TIME Military

The Curse of ‘Friendly Fire’

A B-1 bomber over Afghanistan. Air Force / Getty Images

American bomber reportedly killed five U.S. troops in Afghanistan

The war in Afghanistan began with friendly fire. Now it seems to be ending the same way.

On Dec. 5, 2001, two months after the U.S. invasion, a massive 2,000-lb. (907 kg) bomb killed three U.S. Special Forces north of Kandahar. The GPS-guided weapon struck the Americans because the controller on the ground who called in the air strike changed the battery on his GPS device in the middle of the bombing run. But he didn’t realize that once the unit rebooted, the aim point it began transmitting to the B-52 bomber far above wasn’t the enemy’s location. It was his.

On Monday, at about 9 p.m. local time, it happened again, this time in restive Zabul province in the southern part of the country. “Five American troops were killed yesterday in an incident in southern Afghanistan,” Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, told reporters on Tuesday. “We do have reason to suspect that friendly fire was the cause here, specifically friendly fire from the air.” Reports from Afghanistan indicated a B-1 bomber mistakenly dropped its weapon on the commandos for unknown reasons. The blast also killed an Afghan soldier.

Kirby declined to specify the aircraft or whether those killed were special-ops troops. “Pardon me for editorializing,” he said, “but let’s remember we got five families that are having a pretty tough day today.”

Once again, Taliban fire triggered a call for airpower that apparently ended up killing those who made the call.

Fratricide — where one side kills its own in combat — is a curse of the technologically advanced. They are most likely to have the beyond-visual-range, fast weapons — and the need for batteries to summon a bomb from the heavens — that make it more likely.

Beyond the death and devastation caused by friendly fire, it ripples through the ranks, making those left behind less aggressive, more likely to forfeit the initiative, leery of fighting at night or bad weather and raising doubt in the minds of the commanders involved.

Friendly fire has been a problem as long as war has been a solution. The U.S., as the world’s most modern fighting force, has been fighting friendly fire seriously for two decades.

“The fact that the percentage of casualties resulting from friendly fire from World War I through Vietnam has been extremely low does not make the accidental killing or wounding of one’s own troops any less tragic or unpalatable,” a 1982 Army report said. “There is reason to believe that the casualties attributable to friendly fire in modern war constitute a statistically insignificant portion of total casualties (perhaps less than 2%).”

Weapons got better faster than the trigger fingers firing them. “While modern weapons have furthered the military’s combat firepower, technology that can help U.S. fighting personnel maintain situational awareness and differentiate between friends and foes in difficult combat conditions has lagged,” a 1992 Army paper noted. But doctrine — how and when to use force — and training — how to use it properly — are just as critical in reducing friendly fire as technology, military officers say.

As war has become increasingly antiseptic — with the ability to track who killed whom — friendly fire has loomed as a growing problem. In 1991’s Gulf War, 24% of the 148 U.S. battle deaths — 35 — were due to so-called friendly fire.

“The press of battle, political considerations, emotions and most particularly the lack of a comprehensive and accessible automated data base have mitigated against thorough examinations of the problem,” a 1993 outside study conducted for the Army said. “Recent analysis of empirical data from World War II, Vietnam and Operation Desert Storm indicates that historically accepted fratricide rates of about 2% … are woefully low.”

That sparked a lot of research into ways to curb such accidents, although they continue to occur, if not at the rate of the Gulf War (one tally acknowledges 23 cases of friendly fire in Afghanistan that have killed 40 U.S. and allied troops). In April 2002, four Canadians died when a U.S. Air National Guard pilot dropped a 500-lb. (226 kg) bomb on them while they were conducting a nighttime training exercise in southern Afghanistan. Three British soldiers were killed in August 2007 when a U.S. Air Force F-15 bombed their position during a firefight with the Taliban in Helmand province.

As the 1994 shootdown in Iraq of two U.S. UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters by a pair of U.S. F-15s, which killed all 26 aboard, and the 2004 friendly-fire death of NFL football star turned Army Ranger Pat Tillman in Afghanistan — as well as the pair of bombings in Afghanistan — demonstrate, progress has been halting.

