Hillary Clinton Runs from 9/11 Talking Point as New York Times Editorial Board Attacks

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton is running hard from her talking point blaming her years of Wall Street donations on the 9/11 terrorist attack.

Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta is fighting back against the controversy surrounding her remarks, calling it “an unfair attack.” The Bernie Sanders campaign and the Republican National Committee have both criticized Clinton linking the World Trade Center attacks to her close role with Wall Street banks.

As Breitbart News reported, Clinton campaign surrogate Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee used the 9/11 talking point in the Spin Room immediately after the debate. But the campaign knew that it would backfire. As the night went on, Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri fretted about how to stop her surrogates from using the talking point.

The New York Times Editorial Board ruled that it’s a no-go.

“Her effort to tug on Americans’ heartstrings instead of explaining her Wall Street ties — on a day that the scars of 9/11 were exposed anew — was at best botched rhetoric. At worst it was the type of cynical move that Mrs. Clinton would have condemned in Republicans,” the Board decided.

“She should make a fast, thorough effort to explain herself by providing a detailed plan for how she would promote measures protecting middle-class Americans from another financial crisis.”

What did Clinton say?

“So, I represented New York, and I represented New York on 9/11 when we were attacked. Where were we attacked? We were attacked in downtown Manhattan where Wall Street is,” Clinton explained during Saturday’s Democratic debate in Des Moines, Iowa.

“I did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild. That was good for New York. It was good for the economy and it was a way to rebuke the terrorists who had attacked our country,” Clinton said.

Media Matters For America does not have a report on the matter as of press time.