CNN Fact Checks Rudy "Pinocchio" Giuliani's Cancer Claims

icon Download | play icon Download | play

Wolf Blitzer: Elizabeth,tell us what Giuliani claimed and what you've learned. Did he get the numbers right?

Elizabeth Cohen: Well, according to a lot of the folks we talked to, in fact, all of the folks we talked to, they said he did not get his numbers right.

It's nice to see CNN finally getting around to calling Giuliani out for this. One might be able to believe that the Giuliani campaign was simply misled by the right-wing think-tank article it had relied on for their figures except for the fact that even after they were made aware that the source for that article had contested his misuse of them, Rudy blatantly chose to continue repeating the false statistics anyway. That's not a mistake. It's a complete disregard for the truth and an outright attempt to mislead. And this is hardly the first time Rudy's been caught stretching the truth on the campaign trail so far. WaPo's fact checker gave him four Pinocchios for just this latest tall tale and went on to say:

"The mayor seems to be making a habit of making sweeping statements with little or no factual support. See our recent posts on his claims about Mikhail Gorbachev and the end of the Soviet Union, the cost of health care premiums, and his own record as mayor of New York."

That's earned him a cumulative 13 Pinocchios so far, which after some digging I believe puts him way out in front of the other campaigns, and WaPo's Fact Checker hasn't even gotten around to his more recent fibbing. Greg Sargent caught Rudy telling "three whoppers in one sentence" on Monday. That's got to be some sort of record! It's past time we quit referring to Rudy Giuliani as a "serial exaggerator" (I mean, just look at that list will you?) and get on to calling him out for what he really is, which is a serial liar.

Related Reactions



Login or Register to post comments.

70 comments

Don't hold your breath waiting for the media to focus on Rudy's lies!

Way to go Pat Robertson for the endorsement. These two douchebags deserve each other

Seriously, if the media attacked Gore for his comments about funding the Intertoobz, and twisted it to portray Gore as claiming to fresking INVENT the Intertoobz, then don't epxect them to count the number of times that Rudy has pulled fake numbers out of his ass. That said, we should be thankful that CNN finally caught-up to Rudy on this story. But it took many op-eds (espeically the one by Krugman) to make this a news story.

Cross-dressing Rudy is making herr dubyah look like a "man" of integrity and honesty.

BTW, Pat "I hate gays, minorities, and brown people" Robertson just endorsed Cross-dressing Rudy,

Obviously someone at CNN screwed up. They were supposed to report the facts the day after Election Day 2008.

You know perfectlywell that just isn't going to be the narrative adopted by the pack. Their chosen story lines are not based on reality -- they make up the story line first, then they try to jam what the candidate does and says into it. Giuliani as liar is not the story, and it never will be.

Cross-dressing Rudy and Pat “I hate gays, minorities, and brown people” Robertson both were screeching about needing more "conservative judges"....imagine the fake outrage from the reich-wing if someone on the left stated we needed more "liberal judges".

"The mayor seems to be making a habit of making sweeping statements with little or no factual support."

Unfortunately, it seems, such habits make one doubly-electable these days.

Holy crap. Steve Benen's been keeping a running tally of Rudy's fibs. Just look at that list would you?

The serial exaggerator just can’t help himself
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13499.html

damn. Rudy's going straight to hell. He sure isn't going to be able to find a NYC firefighter to put those pants out for him.

A preacher and a politician coordinate their campaign of lies? I'm shocked! They're obviously in bed together. I wonder which one is the catcher. Probably RG.

that is absolutely scary. the man is a liar. the media won't investigate and call him on the lies. he just keeps smiling and piling on the lies. by my calculations, that puts him in the forefront of the republican candidates. he qualifies.

gee wonder if the corporate pundit pimps, the NEW AXIS OF EVIL OF MATTHEWS, RUSSERT, AND WILLIAMS , will 'report' on the reality of their DRAG QUEEN IN CHIEF after days upon days of trying to destroy Clinton. watching Matthews these past days on his SLUTBALL show is like watching a used REPIGLICAN [Deleted. OTT-Sitemonitor]

hmm, being informed about the facts, but still making a false claims in a speech.
I can swear something happened like this happened a few years ago.............

The St Pete Times and CQ have put up a site. They check the claims and statements made by the candidates to see what's true and what isn't. They even give you the details on which they make their judgements. It's called Politifact.com.

I haven't checked to see if Rudy's latest bs is on there or not.

Guiliani lies and lies. And his stupid captured audience gobbles it up.

But the MSM has already 'endorsed' Guiliani and Hillary. Afterall, they are noise-makers. Who wants a boring president that will bring prosperity ? How you succeed in sweeps week with prosperity??!