TIME 2016 Election

Hillary’s Hard Choices, By The Numbers

Hillary Clinton Reads From Her New Memoir In New York City
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks to a crowd during a book signing for her new book, "Hard Choices" at a Barnes & Noble on June 10, 2014 in New York City. Andrew Burton—Getty Images

The book is over 600 pages long, so here's what you need to know from the index

The price of fighting Osama bin Laden? $1 trillion. Chelsea Clinton’s wedding? $2-$5 million. Appearing in the index of Hillary Clinton’s new memoir, Hard Choices? Priceless.

Ancient astrologers used to divine the future by counting the kinds of stars that appear in the sky. We’re doing the same thing, but instead of reading constellations, we’re reading the index of Clinton’s book.

First of all, her index is heavy on Presidents and light on First Ladies. Michelle Obama, Laura Bush and Barbara Bush are each mentioned only twice. By contrast, George W. Bush gets 13 pages and George H.W. Bush gets four. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama get too many to count. Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan get three mentions each, Jimmy Carter gets two, Richard Nixon gets seven. JFK got four pages, Jackie only one. Coincidence?

The only First Lady to outdo her husband in the index was Eleanor Roosevelt, with a cool five mentions to FDR’s paltry three. Clinton talks about how she’s lifting from Eleanor when she talks about women’s rights as “unfinished business” and pushes for “full participation” of all genders. She also has Eleanor’s picture in her office.

Benghazi got a chapter all to itself, as did Syria and Iran. And Angela Merkel got tons of love, especially since Clinton revealed that she has a German newspaper in her office that portrays Merkel and Clinton as interchangeable on the cover.

The Clinton index also freezes out the philanderers. Huma Abedin gets mentioned nine times, including a heartwarming story about that time when President Obama called her an “American patriot” after she got accused of sympathizing with the Muslim Brotherhood. But her disgraced husband Anthony Weiner is nowhere to be found. David Patraeus got 15 mentions, Paula Broadwell not a one. Is she taking the high road, or doing a complete whitewashing?

Guess who else didn’t make the cut? Monica Lewinsky or Gennifer Flowers. Surprise, surprise.

TIME 2016 Election

Hillary Clinton Mania Comes to New York

Hillary Rodham Clinton Signs Copies Of Her Memoir "Hard Choices"
Former US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton promotes "Hard Choices" at Barnes & Noble Union Square on June 10, 2014 in New York City. John Lamparski—WireImage/Getty Images

Many see a book launch as the start of a campaign

The line stretched down the street and around the corner—then down the next street and around another corner. Fans of her political celebrity—young, old and everything in between—donned “I’m Ready for Hillary!” stickers, waiting hours just to get into a New York City bookstore. They had come early, hundreds of them, some as early as the night before, and all to get a glimpse of—and a book signed by—the woman they hope will be the next President of the United States: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Clinton, the former Secretary of State and would-be 2016 presidential candidate, kicked off the tour for her new book Hard Choices at a Manhattan Barnes & Noble on Tuesday. Forget Iowa and New Hampshire: For a few hours, Union Square was the epicenter of American politics, with all eyes on Clinton as she promoted a book that is widely seen as a prelude to one last run at the White House.

She wasn’t scheduled to arrive until 11 a.m. Not wanting to miss out, some came at 9:30—the night before. Dana Watters, a 27-year-old New York grad student, said she was already behind several people in line when she arrived about 13 hours before the event.

“I’m not 100 percent sure what came out of my mouth [when meeting Clinton], but it was somewhere along the lines of telling her I’ve been a fan of her since I was 6,” Watters said.

“I asked her if it was too soon to call her ‘Madame President,’ and she said ‘Hillary’ was fine for now,” said Bert Feldstein, a 72-year-old retired human resources worker from Long Island.

Clinton has said repeatedly—both in remarks and in her book—that she hasn’t decided whether or not to seek the White House again. But with a bus sponsored by the Ready for Hillary super PAC parked outside the night before, presidential politics were the first, second and third topics of conversation.

“The main reason I’m here is because of my mom. She passed away two months ago, and it was her dying wish that Hillary become president,” Kevin Gussiaas, a 54-year-old health care worker in New York, said. “I don’t think there’s anybody who could replace her.”

