Sarah Palin Responds To The Response Over Her Response To The Arizona Shootings

Sarah Palin was "interviewed" by Sean Hannity last night. I doubt she helped herself.

The former Governor of Alaska took too the safe, unquestioning, air of Fox News Channel yesterday to respond one more time to the controversy that erupted in the days after the shootings in Arizona, as well as the controversy that erupted after her video message last week:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin insisted Monday that she did know the definition of, and correctly used, the term “blood libel” in recently striking back at her critics.

“Blood libel obviously means being falsely accused of having blood on your hands,” Palin said in a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity.

It was Palin’s first interview since the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and the political fallout that followed. After catching flak for rhetoric that led some to pin blame for the shootings partly on her, Palin released an eight-minute video statement last week that denounced the mainstream media for having manufactured “a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn.”

That led to reprimands from Jewish leaders for her use of the term, which has its roots in false, anti-Semitic charges from centuries ago that Jews would use the blood of Christian children to make Passover matzo.

Asked to respond to critics who questioned if Palin really knew what she was saying, the former governor responded: “I don’t know how the heck they would or wouldn’t know” if she understood the definition.

“It goes back to the Jewish people being falsely accused,” she said. “A group of people being falsely accused of having blood on their hands.”

As Palin defended the term by insisting that she has been unfairly targeted, the former governor declared that her response to the tragedy was not “about me.”

“My defense wasn’t self-defense, it was defending those who were falsely accused,” she insisted. “I was puzzled as to why, and before facts were even gathered, why the mainstream media was pointing fingers.”

And her sometimes inflammatory rhetoric, Palin said, has not crossed a line. “When I talk about being up in arms, I’m talking about getting to the voting booth,” she contended.

The question then becomes, of course, why she doesn’t just fire people up about getting out to vote instead of putting the entire thing in the context of references to guns, and violence, and confrontation. While I reject the notion that Palin’s rhetoric had anything to do with what happened in Arizona, I do have to wonder about the psychology of a movement that is so obsessed with this kind of imagery, and whether it is really an appropriate way to bring about political change in a pluralistic, democratic, society.

You can watch the three-part video, which I’ve embedded below, for yourself, but I think Frances Martlet at Mediaite pretty much hits the mark here:

Sarah Palin may be known as “Mama Grizzly,” a political lightning rod, a published author, and a reality TV star, but tonight on Hannity she was a woman scorned. Pupils shaking and voice struggling to remain steadfast, the former Alaska governor gave defending herself post-Tucson (and post-controversial video response) to Sean Hannity the old college try, but at some point it was hard to remember whether it was Palin or Rep. Gabrielle Giffords who took bullets two weeks ago.

(…)

Palin’s course of action during this interview was a perfect strategy from the perspective of a Fox News contributor- she sold her story, played the victim, and equated her suffering with that of the people she claims to represent (Hannity viewers among them). For the rest of America, however- especially swing voters- wallowing in self-pity when six people are dead and a Congresswoman is in the hospital cannot be expected to go over well. Her task tonight, should she be interested in the presidency, was to prove that in times of crisis she could keep her cool and address the situation while looking beyond herself and not getting in the way of the tragedy. Instead, she stood front and center before it, reminding Americans that she- and, vicariously, they- were the true victims of this massacre, not the people that were shot two Saturdays ago. As brilliant as her argument may be as a sales pitch for herself, it was far from presidential, and her enemies are not likely to resist the temptation of chewing on her political remains tomorrow morning.

As we’ve seen in the polling that has started to trickle out in the wake of the Arizona shootings and the controversy that followed, it is fairly clear that Palin did absolutely nothing to help herself over the past week, and may have actually fatally hurt any chance she might have had to redefine herself for independents and Republicans who are, to say the least, unsure about her.

No doubt, her interview with Sean Hannity will be lauded by her supporters, but, as David Zurwaik noted at The Baltimore Sun, the appearance was really more pep rally than serious journalism:

Hannity doesn’t really do interviews with her. He plays defense attorney asking about “criticisms” made of her, and then setting her up with graphics and loaded questions so she can attempt to refute the charges made by hateful people against her. He questions nothing, no matter how contradictory or screwy her answers might be.