WTF...Pat Robertson endorses Guili?! ...Hahahaha. Just like sheep, Dobson will follow.

Let's hope that the "libruul" media will go after cross dressing, flip-flopping , adulterous, serial liar and gay lover (not that anything is wrong with that --- after all I live in the Bay Area where kind of anything goes sexually) like this degenerate Ruuudy G much in the same way they went after Gore and Kerry with the bullshit GOP smears... the difference here is that the stories and rumours about Ruuudy being a corrupt degenerate are TRUE!

I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR THSI ASSHOLE!
EVER!

Greg Sargent has just caught Rudy telling “three lies in one sentence” yesterday.

That's got to be some sort of a record.

oops, I hooked up the wrong link. I meant this one:

Did Rudy Really Tell Three Whoppers In One Sentence?
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/did_rudy_really_tell_three_whopper...

THAT’s got to be some sort of a record.

Liars Lie. Compulsive Liars Lie all the time.

Mendacity Big Daddy...

Given what we've had for the last 6 years it'll be no surprise when the MSM "forgets" about these little fibs. After all, it's not like he's using lies that will get us into an endless war.

Orangutan. @ 18:

Liars Lie. Compulsive Liars Lie all the time.

Rudy Mussolini reminds me of the compulsive liar character Jon Lovitz played on SNL. Since his bankrupt philosophy is a bust, lying and distortion are the only tools they have left.

Oh and the corrupt degenerate Ruuudy is actually bragging that he "has a shot" at winning California?
Are you freaking kidding me?
Yeah... right!
Dream on Ruuudy! California is a BLUE Democratic state and will never vote for a war mongering corrupt 9/11 profiteer like you!

Oh before you trolls start trying to smear California with your "it's full of libruuls" BS... remember something... California is the 5th largest economy in the world. The best and the brightest are here. Not bad for a state filled with "libruuls" eh?
Scumbag conservatives.
Go back to you 3rd world red states like Mississippi and keep electing pigs like Haley Barbour and his lousy leadership --- typical for corrupt conservatives.

BTW: sorry mods... I am a bit fired up this morning.

How can you tell if someone is a pathological liar?

Pathological liars, or "mythomaniacs," may be suffering from histrionic personality disorder or narcissistic personality disorder. The following comments basically reflect a pathological liar who has the characteristics of histrionic personality disorder.

Some characteristics:

1. Exaggerates things that are ridiculous.

2. One-upping. Whatever you do, this person can do it better. You will never top them in their own mind, because they have a concerted need to be better than everyone else. This also applies to being right. If you try to confront an individual like this, no matter how lovingly and well-intentioned you might be - this will probably not be effective. It's threatening their fantasy of themselves, so they would rather argue with you and bring out the sharp knives than admit that there's anything wrong with them.

3. They "construct" a reality around themselves. They don't value the truth, especially if they don't see it as hurting anyone. If you call them on a lie and they are backed into a corner, they will act very defensively and say ugly things (most likely but depends on personality), but they may eventually start to act like, "Well, what's the difference? You're making a big deal out of nothing!" (again, to refocus the conversation to your wrongdoing instead of theirs).

4. Because these people don't value honesty, a lot of times they will not value loyalty. So watch what you tell them. They will not only tell others, but they will embellish to make you look worse. Their loyalty is fleeting, and because they are insecure people, they will find solace in confiding to whomever is in their favor at the moment. ...
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_can_you_tell_if_someone_is_a_pathological_...

Rudy: I Believe I Can Fly!
In today's episode of TPMtv, we ask the question ... Rudy Giuliani, Grade School Fibber or World Class Megalomaniac?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/058020.php
You watch, decide and send us your answers, which we'll read on the show next week ... (and yes, option three, "both" is available.)

lmao

All I can say is "I told you so".

I'm still waiting for someone to start bringing up his eminent domain issues. Im sure that will scare the shit out of people who love real estate.

I don't particularly care what the media is saying now. We're going to have at least 9 months to pound these lies into the narrative if the GOP ignores his obvious vulnerability and Rudy wins the nomination.

I just hope the Democratic nominee is smart enough to not rely on the media making the case and pushes the negative narrative themselves. Kerry and Gore sat back waiting for the media to call Bush on his false statements and exaggerations and that was a major mistake.

Rudy will do anything to get the Arthur laffer cult in his back pocket

watch "Three times a Rudy" on Youtube. It's funny.

Um, but 92% US vs 71% Great Britain is still an apparant 21% US mortal advantage. Even if a doctor says they're essentially the same, that isn't going to cut it for a lot of people for reasons that make perfect logical sense. The great Krugman himself failed to explain that one on the grounds that it's too complicated, although he did mention that British men tend to wait longer than their American counterparts to get checked for the big C.