Republicans, convinced as anyone that the book tour is a campaign-in-waiting, wasted few opportunities to take Clinton down a peg. They highlighted bad reviews of the book, drew attention to off-tone remarks Clinton made earlier about being “dead broke” after leaving the White House, and circulated “fact vs. fiction” opposition research about the book’s contents. The Drudge Report highlighted a journalist’s Twitter post about the book being deeply discounted atop its site with the banner headline “SLASHED.”

“@HillaryClinton’s book launch facing poor reviews & stumbling messaging,” Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus wrote on Twitter.

But outside the Union Square Barnes & Noble, Clinton supporters saw opportunity. Warnings about security measures and that the former first lady wouldn’t be personalizing the signatures on books didn’t seem to dent the mood.

“I think it would be political malpractice to not take the energy and excitement around her and organize it around that today,” said Adam Parkhomenko, the executive director of Ready for Hillary, the super PAC that has been quietly blessed by Clinton allies and has raised more than $6 million.

Bailey Ellicott, a 17-year old student from Manasquan, N.J., who woke up at 4:30 a.m. and missed school, hopes to cast her first vote in a Presidential election for Clinton. “She’s my role model. I look up to her,” Ellicott said. “I can’t picture myself voting for anyone else but her.”

Others said their support for Clinton stretched back to her 2008 campaign and earlier, to when her husband was in the Oval Office.

“When I voted for Bill Clinton, I was really voting for Hillary,” said Robert Shanley, a 63-year-old New York hotel worker. “I think she was really the brains behind Bill, and she’d make a great president. … I’ll be thrilled to see her in the White House.”

“I would sell my soul to work on her campaign,” Watters said.

Camille Desantis, the 53-year-old founder of a brand development company in New York, echoed many in expressing optimism that 2016 might finally see the first election of a female president.

“I think it’s time for the country to have a woman president,” she said. “It’s time for that ceiling to go away,” Desantis said. “I don’t think we would be having some of the issues we’re having today if she were in the White House now.”

TIME 2016 Election

Hillary Clinton Avoids Hard Choices in Hard Choices

US-POLITICS-CLINTON-BOOK-ILLUSTRATION
Hillary Clinton's memoir titled "Hard Choices" after its release on June 9, 2014 in Washington. Eva Hambach—AFP/Getty Images

It reads like—and is—a political campaign book

The first thing to get out of the way is this: Hillary Clinton is running for President in 2016, even if she says on Page 595 of her new book, Hard Choices, “I haven’t decided yet.”

Without the reality of a coming candidacy, the rest of the book just doesn’t make any sense. This is a campaign book, written by a candidate (via her speechwriters), processed through a political machine, and delivered to the public with the contradictory goals of depicting the author as a decisive leader and not betraying any evidence of leadership that would turn a voter off. Here is how the candidate-without-an-official-campaign describes the choice facing the country in the next presidential election:

Ultimately, what happens in 2016 should be about what kind of future Americans want for themselves and their children—and grandchildren. I hope we choose inclusive politics and a common purpose to unleash the creativity, potential, and opportunity that makes America exceptional. That’s what all American people deserve.

Real people who aren’t running for office do not write like this. They do not think like this. They do not try to string together feel-good words in decisive ways that pretend at taking bold stands on the future without actually taking any stand. There are no clear-thinking Americans who do not want “inclusive politics” or “common purpose.” There is no one in public or private life in this country who does not want to “unleash the creativity, potential and opportunity” of the nation. So why write it? Because it is campaign mumbo-jumbo, and campaign mumbo-jumbo works if you want to win elections.

Clinton is only able to say that she not yet decided about running for President because of a legal technicality: She has not yet declared that she is running for President. But in the current environment, and with this book, that should not matter. She is doing exactly what she would do if she knew she was going to declare. It’s as if she left her home, walked down the street to her local bar, took a seat on a stool, handed the barkeep her credit card, and then told him, “I haven’t decided whether or not to order a drink.” She still has time to choose not to order the drink. She may not be a candidate when the Iowa caucuses meet. But that shouldn’t prevent anyone from observing what she is doing in the meantime.