Here is her answer when he asked her about allegations that she took down the image of crosshairs targeting the district of U.S. Rep Gabriel Giffords after the congresswoman was shot. The image was on the website of her PAC.

“You know, I believe that someone in the PAC — in fact, the contrac

“criticisms” made of her, and then setting her up with graphics and loaded questions so she can attempt to refute the charges made by hateful people against her. He questions nothing, no matter how contradictory or screwy her answers might be.

Here is her answer when he asked her about allegations that she took down the image of crosshairs targeting the district of U.S. Rep Gabriel Giffords after the congresswoman was shot. The image was on the website of her PAC.

“You know, I believe that someone in the PAC — in fact, the contract graphic artist — did take it down,” she began.

My goodness, I thought, almost a straight answer from Palin, even if she was distancing herself with the “contract graphic artist” language. But she was only beginning.

“And I have no problem with it being taken down,” she continued. “I don’t think it was inappropriate [that it was taken down] if it was going to cause much heartburn or even more controversy…. Knowing that it had nothing to do with an apolitical or perhaps even left-leaning criminal killing these innocents….I didn’t have a problem with it being taken down, if in fact it has been taken down.”

(…)

But a responsible interviewer might have asked her about the seeming contradiction between “it was taken down” and “if in fact it has been taken down.” He might also point out that folks are not interested in whether she had a “problem” with it being taken, they want to know why she or members of her team DID take it down. Was it because they were ashamed of it after the shooting?

Instead, Hannity showed an old bulls-eye map that the Democrats once had up and then offered a statement about how Bill Clinton had a “war room” and how “war analogy is very common in politics.” All of it was preamble to asking, “So, why do you think the left singled out you out, Governor?”

Again, this isn’t journalistic interviewing, it is what a defense attorney would do while questioning his client in an effort to refute charges against her.

There is much in an “interview” like this that is worthy of being mocked, and those people who aren’t already Palin (and Hannity) fans are unlikely to be impressed by her performance here. Palin ends the interview by saying she isn’t going to “sit down and shut up.” The thing is, most people aren’t saying that’s what she needs to do. Instead, they’re asking that she think about what she says before she says it, and that she realize that, most of the time, the story isn’t really about her.

Video:

FILED UNDER: Politicians, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010 and contributed a staggering 16,483 posts before his retirement in January 2020.

Comments

  1. anjin-san says:

    A Fox PR event masquerading as journalism. Which is all Palin can handle, and all her followers want to hear.

  2. Doug, I think the whole thesis of those who’ve defended her through the Tucson shooting blame game is that she has absolutely nothing to apologize for with her rhetoric. Because if, as you say, that “she [should] think about what she says before she says it,” then the culpability is still there. The AZ shooting would hang on her neck as other events would hang on the necks of other Conservative commentators.

    I saw one blog post somewhere that had a litany of what “America” “needed” Palin “to do,” including such choice bits of unsolicited advice as “apologizing.” “America needed Sarah Palin to apologize. America needed Sarah Palin to reflect. America needed Sarah Palin to moderate her speech.” Blah blah blah.

    No, that Leftist commentator needed her to do that. The whole issue with the Palin thing is that the Left is using her as a billy club to bully Conservatives into moderating our speech when we all know that (1) “blood libel” has been used by Liberals and Conservatives before without the kind of firestorm it’s done and (2) her rhetoric did NOT cause the AZ shootings.

    There is nothing to apologize, there is nothing to moderate. There’s plenty to ridicule on both sides of the aisle, and much to be debated. But to demand that we walk on eggshells lest my words “kill” someone? Bull.

    Lastly. I’ll agree that Palin As Victim is not her best stance on this matter.

  3. Steve Metz says:

    I asked a right wing friend of mine to show me where the “mainstream media” blamed Palin for the shooting. Of course, he couldn’t. But like many of the strawmen that the yammering heads use, accuracy is not a criterion. It just RESONATES and if Palin, Limbaugh etc say it enough times, their audience doesn’t even question whether it’s true.

