-----Original Message-----
From: Alamaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: CTRL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 1:13 am
Subject: [ctrl] Hillary Clinton Fired For Lies, Unethical Behavior
Dan Calabrese
Read Dan's bio and previous columns here
http://www.northstarwriters.com/dc163.htm
March 31, 2008
Watergate-Era Judiciary Chief of Staff: Hillary Clinton Fired For Lies,
Unethical Behavior
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.”
How could a 27-year-old House staff member do all that? She couldn’t do it
by herself, but Zeifman said she was one of several individuals –
including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special
counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum – who
engaged in a seemingly implausible scheme to deny Richard Nixon the right
to counsel during the investigation.
Why would they want to do that? Because, according to Zeifman, they feared
putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be
cross-examined by counsel to the president. Hunt, Zeifman said, had the
goods on nefarious activities in the Kennedy Administration that would
have made Watergate look like a day at the beach – including Kennedy’s
purported complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.
The actions of Hillary and her cohorts went directly against the judgment
of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip
O’Neill, that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel. Zeifman says that
Hillary, along with Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar, was determined to gain
enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny
counsel to Nixon. And in order to pull this off, Zeifman says Hillary
wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide
her deception.
The brief involved precedent for representation by counsel during an
impeachment proceeding. When Hillary endeavored to write a legal brief
arguing there is no right to representation by counsel during an
impeachment proceeding, Zeifman says, he told Hillary about the case of
Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt
in 1970.
“As soon as the impeachment resolutions were introduced by (then-House
Minority Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House
Judiciary Committee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a
lawyer,” Zeifman said.
The Judiciary Committee allowed Douglas to keep counsel, thus establishing
the precedent. Zeifman says he told Hillary that all the documents
establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files. So
what did Hillary do?
“Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was
located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public,”
Zeifman said. Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there
was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an
impeachment proceeding – as if the Douglas case had never occurred.
The brief was so fraudulent and ridiculous, Zeifman believes Hillary would
have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.
Zeifman says that if Hillary, Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar had succeeded,
members of the House Judiciary Committee would have also been denied the
right to cross-examine witnesses, and denied the opportunity to even
participate in the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.
Of course, Nixon’s resignation rendered the entire issue moot, ending
Hillary’s career on the Judiciary Committee staff in a most
undistinguished manner. Zeifman says he was urged by top committee members
to keep a diary of everything that was happening. He did so, and still has
the diary if anyone wants to check the veracity of his story. Certainly,
he could not have known in 1974 that diary entries about a young lawyer
named Hillary Rodham would be of interest to anyone 34 years later.
But they show that the pattern of lies, deceit, fabrications and unethical
behavior was established long ago – long before the Bosnia lie, and
indeed, even before cattle futures, Travelgate and Whitewater – for the
woman who is still asking us to make her president of the United States.
© 2008 North Star Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.
--
Alamaine, IVe
Grand Forks, ND, US of A
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"All are lunatics, but he who can analyze his delusion is called a
philosopher." - Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)
"Being ignorant is not such a shame as being unwilling to learn." -
Poor Richard's Almanack, 1758 (Benjamin Franklin)
~~~~~~~
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes.