And what she is doing in this book is a thing to behold. Over nearly 600 pages, she gives a grand tour of American foreign policy as seen from the communications operation of the U.S. State Department. There are dozens of pages devoted to singing the praises—and naming the names—of the people she worked with and the things she accomplished. There are hundreds of pages of history, recounting the major events of the last five years in a useful, matter-of-fact voice that would be well-suited to a high school textbook. There are some wonderful admissions and asides, like her habit of digging her fingernails into her hand when she gets sleepy at meetings, or the time when former French President Nicolas Sarkozy declared, while watching a traffic jam of motorcades after a frustrating day of summits in Copenhagen, “I want to die!”

There are also carefully constructed personal recollections of some of the hard choices she made, like her support for the Osama bin Laden raid, with which President Barack Obama agreed, and her support for arming the Syrian rebels, with which Obama disagreed. But as often as not, the hard choices are so polished as to lose their edge. She admits to a shouting match with the former CIA director over whether or not to authorize a particular drone strike, but on the subject of her approach to drone strikes in general she offers only diplo-babble fortune cookies. She agrees with Obama that the strikes raised “profound questions,” and writes that it’s “crucial that these strikes be part of a larger smart power counterterrorism strategy that included diplomacy, law enforcement, sanctions, and other tools.” Got it?

There are other hard choices she clearly runs away from making. After mentioning the controversy over the National Security Agency’s mass collection of domestic phone records without a warrant, she offers a puzzle instead of a position: “Without security, liberty is fragile,” she writes. “Without liberty, security is oppressive. The challenge is finding the proper measure: enough security to safeguard our freedoms, but not so much (or so little) as to endanger them.” Even the NSA will struggle to decode that one.

She devotes an entire chapter to the need to take on climate change, imploring policy makers to save the world in the most vacuous language of policy making, which keeps rearing its head throughout the book: “Building a broad national consensus on the urgency of the climate threat and the imperative of a bold and comprehensive response will not be easy, but it is essential.” But she makes no mention of her position on the Keystone pipeline, which is arguably the most central domestic climate change issue she faced, and which coincidentally divides the Democratic Party.

Perhaps there is no reason to expect more from a politician in mid-stride. Barack Obama’s first book, Dreams of My Father, was widely hailed as a deeply personal literary work in its own right. The book he wrote before his 2008 campaign, The Audacity of Hope, was a far inferior list of policy maxims, Republican bashing and feel-good utopianism. But assuming she continues her campaign, Clinton has a problem to solve that Obama never had before he ran: She must convince voters both within and without the Democratic Party that she is a real person people can believe in, not just a political brand that is repolished and reintroduced to the public at regular intervals under the soft lights of a primetime television interview.

In Hard Choices, Clinton limits her personal admissions to the expected: Praise and pride in her daughter Chelsea, a tribute to her mother Dorothy, who passed in late 2011, and some glimpses of the personal toll of traveling 2,000 hours by plane to 122 countries over four years. Then, in the final pages, there is the hint of more:

Recently, Bill and I took another of our long walks, this time with our three dogs, near our home. It had been an unseasonably long winter, but spring was finally peeking through the thaw. We walked and talked, continuing a conversation that began more than forty years ago at Yale Law School and hasn’t stopped yet.

Do you want to know what happened next? What they talked about? How things have changed for the most storied political couple in the land? Well, you won’t find it here. The paragraph over, she changes the topic, and moves on, with no indication why the walk might have been important or interesting, or needed to be included in her book.

Clinton has made the hard choice to hide any details of the hardest choice to come in a book she calls Hard Choices. It’s exactly what candidates do—when they are preparing campaigns.

TIME Aviation

Feds Approve First Commercial Drone Flight Over U.S. Soil

AeroVironment’s Puma AE drone AeroVironment

Could pave way for more commercial drone use

Here come the drones.

The Federal Aviation Administration for the first time Tuesday authorized an unmanned aircraft flight for commercial purposes over American soil, a step toward wider use of drones by businesses in the U.S.

The oil and gas company BP and the drone manufacturer AeroVironment will fly the AeroVironment’s Puma AE to survey Alaska’s North Slope. BP will use the hand-launched drone—a small aircraft, 4 1/2 ft. long with a 9 ft. wingspan—to oversee maintenance activities on infrastructure, the FAA said.

“These surveys on Alaska’s North Slope are another important step toward broader commercial use of unmanned aircraft,” Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx said in a statement. “The technology is quickly changing, and the opportunities are growing.”

