One of the biggest talking points being used by the Donald Trump campaign against Hillary Clinton is that she voted for the Iraq War. Which, technically she did. She approved of the authorization to use force if necessary after an inspection and investigation into the use of weapons of mass destruction, an investigation that was manipulated to get us into war, but then later found no such weapons.According to CNN, the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism, reported: The Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Let s recall exactly what Clinton said back in 2002 in regards to the vote: Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first   I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the’security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections. Adding: This is a difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make. Any vote that may lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction.   My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of preemption or for unilateralism or for the arrogance of American power or purpose.Arguing, that her vote: Is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our president. And we say to him: Use these powers wisely and as a last resort. Her position was clear, and back in 2006, Trump knew that Hillary s vote to authorize force was  horrendous,  but told New York Times reporter Maureen Dowd: Don t forget that decision was based on lies given to her. Adding: She’s very smart and has a major chance to be our next president. When one makes a decision based upon lies, one must still be held accountable, but others must remember that lies were told. Back in 2006, Trump’seemed to understand that while, yes, her vote wasn’t ideal, she made the decision based upon information given to her at the time and she made clear war was to be used as a last resort after all diplomatic means were exhausted.For Trump to now use this against her is either willful ignorance or pure political pandering. He s a man with no policy experience and knows Hillary will be able to crush him at any debate and is far more qualified than he could ever dream of being, so he’s grasping at popular mudslinging straws that he’sees others use, because they work. Yet, facts will prevail, and the internet will uncover his opinions from the past. He s got nothing on Hillary, and he knows it.Featured Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: One of the biggest talking points being used by the Donald Trump campaign against Hillary Clinton is that she voted for the Iraq War. Which, technically she did. She approved of the authorization to use force if necessary after an inspection and investigation into the use of weapons of mass destruction, an investigation that was manipulated to get us into war, but then later found no such weapons.According to CNN, the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism, reported: The Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Let s recall exactly what Clinton said back in 2002 in regards to the vote: Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first   I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the’security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections. Adding: This is a difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make. Any vote that may lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction.   My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of preemption or for unilateralism or for the arrogance of American power or purpose.Arguing, that her vote: Is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our president. And we say to him: Use these powers wisely and as a last resort. Her position was clear, and back in 2006, Trump knew that Hillary s vote to authorize force was  horrendous,  but told New York Times reporter Maureen Dowd: Don t forget that decision was based on lies given to her. Adding: She’s very smart and has a major chance to be our next president. When one makes a decision based upon lies, one must still be held accountable, but others must remember that lies were told. Back in 2006, Trump’seemed to understand that while, yes, her vote wasn’t ideal, she made the decision based upon information given to her at the time and she made clear war was to be used as a last resort after all diplomatic means were exhausted.For Trump to now use this against her is either willful ignorance or pure political pandering. He s a man with no policy experience and knows Hillary will be able to crush him at any debate and is far more qualified than he could ever dream of being, so he’s grasping at popular mudslinging straws that he’sees others use, because they work. Yet, facts will prevail, and the internet will uncover his opinions from the past. He s got nothing on Hillary, and he knows it.Featured Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images