  4. Smooth Jazz says:

    “While I reject the notion that Palin’s rhetoric had anything to do with what happened in Arizona,”

    OK, board members, Repeat after me again, even if you heard it the previous 500 times I posted about it: “Palin wasn’t responsible fro the shooting, but she’s a dimwit anyway, blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda. Of course, you don’t think any of her videos helped her: You’re an anti Palin zealot, who can’t look past your ingrained bias. OK board members, everybody put your hands together: Palin is a dimwit because Joe Scarborough and David Frum and Doug Matconis and MS DNC said so….Rah Rah Rah, Ayuh.

  5. Ernieyeball says:

    SM sez: “…It just RESONATES and if Palin, Limbaugh etc say it enough times, their audience doesn’t even question whether it’s true.”
    “…enough times…”!?! For Ditto Nation once is more than enough.
    Their Mantra: Rush said it! I believe it! That settles it!

  6. ponce says:

    Wingnuts always double down on the crazy.

    Always.

  7. An Interested Party says:

    “Palin is a dimwit because Joe Scarborough and David Frum and Doug Matconis and MS DNC said so…”

    Hardly…actually, Palin is a dimwit because of the precise criticism presented in the Mediaite link…

    “Instead, she stood front and center before it, reminding Americans that she- and, vicariously, they- were the true victims of this massacre, not the people that were shot two Saturdays ago.”

  8. Jaspion says:

    I tunned on Fox News yesterday right when she was being interviewed by coincidence.

    Mid-way thru the interview she started making me angry by not taking the higher ground of nonpartisan answers. And I had just awoken from a nap. 🙂

    Instead of letting her getting under my skin, I started to feel a little compassion towards her. As if she knew no better.

    I wonder whether politicians running for president are not supposed to say they are sorry for anything, ever.

  9. jwest says:

    The people who were shot were the victims of Loughner. Sarah Palin, the Tea Party and talk radio were victims of a malicious smear by the media.

    A majority of the public recognized that the MSM, despite their best efforts, were trying to blame Palin and the others for Loughner’s actions. They failed, and now they are panicking. If Palin had shown even the smallest bit of culpability concerning the “cross hair” targets or anything else, the media could have declared victory. Rightfully, she didn’t.

    Palin is running a brilliant campaign for office in 2012 against an almost universally despised opponent – the liberal MSM. Just as Bill Clinton ran his second campaign against Newt Gingrich and Obama ran against George Bush, Palin has chosen to run against an entity of her choice.

    Doug believes Palin didn’t do herself any favors by this interview and her Facebook video. I submit that the media didn’t do itself any favors by so blatantly misinforming the public during the Arizona affair. The question should be why we haven’t seen any polling on that match-up.

  10. ponce says:

    “The question should be why we haven’t seen any polling on that match-up.”

    We did.

    Sarah the Martyr’s numbers dropped even lower.

    She’s now in Dick Nixon territory…which seems about right.

  11. jwest says:

    Ponce,

    Let’s work on that comprehension problem.

    Palin’s approval would need to drop by half and her disapproval would need to double to be anywhere near the numbers of the MSM.

    Try to understand. She’s not running against Obama.

  12. How is Palin every going to go away when one out of four OTB posts are about her?

  13. Palin is running a brilliant campaign for office in 2012 against an almost universally despised opponent – the liberal MSM.

    Perhaps. And perhaps she thinks that that is what she is doing. However, this is nothing new for a GOP candidate, although this may be at a new level.

    The ultimate problem, however, is that such a strategy only works to appeal to the base, so I question its usefulness.

    Further, given that Fox News is the #1 cable network and that talk radio is dominated by rightward voices, the notion that mass media is this liberal Goliath that needs a David to take it down is simply a myth.

  14. ponce says:

    “Try to understand. She’s not running against Obama.’

    Let’s hope that’s not true, JWest.

    I’ll be voting for her in my state’s republican primary.

  15. Janis Gore says:

    To be fair to her, Sean Hannity is the one who makes the interview all about Sarah. In her answers, she keeps trying to expand the scope of her answers to at least include her compatriots.

    He didn’t do her any favors by always bringing the focus back to her, personally.

    And am I the only one who thinks he sounds like a chipmunk? I’ve never watched him or listened to him on radio.

    The problem that Z writes about, her confusion or obfuscation about the removal of the graphic contrasts with the profile from the New York Times that stressed that she insists on reviewing all content that goes out under her name. That, I would think, would have been subject to her approval.

    But the woman looked good, and she articulated well within the format. It bothers me that she always leads with her chin, but that may be skeletal.

  16. jwest says:

    Steven,

    The voting bloc she needs to win to take the general election is single white women (18 – 39). The common traits of this group are the need for “fairness” and a hatred of being lied to.

    If Palin can establish a perception that the MSM (NY Times, ABC, NBC etc.) unfairly reported stories about her that were not true, she can lock that group into her column.

  17. PJ says:

    I’m starting to lean against the idea that there are some who don’t want her not to run, but actually want her to run. And what better way to ensure that than to rile up her base. Make them see her as a persecuted victim. They want her fans to be eager to vote in the primaries. And then after her crushing defeat in the general election, the GOP will refocus.

  18. @jwest:

    The notion that playing the victim of unfair media attacks is going to appeal to that demographic in question strikes me as a stretch.

    That group also tends to be pro-choice and anti-gun, amongst other things.

    You are free to come back and tell me “told ya so” if I am wrong, but the scenario you are suggesting strikes me as fantastical.

  19. mantis says:

    The people who were shot were the victims of Loughner. Sarah Palin, the Tea Party and talk radio were victims of a malicious smear by the media.

    That first group isn’t really important though, are they? The only real victim here is poor Sarah.

    A majority of the public recognized that the MSM, despite their best efforts, were trying to blame Palin and the others for Loughner’s actions.

    They tried despite their best efforts? What does that even mean?

    Palin is running a brilliant campaign for office in 2012 against an almost universally despised opponent – the liberal MSM. Just as Bill Clinton ran his second campaign against Newt Gingrich and Obama ran against George Bush, Palin has chosen to run against an entity of her choice.

    Notice a big difference there? Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House. George W. Bush was the outgoing president. Both were leading their parties and had recent policy records to run against. Sarah Palin, by your estimation, is running against a rightwing myth, not a person, party, or policy platform.

    If this is true, and I think it is, she’s not running for president at all. She’s running for Sarah Palin, rich media celebrity. She’s already winning that race, and the loser is her political reputation and popularity. In essence, she’s really running against herself. You betcha!

  20. @PJ:

    I think that many Democrats are very much hoping that she will run, as they know that her chances of beating Obama are quite small.

    (and let the contrary opinions now fly regarding her electability).

  21. An Interested Party says:

    “The question should be why we haven’t seen any polling on that match-up.”

    Because “the liberal MSM” won’t be on the ballot in the presidential election of 2012…

  22. Notice a big difference there? Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House. George W. Bush was the outgoing president. Both were leading their parties and had recent policy records to run against. Sarah Palin, by your estimation, is running against a rightwing myth, not a person, party, or policy platform.

    Quite right on all counts.

  23. sam says:

    I believe in the Roman Hruska theory of representation, and therefore must align myself Palin supporters: They deserve representation, and she represents them.

  24. PJ says:

    @Steven L. Taylor:
    “I think that many Democrats are very much hoping that she will run, as they know that her chances of beating Obama are quite small.”

    I was a bit vague.
    That a lot of democrats are hoping that she will run and win the republican primary, that’s pretty obvious. I was more thinking of republicans who are displeased and want the party to abandon some issues. Republicans who are ready to lose the 2012 election as a mean to get a better candidate in 2016.

    Now, instead of actively cheering on Palin and ending up on the losing side, they rile up her base.

  25. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    The only thing I have learned form all of this. Beware of a grammar nazi obsessed with a female politician.

  26. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Taylor, that is want you guys said about Reagan. Taylor, you get a reserved seat at the diner where the crow will be served when Palin is sworn in. You should turn in your teaching credentials if she should unseat the communist. I would simply challenge Obama to reveal his college transcripts. We know what grades she got. We have not idea what he said or did in collgege. We don’t know what courses he took or from what leftwing radical professors he listened to. Face it Taylor, she scares the living hell out of you. She would call you on your shit.
    Most of the choir here are not able to put together the idea she had absolutely notthing to do with this shooting in Arizona. Bill Clinton had more responsiblity for the Kansas City Bombing by way of the Waco Massacre than Palin did for what happend in Tucson. There exists absolutely no evidence, even obtuse, Loughner ever even heard of Sarah Palin, or anyone on the right. There is evidence he was dissatisfied with his representative for some answer she did not give him. Conservatives do not go to Democratic rallies. I think you should all submit to mental evaluations. Especially Doug Mataconis, the Jared Lee Loughner look alike.

  27. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    ***That a lot of democrats are hoping that she will run and win the republican primary, that’s pretty obvious.***

    lol, and i’m hoping that Obama runs and wins the DEMOCRAT nomination.
    I’ll be voting for him in my state’s DEMOCRAT primary.

  28. jwest says:

    I always wondered what happened to the students who were sleeping in the back of the classroom during “Conflation 101”. Apparently, they all became OTB authors and commentators.

    How many voters believed Saddam Hussein attacked the U.S. on 9/11? Was there ever a presidential candidate named “BushMcCain”? By conflating Obama and the elitist MSM, they will become a single entity by 2012. Every time one is shown to be misleading, condescending or lying, the other will share the same scorn.

    As those of us who paid attention in class know, the only time conflation works is when there is a pre-existing plausible connection. Luckily for Palin, Obama and the MSM are practically joined at the hip.

  29. PJ says:

    @G.A.P.THEORY:
    “I’ll be voting for him in my state’s DEMOCRAT primary.”

    Please do if you want, but I don’t think he’ll have a problem winning without your vote. Palin on the other hand, she needs every vote she can get to show the liberal MSM that really, really hates her…

    I would prefer if you voted for her. And get all your friends to vote for her too.

  30. mantis says:

    Taylor, you get a reserved seat at the diner where the crow will be served when Palin is sworn in.

    Actually, they’ll be serving unicorn and dragon at that meal. Not sure why it will be at a diner, though.

    Bill Clinton had more responsiblity for the Kansas City Bombing by way of the Waco Massacre than Palin did for what happend in Tucson.

    I’m still pissed at Clinton for the Kansas City bombing. Wait…the what now?

    I think you should all submit to mental evaluations.

    Says…Zelsdorf Ragshaft III

  31. mantis says:

    ***That a lot of democrats are hoping that she will run and win the republican primary, that’s pretty obvious.***

    lol, and i’m hoping that Obama runs and wins the DEMOCRAT nomination.
    I’ll be voting for him in my state’s DEMOCRAT primary.

    Sad thing is, GAP thinks he’s being clever here.

  32. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    ***I would prefer if you voted for her. And get all your friends to vote for her too*** lol, I was joking, I would never vote for an abortionist, never ever…….I will vote for Palin if she runs, and I hope all these liberals join me.

    ***Sad thing is, GAP thinks he’s being clever here.***nope just taking the opportunity to write DEMOCRAT…….

    ***Bill Clinton had more responsibility for the Kansas City Bombing by way of the Waco Massacre than Palin did for what happened in Tucson.*** thats kinda what the bomber said was his motivation. And as usual you have taking this out of context.

    Mantis, that crap don’t work to good when the original is a couple of posts up.

  33. Ernieyeball says:

    For ZR and GT:
    Kansas City Bomber 1972 ***ing Raquel Welch and Kevin McCarthy with Jody Foster.
    More reality than a FOX News interview with 1/2 Governor Palin!

  34. tom p says:

    Zels: What bombing in KC???? Even AFTER mantis asked, GA doubles down….

  35. mantis says:

    nope just taking the opportunity to write DEMOCRAT…….

    Yeah, I know, and you think that’s clever.

    thats kinda what the bomber said was his motivation. And as usual you have taking this out of context.

    Mantis, that crap don’t work to good when the original is a couple of posts up.

    Yeah, I’m still trying to figure out what got bombed in Kansas City when Clinton was president. Perhaps you could enlighten us…

  36. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    ***The only thing I have learned form all of this. Beware of a grammar nazi obsessed with a female politician.***Once again for the liberals………even after mantis doubles down, tom p goes for the Obama, no humor no wit, just a bunch of donkey….poop:)

  37. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    ****Yeah, I’m still trying to figure out what got bombed in Kansas City when Clinton was president.…***ya, I bet you are….lol….

  38. Of course, President Obama is still running against President George W. Bush.

  39. mantis says:

    Of course, President Obama is still running against President George W. Bush.

    Correction: President Obama is still dealing with the enormous mess left behind by President George W. Bush.

    GAP, you still haven’t figured it out, have you? I guess our children is not learning.

  40. Ernieyeball says:

    Chas A.,
    In the interest of journalistic accuracy, my rough count of OTB posts since Sat. Jan. 8, 2010 shows 21 with Palin or Sarah Palin in the title. Total OTB posts in that stretch are 187. That would be about 11%. Far below your fantasy number of 25%.
    Get a grip.

  41. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    ****GAP, you still haven’t figured it out, have you? I guess our children is not learning.****

    lol, no, I have know idea were the first of many atrocities commented by the pioneers of the T.E.A. Party took place.

    So now, perhaps, you would give me a hint and tell me which of the 57 states it happened in?

  42. Right now, six out of twenty-nine “non-quick hits” on OTB feature a picture of Sarah Palin. If you add up the posts on the politicization of the tragedy as it relates to Sarah Palin, it’s not hard to come up with one in four.

  43. I wish he was dealing with the mess he inherited from George Bush, even if you want to totally discount 4 years of a Democratically controoled Congress, but I digress. Instead he just keeps digging.

  44. tom p says:

    Go ahead GA, you can say it… “I was wrong, I mispoke, I meant Oklahoma City….”

    There now, that wasn’t so bad, was it???

  45. tom p says:

    >>>I wish he was dealing with the mess he inherited from George Bush, <<<<

    Charles, you are better than this. You know that congress has an affect, but so does Bush, and yet you lay it all on the congress. Charles, you can say it,

    "I was wrong, I mis-spoke, GW Bush was a hack."

  46. Ernieyeball says:

    It sure is neat the way anyone can make statistics work for them no matter which way they go!

  47. An Interested Party says:

    “Instead he just keeps digging.”

    That’s ok…Sarah Palin will apparently run a brillant campaign against the MSM which will be tied around his neck so she will than beat him…or something like that…hell, maybe another Kansas City bombing will help her chances…

  48. An Interested Party says:

    Oops…she will *then* beat him…

  49. michael reynolds says:

    I am so worried she’ll destroy herself too early. She needs to hang in there at least another 18 months.

    Come on Palinistas, stand by your bimbo. We need her.

  50. jukeboxgrad says:

    ragshaft:

    We know what grades she [Palin] got.

    She released transcripts from the five colleges she attended? Really? I must have missed this. Where can I see them?

  51. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    ***Come on Palinistas, stand by your bimbo. We need her.*** You need something Harry. Perhaps a lesson in manners?

  52. tom p says:

    GA; You don’t get off that easy, I repeat:

    >>>”Go ahead GA, you can say it… “I was wrong, I mispoke, I meant Oklahoma City….”

    There now, that wasn’t so bad, was it???<<<"

    Speak up, or….

  53. G.A.P.THEORY says:

    lol, ok if it will make you happy Tom, I thought I did a great job of covering up, but you guys dint get it.

    And it would be more like I did not even realize Zels made a mistake and reacted to the usual mantis out of context disbelief of reality because I dint realize what he was actually babbling about because it usually the same old crap.

    You got me.

    Now your thoughts on ***The only thing I have learned form all of this. Beware of a grammar nazi obsessed with a female politician.***

  54. mantis says:

    And it would be more like I did not even realize Zels made a mistake and reacted to the usual mantis out of context disbelief of reality because I dint realize what he was actually babbling about because it usually the same old crap.

    Translation: I respond to things without even reading them.

    You got me.

    Not a tough catch.

  55. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Kansas City, Oaklahoma City. I made a small mistake but the incident happened. How many States are there? Am I, an ordindary citizen held to a higher standard than the President of the United States by the pseudo intellectuals infesting OTB?

  56. jukeboxgrad says:

    Zelsdorf, I notice that you haven’t answered my question. You said this:

    We know what grades she got.

    Really? How do you know? Where are those grades hiding?

    Surely you didn’t just fabricate that claim, right?