While the FAA banned commercial drones in 2007, the agency still approves usage on a case-by-case basis, such as drones launched for academic research or public safety. And many drones have flown without FAA authorization, including a recent incident in which a drone almost crashed into an American Airlines jet in March. In a separate incident this month, the National Transportation Safety Board rejected a $10,000 fine the FAA had leveled against an operator for recklessly flying his drone, saying the agency didn’t have the authority to regulate that particular model of aircraft.

Over the last year, the FAA has sought to clarify rules surrounding commercial drone use. In November, the FAA released its first annual Roadmap to outline the efforts necessary to safely integrate drones into American airspace. One month later, the FAA agency announced six test sites—including the University of Alaska, where AeroVironment demonstrated its drone in September—to research operational risks, airspace integration and safety standards.

The FAA will integrate drones into U.S. airspace by September 2015 as mandated by Congress’ 2012 FAA reauthorization bill.

TIME Crime

Gunman Kills 1 At Oregon High School

Multiple agencies in armored vehicles swarmed onto the scene after shots were heard inside of an Oregon school Tuesday morning

Updated 4:36 p.m. E.T. on June 10

A lone shooter armed with a rifle opened fire at an Oregon high school Tuesday, police said, killing one student before the gunman was also killed. Police said later they believe the shooter may have taken his own life.

The Multnomah County Sheriff’s office confirmed the shooter’s death in an early Tuesday statement, saying the situation at Reynolds High School in Troutdale had “stabilized.” One teacher was treated at the scene for a non-life threatening injury, police said.

“This is a very tragic day, one that I had hoped would never ever be part of my experience,” Schools Superintendent Linda Florence said.

Police first received reports of gunfire at 8:07 am local time. Around 100 officers and emergency responders reported to the scene, KOIN 6 reports. Tactical units began a room-by-room evacuation of the building which had gone into lockdown shortly after the shots were fired. Pictures of armored SWAT vehicles parked outside the school cropped up on Twitter as multiple agencies, including the FBI, cordoned off the area.

“My heart is heavy after learning of this morning’s tragic events at Reynolds High School,” said Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber in a statement Tuesday. “Today Oregon hurts as we try to make sense of a senseless act of violence. Please keep students, staff, the extended Reynolds community and first responders in your thoughts and prayers.”

Local broadcaster KGW-TV showed footage of students leaving the building with their hands raised above their heads. Police said they were bussing the students to a nearby parking lot, where parents were told to meet the students.

Police said in a separate incident unconnected to the shooting they had found a gun on one of the evacuees, who was taken into custody.

About 2,800 students attend the school in Troutdale, an eastern suburb of Portland.

TIME Military

Bergdahl Deal Struck Only 1 Day Before Prisoner Swap, Top Democrat Says

“They knew an hour ahead of time where it was going to take place," said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)

The Obama administration cemented the trade to release Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl only a day before his June 1 release, a top Senate Democrat told reporters Tuesday.

“They knew a day ahead of time that the transfer was going to take place,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D—Ill.). “They knew an hour ahead of time where it was going to take place.”

Durbin, the Democratic whip, put forward the last-minute nature of the deal as a reason why the White House did not inform Congress of the prisoner exchange 30 days beforehand, as some critics have said President Obama should have. The National Defense Authorization Act calls for the president to give 30 days notice when prisoners are released from Guantanamo Bay. Bergdahl’s release was secured as part of an exchange with five Taliban prisoners, who were released into Qatari custody.

“Are we saying that once we decided to do the prisoner transfer we had to wait 30 days to notify Congress?” Durbin said. “The President couldn’t do that. It was impossible. It could have endangered the man’s life if we waited 30 days. So we have a provision in the law about 30-day notification which doesn’t square with reality. Could anyone have contacted Congress sooner? Perhaps.”

Congressional lawmakers have expressed disappointment and even anger at not being notified of the prisoner swap ahead of time. Only Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was notified before the swap.

“It comes with some surprise and dismay that the transfers went ahead with no consultation, totally not following the law,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee told reporters a week ago. On Tuesday, Feinstein struck a different tone.

“I think we need to put an end to all of this now,” she said. “I think enough is enough. I think the Senate has had a hearing and the House has had a hearing,” she said.

