Featured Item

'Hillary Care' and 'Socialized Medicine'

Mitt Romney says that Hillary Clinton is planning a government takeover of the health care system. Has he got his facts right?.
Read on, weigh in »

Our Mission

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." -- C.P. Scott, editor Manchester Guardian, 1921

Our goal is to shed as much light as possible on controversial claims and counter-claims involving important national issues and the records of the various presidential candidates. More »

Campaign 2008

The Trail

For GOP, Back-to-the-Future Week

The current crop of Republicans has reached back in time for validation from leaders who have neither the power nor the influence they once had. 2:40 PM ET | More »


Recent Posts




Regular Features

Stories By Date

Subscribe to This Blog

Related Links

Campaign Resources on washingtonpost.com

More Useful Sites

Candidate Watch

Aliens Support Clinton, Richardson

Dream presidential ticket for UFO believers.

"The federal government has not come clean on all that it knows...They don't produce documents on this, they should get it all out...The government has not handled this well over the years, that is a historical fact."

--Bill Richardson, interviewed by Chris Matthews on MSNBC, claiming that the US government is witholding information on UFOs, October 30, 2007.

"More people in this country have seen UFOs than, I think, approve of George Bush's presidency."

--Dennis Kucinich, Democratic presidential debate, October 30, 2007.

Last week's media excitement over the claim by Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich to have personally seen a UFO obscured a much more newsworthy story. Bill Richardson alleges UFO coverup! Archives officials wonder if New Mexico governor is living on a different planet!! Top UFO researcher endorses Clinton-Richardson presidential ticket, predicts Democrats will end "UFO truth embargo"!!! The Fact Checker investigates!

The Facts

Kucinich may be grabbing the headlines, but it turns out that Richardson is the sleeper UFO candidate. The New Mexico governor has long insisted that the U.S. government has failed to disclose "everything it knows" about a 1947 flying saucer "sighting" in Roswell, N.M., that he has helped to transform into a worldwide tourist attraction. In 2004, Richardson wrote a foreward to a book entitled "The Roswell Dig Diaries" calling for "full disclosure."

"The American people can handle the truth--no matter how bizarre or mundane," the governor wrote.

Officials at the National Archives took umbrage at Richardson's suggestions of a coverup. "What records is he talking about exactly?" asked Tim Nenninger, head of the Archives modern military records branch, who supervises Air Force records of UFO sightings, known as Project Blue Book. "We are unaware of any large collection of UFO records that have not been declassified."

The largest body of UFO records was declassified in the early to mid-1970s, and is now available for research at the Archives facility in College Park, MD. A finding aid for Project Blue Book is available here. In 1994, the Air Force wrote a study optimistically entitled "Roswell Report: Case Closed", which has also been declassified and is available here.

Nenninger that some "UFO-related documents" that are part of other collections are awaiting declassification under the Freedom of Information Act, but the main bodies of records have been released. According to Archives officials, a UFO researcher named Grant Cameron was the first person to file a Freedom of Information Act request to the Clinton presidential library, putting him in the queue ahead of other researchers who are demanding the release of millions of pages of Hillary Clinton records as First Lady.

A July 1995 report by the General Accounting Office found nothing to support claims of a government coverup into the 1947 UFO sighting in Roswell. Like other official investigations, it concluded that the "flying saucer" was, in fact, a military research balloon launched to monitor Soviet atomic tests.

Rightly or wrongly, UFO researchers see Hillary Clinton as a possible ally in the fight to declassify government records on alien activity. Stephen Bassett, founder of the Paradigm Research Group, said that UFO researchers were hoping for a Clinton-Richardson ticket, as the best combination to "end the truth embargo" on UFO sightings. He expressed disappointment at Dennis Kucinich, saying that the Ohio congressmen had failed to reveal "everything he knows" about his encounter with a UFO in the early 1980s at the home of actress Shirley Maclaine.

A spokesman for Richardson, Tom Reynolds, noted that the governor had "a grin on his face" when he replied to the UFO question from Matthews on MSNBC, and "made clear that he was promoting New Mexico tourism." "The governor never alleged that there is any sort of coverup," Reynolds said. "He was speaking to the overclassification of documents. It seems there is an air of secrecy around the Roswell issue that we would like to see pulled back."

While we are addressing this subject, we must note that Kucinich used a false statistic in claiming that "more people in this country have seen UFOs than...approve of George Bush's presidency." See video here. Just for the record, according to a pre-Halloween Associated Press poll, 14 per cent of Americans say they have seen a UFO. The president's current approval rating is currently hovering around 34 per cent.

The Pinocchio Test

We understand why the governor of New Mexico wants to promote tourism in his state, but he should put up or shut up. If he has evidence that the government is withholding information, he should produce it. One Pinocchio.

Three Pinocchios for Congressman Kucinich, and his false claim that more Americans have seen UFOs than approve of President Bush.

(About our rating scale.)

Posted on November 6, 2007 at 6:00 AM ET  | Category: 1 Pinocchio, 3 Pinocchios, Bill Richardson, Candidate Record, Candidate Watch, Dennis Kucinich, Hillary Rodham Clinton, History
Share This: Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This | What Are These Links?
Previous: Biden Talks Tough to Brezhnev? | Next: Four Pinocchios for Recidivist Rudy


Please email us to report offensive comments.

What a waste.

Posted by: | November 6, 2007 09:43 AM

"What a waste."

Amen! I thought summer was the slow news season, not the fall.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | November 6, 2007 01:41 PM

...and your Clinton headline and mentions are strained, to say the least. Who made you add those?

Posted by: | November 6, 2007 03:17 PM

Hey, Wait a minute. Dennis's assertion CAN be tested. The next time any one polls on Bush's approval rating, ask the respondents IF they have ever seen a UFO.

When more people believe in UFO's than believe in George Bush, appologize.

Posted by: ceflynline | November 6, 2007 08:29 PM

It makes sense that Kucinich gets three (instead of four) for an obvious lie because there was an element of humor in the delivery and most educated people will understand that his was a false statement.

But why does Richardson only get one for pure speculation and absolutely no evidence to support his claim of cover up?

Posted by: Paul S. | November 6, 2007 11:52 PM

Sheesh. Cut Kucinich a break. He made a good joke, for once, and besides, the populations who've seen UFO's and who support GW Bush, while they may tend to vote differently, have a great deal in common: suggestibility, an eagerness to hold strong beliefs that overwhelms normal screening mechanisms, and an incapacity to accept or process information contradicting those beliefs.

Posted by: Elizabeth K. for First-Lady-For-Life | November 7, 2007 11:33 AM

Just thought I would share this information for anyone who wants to support Hillary. I bought a bunch of stuff from http://www.hillarycampus.com/ for a rally that we had at my school and I just wanted to recommend it because it's inexpensive, fast and I know people don't have a lot of money to spend on bumper stickers and T shirts. I think we should be able to support Hillary without going broke!

Posted by: DemStore | November 7, 2007 11:34 AM

I LIKED this piece. Not the most weighty issue, but entertaining nonetheless. A little levity in subject is due from an article that awards something called Pinocchios.

Posted by: angrydoug | November 7, 2007 03:02 PM

Umm, yeah...Kucinich was taking a swipe at Bush, not pouring out policy stats. If you want some real truth benders check out some of Giuliani's doosies on NYC crime statistics and his claim that as a USA and mayor he engaged in "enhanced interrogation" methods. I don't think there's anything he's not willing to make up. And, if he *was* waterboarding crime suspects, shouldn't he be investigated??

Posted by: Dave | November 7, 2007 03:35 PM

I see WaPo's own Dan Froomkin is "Factchecking the Factchecker":


Kucinich statement was still wrong, but I'm guessing Froomkin is right on the correct statement Kucinich had in mind.

Posted by: Crust | November 7, 2007 04:32 PM

Why the heck is Clinton referenced in this article?

Just a gratuitous jab? I've come to expect that from Dobbs, who appears to be both lazy and stupid.

Posted by: Egilsson | November 8, 2007 08:52 AM

Oh geez....apparently candidates can't even say anything in good humor these days...I saw Kucinich's comment and it was all in good humor, and of course it was a swipe at the President..but hellloo he is a candidate for President. Can't believe steps were taken to actually ck out the statistic! Dumbfounded at this article. All I can do is roll my eyes in disbelief.

Posted by: Jean M. | November 8, 2007 01:52 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

Contact the Fact Checker

We rely on our readers to send us suggestions on topics to fact check and tips on erroneous claims by political candidates, interest groups and the media. If you have facts or documents that shed more light on a subject under discussion, or if you think we have made a mistake, let us know.

If you wish to send an attachment, please e-mail factchecker@washpost.com.

© 2006-2007 The Washington Post Company