Overall, CNN makes it look as though Rudy's remains valid, even if he did exaggerate the difference, while pro national healthcare advocates look as though they're not being completely honest about the efficacy of state run health care.

No propaganda victory here, folks. Sorry. It's illusional.

Um, that should read "Rudy's point remains valid..." Sorry.

The Republicans won't nominate this ass now. You have to be able to tell convincing lies to get into a Republican White House.

13 "Pinocchios" and a Flanagan.

Yeah, that's the ticket!

We are in serious trouble if Rudy wins the repub nomination.

count orlock is a creep

Remember Cheney said he made his millions in the private sector

patty @ 32:

We are in serious trouble if Rudy wins the repub nomination.

The exact opposite, actually. Dukakis could beat him.

hieronymus "the troll" braintree @ 29:

Um, that should read "Rudy's point remains valid..." Sorry.

No, actually it doesn't. The difference in survival rates has NOTHING to do with socialized medicine. The US has a much better early detection/screening program than any other country in the world. By detecting ANY cancer earlier, survival rates increase...it's a simple fact. Again, this has NOTHING to with socialized medicine. Rudy's point does not remain valid...sorry.

patty @ 32:

We are in serious trouble if Rudy wins the repub nomination.

Cross-dressing Rudy is the best hope for a Dem victory. The so-called [reich-wing] "values voter" will be staying home in masses come Nov next year if s/he gets the nod. They won't vote a "Librul Yankee New Yorker" as a representative of the reich-wing party.

Why waste time pointing out his lies? Let the Republicans nominate him, then bring out the ammunition he has provided for use. If you shoot him down now, they might even find someone electable to replace him.

Trying to picture Rudy as a New Yawk-er kid lying and exaggerating to the kids his Mom paid to play with him:

"My Dad's a MILLION times bigger than yours!"

"I met Mickey Mantle - he was at my house last night for dinner. He's from the Yankees, my favorite team...oh wait, I meant the Red Sox are. No wait, darn...whoever you guys are a fan of, so am I!"

And the biggest lie/exaggeration of all - "I'm going to be President one day!"

Right, Rudy...suuuuuuuure you will, you vicious, lying sack of shit!

Okay, turn on the wayback machine to when RJ was a prosecutor. How many people were convicted because he stretched the facts? This sounds like he's making work for the dreaded trial lawyers to appeal every case he was involved in.

How can anyone seriously consider this lying mo-fo for the president of the United States? He's a lying liar and an outright crook! Is there no shred of decency or shame in these idiots who claim they want to lead this country? I'm appalled that Rudy gets up and lies time after time after time... what does he think?! that nobody will check the facts or call him on his bullshit?! WTF!?

If you make a mistake and correct it when it's pointed out to you, that's just an error. Everybody does that. If you make multiple mistakes and often don't bother to check or correct, that's questionable and someone should look into where you get your facts. If you DELIBERATELY make multiple errors and then REFUSE to correct them then call it what it is... LYING.

Ghouliani isn't being 'misleading' he's a LIAR and a really bad one because he's making public statements that everyone can check and everyone DOES. So he's not just a terrible liar [terrible for doing it... terrible AT it] he's an idiot who has no regard for the intelligence of the people he's addressing.
Anyone who would consider this d****bag for presidential nominee even for a nanosecond needs to have their head examined.

[deleted--middle school get let out early today?]

Rudy is running on the premise that if Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh can say anything, he can say anything too.

I see a major problem with this type of behavior. Kucinich just introduced articles of impeachment for Dick Cheney because of his bending and stretching of statistical data with intent to engage us in a war with Iraq. Guliani not only bends and stretches statistics, he seems to just down right make shit up!

The Today Show ran a clip from a Brian Williams interview with Giuliani this morning. The first question (shown in the clip - it may not have been the first question of the actual full interview) was what does Giuliani think, personally, about Hillar Clinton. Giuliani managed to mention 9-11 in the first sentence of his answer. Something like "well I got to know Hillary Clinton after 9-11..."

9-11
9-11
9-11
9-11

my wonderment is when the media bs artists are going to call him out on his lies...matthews, russert, williams, hume,,,hello are you out there????

I'm thinkin of an old Eagles tune from the 70s...
Rudy?? You can't hide yer lyin eyes.. And yer smile is a thin disguise, thought by now, you'd realize.... There ain't no way to hide yer lyin eyes.......................JD

p.s. Thanks to Don Henley, Glenn Fry, Randy Meisner and all the rest of the original Eagles... Sorry Joe, don't think you were there for this one.....JD

Don't look now Rudy but your pants are on fire.