“I think everybody has heard what they need to hear.”

TIME The Brief

Hillary Opens Up About Book, Not 2016

Welcome to #theBrief, the four stories to know about right now—from the editors of TIME

Here are the stories TIME is watching this Tuesday, June 10.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton opened up about her book to ABC’s Diane Sawyer, but remained mum on a possible 2016 presidential campaign.

In his first interview as President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko told TIME’s Simon Shuster that he must seek “an understanding” with Russia because no other country can guarantee Ukraine’s safety.

Donald Sterling decided to stop the sale of the Los Angeles Clippers after he learned that the NBA would not lift his lifetime ban.

And finally, Thailand’s Military Junta wants you to forget about the coup and be happy. The military government’s “happiness” music video went viral on YouTube.

The Brief is published daily on weekdays.

TIME Football

This Powerful Anti-Redskins Ad Will Play During the NBA Finals

The California tribe Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation paid to run the minute-long commercial during the NBA Finals

Sports fans will see more than ads for fast food, cars and beer during commercial breaks in Tuesday night’s NBA Finals. An anti-Washington Redskins ad will run during the game’s halftime, in the hope that the NFL will force the team to change its name from what many consider a racial slur.

The California tribe Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation paid to run the minute-long ad, an edited version of the commercial above, which was created by the National Congress of American Indians. Adweek reports that a 30-second ad slot cost advertisers $460,000 in the 2013 NBA Finals.

The ad, called “Proud to be,” highlights tribes across the country. The final voiceover says, “Native Americans call themselves many things. The one thing they don’t…” before flashing to an image of a Redskins helmet.

While the Redskins name and logo has been a source of controversy for decades, it received particular bad press after Clippers owner Donald Sterling was banned from the NBA for life after his racist rant was leaked to the public. NFL player Richard Sherman told TIME’s Sean Gregory that he didn’t think the NFL would have the same response.

“Because we have an NFL team called the Redskins,” Sherman said. “I don’t think the NFL really is as concerned as they show. The NFL is more of a bottom line league. If it doesn’t affect their bottom line, they’re not as concerned.”

The Redskins is preparing for a political fight over its name, hiring a lobbying firm in May after 50 Democratic senators sent the NFL a letter asking for a name change.

The National Congress of American Indians praised the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation for airing the ad during the NBA finals, and said it would send a “loud and clear” message to the league and the team.

“Contrary to the team’s absurd claims, this dictionary-defined racial epithet does not honor our heritage. The Change the Mascot campaign continues to gather strength every time that people are educated about the origin of the R-word and its damaging impact on Native peoples,” NCAI Executive Director Jackie Pata and Oneida Indian Nation Representative Ray Halbritter said in a statement. “By airing this ad during the NBA Championships, the message will be brought into the living rooms of millions of American all across the country.”

TIME Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Revises Financial Status from ‘Dead Broke’ to ‘Obviously Blessed’

ABC News - 2014
Hillary Clinton talks with ABC News anchor Diane Sawyer for her first television interview in conjunction with the release of her new book on Monday, June 9. Martin H. Simon—ABC / Getty Images

Clinton walked back her statement on Monday that her family suffered financially after leaving the White House. "We’ve been blessed in the last 14 years," she said

Hillary Clinton offered a notable revision to her family’s financial history on Tuesday, walking back her Monday statement that her family left the White House “dead broke” and adding that they were “obviously blessed.”

Clinton was asked to address a critical backlash to her comments about working through a financial “struggle” by accepting lucrative book deals and speaking fees. The comments struck some critics as out of touch with ordinary Americans.

“Let me just clarify that I fully appreciate how hard life is for so many Americans today,” Clinton said in an interview with Good Morning America’s Robin Roberts. “Bill and I were obviously blessed. We worked hard for everything we got in our lives and we continue to work hard, and we’ve been blessed in the last 14 years.”

Asked about her description of financial distress, Clinton did not repeat the words “dead broke.”

“As I recall we were something like $12 million in debt,” Clinton said, before adding, “We have a life experience that is clearly different in very dramatic ways from many Americans, but we also have gone through some of the same challenges as many people have. I worry a lot about people I know personally and people in this country who don’t have the same opportunities that we’ve been given.”

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser