Will Media Give Story About Hillary's Unethical Past the Legs It Deserves?

[Guest Guest]

I hope the media gives this the legs it deserves. ( http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/04/01...hical-behavior/ )

It may be early in Hillary's career, but it gives a clear picture to the roots of her character and its quite disturbing stuff.

 

Jerry Zeifman, the man who served as chief counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, comes out calling Hillary( http://www.northstarwriters.com/dc163.htm ) a career liar and says she wanted to deny Nixon the basic right to counsel!

 

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

 

 

There are some very serious charges he lays out as well.

 

After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader “Tip” O’Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O’Neill’s statement that: “To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series.”

 

Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee’s then most recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.

 

I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff — where they were no longer accessible to the public.

 

Hillary had also made other ethical flawed procedural recommendations, arguing that the Judiciary Committee should: not hold any hearings with – or take depositions of — any live witnesses; not conduct any original investigation of Watergate, bribery, tax evasion, or any other possible impeachable offense of President Nixon; and should rely solely on documentary evidence compiled by other committees and by the Justice Departments special Watergate prosecutor .

 

 

Ed Morrissey:

 

The right to counsel is considered one of the inviolable tenets of our justice system. It doesn’t speak well of ambitious attorneys working on a highly-charged political investigation that she wanted to deny someone the right to an attorney. Small wonder Zeifman questioned her ethics.

If all she did was to propose that as a tactic, that would not make it terribly concerning — but she did much more than just spitball ideas. When informed that public evidence showed a precedent for the right to counsel, she absconded with the files to eliminate the evidence. Does that remind anyone of later incidents in the Clinton narrative, such as the billing records for the Rose Law offices and the 900+ raw FBI files on political opponents of the Clintons?

 

 

These are very serious charges to Clinton's character. Of course it isn't news that she is a liar, but the detailed ugly details of wanting to deny someone basic Constitutional rights for the sake of a political vendetta has the potential to do her in. If the media gives this the legs it deserves Hillary's political future could cease to exist. Hopefully they don't sweep this one under the rug.

 

 

[Guest Guest]

Yea what I thought skate around it shillary supporters ignore it so it will go away.

WRONG GOING NO WHERE.

[Guest Guest]

Yea what I thought skate around it shillary supporters ignore it so it will go away.

WRONG GOING NO WHERE.

 

Face the facts: Hillary or Obamma will be our next president.

[Guest Guest]

Wow. Lied about following the rules, tried to deny rights to a political opponent and took public property (papers) out of the public realm to hide the details contained therein.

 

Any wonder she did the same things as “co” president? Anyone really believe she wouldn’t keep doing it as “full” president? She is pure evil incarnate.

 

[Guest Guest]

Face the facts: Hillary or Obamma will be our next president.

UMMMMMMM DON"T THINK SO

You libs are such bunglers you had it in your clutches you could taste it but then you picked these two losers

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[bcdiogenes]

Will tools for the politicians ever stop throwing mud and allow voters to hear discussion on the REAL ISSUES?

 

I am not a Hillary supporter, but this crap has to stop. I want to hear about: the economy, the war, healthcare, infrastructure, tax reduction and reform. I don't care about who sleeps with who, and who said what to who (6 years ago). It is simply childish to continue these devisive slanders while avoiding the important topics.

 

Grow up.

[Guest Guest]

UMMMMMMM DON"T THINK SO

You libs are such bunglers you had it in your clutches you could taste it but then you picked these two losers

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

want to make it interesting?

[Guest Guest]

UMMMMMMM DON"T THINK SO

You libs are such bunglers you had it in your clutches you could taste it but then you picked these two losers

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

 

well we're trying to learn for the best you know those bungling cons. Anyway you picked the biggest loser twice now.

[Guest dante]

I hope the media gives this the legs it deserves. ( http://stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/04/01...hical-behavior/ )

It may be early in Hillary's career, but it gives a clear picture to the roots of her character and its quite disturbing stuff.

 

Jerry Zeifman, the man who served as chief counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, comes out calling Hillary( http://www.northstarwriters.com/dc163.htm ) a career liar and says she wanted to deny Nixon the basic right to counsel!

 

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

 

 

There are some very serious charges he lays out as well.

 

After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader “Tip” O’Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O’Neill’s statement that: “To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series.”

 

Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee’s then most recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.

 

I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff — where they were no longer accessible to the public.