And your nose is as long as a telephone wire too.

What did he have, foam rubber breast cancer?

Rudy must have attended the "George Bush Seminar on Being a Crook and Despicable Scumbag." He is a bold liar, a crook, a friend to numerous crooks, a warmonger and wannabe torture artist.

Furthermore, they both look like well known fictional characters: Ichabod Crane and Colonel Wilhelm Klink. Except that Ichabod had more courage than Bush and Klink had more intelligence than Rudy.

Where's the "I thought it was fat free yogurt" Rudy I remember from Seinfeld??

All that remains of Mayor Rudy is the pathologically lying psychotic scumbag of today who will do and say ANYTHING to pander to Bush's 24% base - a feat he honestly believes is enough to retain GOP control over the White House in '08.

Operation Pathetic Desperation with Captain Rudy at the helm!

Yep, Rudy is a serial liar, which makes him the perfect candidate for the Presidency! I agree that it's nice to see a network call him out on his false claims, but will this really make a difference with his support base? What does this guy have to do to make it more obvious that he's the devil incarnate? Get divorced four more times? Perhaps start knocking door to door at the homes of 9/11 wives and start taking photos with them, holding up a picture of a collapsing WTC 1 while saying..."9/11...9/11...I was there on 9/11."

What a jackass this guy is.

It would be hard to tell who should be in the Guiness World Book of Records for saying 9/11 the most, Rudy or George.

Dr. Matt @ 36:

hieronymus "the troll" braintree @ 29:

Um, that should read "Rudy's point remains valid..." Sorry.

No, actually it doesn't. The difference in survival rates has NOTHING to do with socialized medicine. The US has a much better early detection/screening program than any other country in the world. By detecting ANY cancer earlier, survival rates increase...it's a simple fact. Again, this has NOTHING to with socialized medicine. Rudy's point does not remain valid...sorry.

If you'll go back and read the original post it say it "looks" as if Rudy's point, etc. You're right on the facts but the impression given by the newscast actually shakes out in Rudy's favor. That's my point. Rudy's a jerk.

"Elizabeth Cohen: Well, according to a lot of the folks we talked to, in fact, all of the folks we talked to, they said he did not get his numbers right."

Just watch that reporter struggle to avoid lying on air to make Guiliani look better. They start out with "a lot" and seven words later manage to work up the courage to mention that it was actually "all" of the people they talked too.

hieronymus "the troll" braintree @ 28:

Um, but 92% US vs 71% Great Britain is still an apparant 21% US mortal advantage. Even if a doctor says they're essentially the same, that isn't going to cut it for a lot of people for reasons that make perfect logical sense. The great Krugman himself failed to explain that one on the grounds that it's too complicated, although he did mention that British men tend to wait longer than their American counterparts to get checked for the big C.

Overall, CNN makes it look as though Rudy's remains valid, even if he did exaggerate the difference, while pro national healthcare advocates look as though they're not being completely honest about the efficacy of state run health care.

No propaganda victory here, folks. Sorry. It's illusional.

Yes and no. The stats may be a little worse for Britains NHS, but countries like Denmark and Germany have better survival rates than us. The problem, as usual, is the boneheaded way the debate is framed.

All advanced nations except the United States have taxpayer-supported healthcare systems which do not allow private for-profit insurance companies anywhere near primary care. Beyond that, they're all different. Britain's NHS is the closest to the dread 'socialized medicine' these lunkheads are always on about. Doctors are government employees and hospitals are run by the state. There is, however, a paralell private system for those who can afford it.

Most other countries use some form of public/private partnerships. Canada, for instance, functions a lot like medicare does here. Doctors work for themselves, government picks up the tab. Insurance premiums are reasonable (I paid $54 a month in 2003, the last year I lived up there) there is no such thing as a co-pay or a pre-existing condition. Nobody goes bankrupt because of medical bills, because there aren't any. Sure my taxes were a little higher, but I actual have more deductions on my check here, because I pay more than six times more for health insurance so shabby a Canadian polititian would get run out of office for proposing anything like it.

My point is that if we had any sense we'd look at all these various other ways of doing things and cherry pick the stuff that works best. Then we really would have 'the best health care system in the world' instead of just saying (very loudly over and over) that we do. The fact that we can't even have the discussion without these goobers screaming about 'socialized medicine' is precisely why we're stuck with the clusterfuck we have.

