A recent report tells of a Canadian official accusing the Clinton campaign of also "reassuring" the Canadian government about NAFTA:

TORONTO (AP) - The Canadian prime minister's chief of staff says someone in Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign told him to take the presidential candidate's tough-on-NAFTA talk with "a grain of salt."

That's according to a report by the Canadian Press. A Clinton spokesman says the campaign "flatly denied" the suggestion.

Something is perculiar about this accusation. If this is true, then it doesn't make sense why the Clinton campaign "flatly denied" the accusations.

On the contrary, earlier today it was reported:

But Clinton's camp has repeatedly denied there was any assurances given, and they continued to do it Thursday.

"We flatly deny this report," said Clinton spokesman Phil Singer. "It didn't happen."

Last week, Singer said the Clinton campaign was offering the Canadian government "blanket immunity to reveal any name" they might have in the reported contact.

The Clinton campaign remains firm in it's denials. Yet there is still a possibility that it all happened (though I pray not). But, it begs the question: Why would the campaign continue to deny it when they saw what happened to Barack Obama?

I don't know, honestly. An MSNBC report claims that it was Hillary, not Barack who made the calls. A report that I saw on the front page of Yahoo! said that they BOTH did. The Hillary Clinton campaign reasserts that they did not. My head is ultimately spinning on the issue. I really don't know what's going on. Does anybody know?