 

Hillary had also made other ethical flawed procedural recommendations, arguing that the Judiciary Committee should: not hold any hearings with – or take depositions of — any live witnesses; not conduct any original investigation of Watergate, bribery, tax evasion, or any other possible impeachable offense of President Nixon; and should rely solely on documentary evidence compiled by other committees and by the Justice Departments special Watergate prosecutor .

 

 

Ed Morrissey:

 

The right to counsel is considered one of the inviolable tenets of our justice system. It doesn’t speak well of ambitious attorneys working on a highly-charged political investigation that she wanted to deny someone the right to an attorney. Small wonder Zeifman questioned her ethics.

If all she did was to propose that as a tactic, that would not make it terribly concerning — but she did much more than just spitball ideas. When informed that public evidence showed a precedent for the right to counsel, she absconded with the files to eliminate the evidence. Does that remind anyone of later incidents in the Clinton narrative, such as the billing records for the Rose Law offices and the 900+ raw FBI files on political opponents of the Clintons?

 

 

These are very serious charges to Clinton's character. Of course it isn't news that she is a liar, but the detailed ugly details of wanting to deny someone basic Constitutional rights for the sake of a political vendetta has the potential to do her in. If the media gives this the legs it deserves Hillary's political future could cease to exist. Hopefully they don't sweep this one under the rug.

 

 

[Guest Guest]

Will tools for the politicians ever stop throwing mud and allow voters to hear discussion on the REAL ISSUES?

 

I am not a Hillary supporter, but this crap has to stop. I want to hear about: the economy, the war, healthcare, infrastructure, tax reduction and reform. I don't care about who sleeps with who, and who said what to who (6 years ago). It is simply childish to continue these devisive slanders while avoiding the important topics.

 

Grow up.

 

 

I'd respond to this tripe....but I'm too busy dodging sniper fire. Sorry.

[Guest Guest]

Will tools for the politicians ever stop throwing mud and allow voters to hear discussion on the REAL ISSUES?

 

I am not a Hillary supporter, but this crap has to stop. I want to hear about: the economy, the war, healthcare, infrastructure, tax reduction and reform. I don't care about who sleeps with who, and who said what to who (6 years ago). It is simply childish to continue these devisive slanders while avoiding the important topics.

 

Grow up.

 

 

You are correct. Its not as if Hillary drove her car with an intern in it off a bridge while drunk, leaving her in the car to drown, faking being hurt, escaping legal consequences, and having people cover everything else she does for the rest of her life.

 

[Guest Guest]

Hillary's not only a liar but she's a DEADBEAT! You Libs must be proud.

[Guest Guest]

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that “she who must not be named” couldn’t tell the truth if her life depended on it. It appears the MSM/Clinton love feast is over with and the Obamanation is now the anointed one. The tales of her lies and deceptions are growing legs while the very troubling story about the Obamanation’s 20 plus year association with a racist anti-American pastor and church is no longer a story according to the MSM.

 

 

@

[Guest Guest]

well we're trying to learn for the best you know those bungling cons. Anyway you picked the biggest loser twice now.

Yes WE did didn't WE

So I guess what your saying is that you have nothing but losers to run if they can't beat him.

 

 

@

[Guest Guest]

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that “she who must not be named” couldn’t tell the truth if her life depended on it. It appears the MSM/Clinton love feast is over with and the Obamanation is now the anointed one. The tales of her lies and deceptions are growing legs while the very troubling story about the Obamanation’s 20 plus year association with a racist anti-American pastor and church is no longer a story according to the MSM.

 

 

@

Well we are the new media and I think we shall keep it on the front PAGE.

 

[Guest Guest]

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that “she who must not be named” couldn’t tell the truth if her life depended on it. It appears the MSM/Clinton love feast is over with and the Obamanation is now the anointed one. The tales of her lies and deceptions are growing legs while the very troubling story about the Obamanation’s 20 plus year association with a racist anti-American pastor and church is no longer a story according to the MSM.

 

I don't think we can assume that Obama's church issue is over. The dems are still in a primary battle and Hillary can't keep that issue visible. The general election has not started yet and won't really start until the democrats finalize their candidate. It will be Obama unless something dramatic and unexpected happens to hurt him. The church issue is not dead. Wait until the general election campaigning starts. McCain won't be the church protagonists but I'm sure there will be a "swiftboat" type effort to not let the general electorate forget about it. I really think McCain has a decent chance to win as a result.

 

 

@