Isn't it obvious folks?? He's practicing for when he replaces Dubya, gotta keep the lying momentum going to get to the Whithouse. Intentionally mispelled to imply Nit Whit..nuf said

Give it rest already. Pounce on something worth discussing, like if they actually have a consistant thought about something that really matters: Immigration, health, Taxes, Security. We all know Politicians lie, tell us something we don't know: like the answers to important questions. Listneing to the herd of bloggers is like watching farm animals run as they wave the dog in from the field, funny and silly all at once..LOL

hieronymus "the troll" braintree @ 28:

Um, but 92% US vs 71% Great Britain is still an apparant 21% US mortal advantage. Even if a doctor says they're essentially the same, that isn't going to cut it for a lot of people for reasons that make perfect logical sense. The great Krugman himself failed to explain that one on the grounds that it's too complicated, although he did mention that British men tend to wait longer than their American counterparts to get checked for the big C.

Overall, CNN makes it look as though Rudy's remains valid, even if he did exaggerate the difference, while pro national healthcare advocates look as though they're not being completely honest about the efficacy of state run health care.

No propaganda victory here, folks. Sorry. It's illusional.

The use of that '92% US vs 71% Great Britain' statistic is completely misleading. As every expert (including Rudy's source for the misleading statistics he used) has said so far, long-term survival rates is a much better statistic to look at and when one looks at "the deaths per 100,000 males in each country. About 25 men out of 100,000 are dying from prostate cancer every year in both the U.K. and the U.S.

That is really "amazing given the fact that Britain spends only 41 percent as much on health care per person as we do."

[A]ny such comparison is flawed, since it fails to take into account the additional investment in cancer education and screening in the United States. Much of the gap would be closed if other countries invested similar sums in catching cancer early.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/10/rudys-fuzzy-hea.html

There are some pretty funny posters over at Jesus' General about some of Rudy's "accomplishments".

You know the Repukes, why would they ever let facts get in the way

He's a good, plain and simple. All I need to know.

goon

goon [goon]
n
1. thug: a professional gangster whose work is beating up or terrorizing people
2. clumsy person: somebody who is regarded as clumsy or uncouth (insult)

[Mid-19th century. Origin uncertain: perhaps from goon(e)y , variant of gony “simpleton”; or from Alice the Goon , a character invented by the U.S. cartoonist, E. C. Segar (1894–1938).]
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2003. ⓒ 1993-2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Pinocchiani

"according to a lot of the folks we talked to, in fact, all of the folks we talked to" what a strange way to say something. It wasn't a lot it was all of them but she just couldn't bring herself to say it right in the beginning.

justabill @ 62:

hieronymus "the troll" braintree @ 28:

Um, but 92% US vs 71% Great Britain is still an apparant 21% US mortal advantage. Even if a doctor says they're essentially the same, that isn't going to cut it for a lot of people for reasons that make perfect logical sense. The great Krugman himself failed to explain that one on the grounds that it's too complicated, although he did mention that British men tend to wait longer than their American counterparts to get checked for the big C.

Overall, CNN makes it look as though Rudy's remains valid, even if he did exaggerate the difference, while pro national healthcare advocates look as though they're not being completely honest about the efficacy of state run health care.

No propaganda victory here, folks. Sorry. It's illusional.

The use of that '92% US vs 71% Great Britain' statistic is completely misleading. As every expert (including Rudy's source for the misleading statistics he used) has said so far, long-term survival rates is a much better statistic to look at and when one looks at "the deaths per 100,000 males in each country. About 25 men out of 100,000 are dying from prostate cancer every year in both the U.K. and the U.S.

That is really "amazing given the fact that Britain spends only 41 percent as much on health care per person as we do."

[A]ny such comparison is flawed, since it fails to take into account the additional investment in cancer education and screening in the United States. Much of the gap would be closed if other countries invested similar sums in catching cancer early.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/10/rudys-fuzzy-hea.html

How is anyone supposed to look at the CNN report and get all these nuances? My point is not that reality favors Rudy but that the way it's being presented does.

Forget about Rudy we know his story but this Elizabeth Cohen is a babe

hieronymus "the troll" braintree @ 68:

[...]
How is anyone supposed to look at the CNN report and get all these nuances? My point is not that reality favors Rudy but that the way it's being presented does.

Well, because the report said straight up that everyone they checked with "said he did not get his numbers right" and it said that the statistic Rudy used was misleading and that "it's actually more accurate to look at the chances of men dying from prostate cancer" and "when you look at the men who die from prostate cancer ... there is no difference between the UK and the US" and then they had Dr Thrasher, the spokesman from the American Urological Assoc to reiterate that point, saying "You're not seeing big differences between the UK and the United States."

Those weren't nuances. I'm figuring you must have watched a completely different video.

70 comments

Login or Register to post comments.