yes Sanders does too. He knows he has no chance to accomplish what he proposes.

[Phlem]

98. Notice how i said "Politicians"

My reply was not a response to an individual politician. Of course Bernie has talked out his ass, notice how said "Politicians". I cannot find any cases of it, but he is human and not all perfect.

Facts however do not equal assumptions.

Have a nice day.

[Lil Missy]

90. Because they lie out of desperation. n/t

[Phlem]

101. you know this because.........

Facts please.

[quickesst]

103. Because....

...it looks good to them. Fanning the flames of a fire that turns out to be nothing more than a video slipped into a DVD player. Looks hot, but in reality, cold to the touch, and not real.

[HassleCat]

104. Supporting your candidate is good, I guess

This thread happens to have several Clinton supporters deconstructing her statement to "prove" she is categorically opposed to raising the SS retirement age. We find similar stuff explaining how Bernie Sanders is really strong on gun control because he got a D-minus from the NRA. People, people, people. Our candidates are politicians. Some of their baggage incudes contradictions, reversals, waffling, intentionally vague commitments, and so on. They're just trying to keep their options open. In some cases, they haven't decided yet, and don't want to commit right now, because issues are not simplistic. Our candidates are Democrats, and Democrats like to think about things, not make blunt pronouncements like Republicans do.

Opponents and supporters alike should realize candidate statements on the issues will sometimes not be all we wish they were. Maybe we should relax and wait to see what happens.

[Scuba]

106. More weasel words from the Queen of Camp Weathervane. Her chumming with Pete Peterson tells ...

... you all you need to know about Hillary and Social Security.

[Cha]

107. Because they can't win by telling the truth.