Hillary fired for lying, unethical behavior on Watergate Committee

Started by Eviltwin, May 07, 2014, 12:08 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Eviltwin


http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/while-on-watergate-committee-hillary-was-fired-for-lying-unethical-behavior/

Hillary Clinton might have a pretty hefty scandal brewing.
It turns when she was an attorney working on the Watergate investigation, she was fired by her supervisor for "lying, unethical behavior."
Jerry Zeifman, who said he is a lifelong Democrat, was a supervisor for 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. When the investigation was complete, Zeifman said he fired Hillary and refused to give her a recommendation.
"Because she was a liar," Zeifman said. "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.
Dan Calabrese reports:
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.

Affirmative Action: The federal government takes your job away from you and gives it to a woman. Then she sneers at you because you are unemployed.

dr e

Interesting. She fits like a glove with the feminists. Lying, making things up, blocking truths.   :BangHead:
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

Captain Courageous


Interesting. She fits like a glove with the feminists. Lying, making things up, blocking truths.   :BangHead:


Yep!


poiuyt

#3
Jul 14, 2014, 04:52 AM Last Edit: Jul 14, 2014, 05:40 AM by poiuyt
Staff and enforcing patrons of English-Socialism [INGSOC] appear so far out of touch of the strength of feeling growing against their hated ideology, their anti-trust, anti-freedom conspiracies. Not even establishment conservatives or RINOS appreciate this phenomena of conscientious objection and rejection.

Staff and patrons of English-socialism [INGSOC] have become so brazen in their ideology, its impacts and its consequences as to be dead blind to the obvious double injustices peoples are refusing to accept of their closed-cathedral style operations, their nepotistic appointments and their public thefts.

New comers, red pillers and other sovereign citizens interested in the destruction of Social Marxism may look to how UK anti-communists and anti-socialists worked to remove an official implicated in the use, abuse, exploitation and murder of children from self investigation.  

How can an official whom's office, whom's public position, whom's actions and whom's decisions over children and other vulnerable's be the same entity tasked with investigating the injurious consequences to the victims? You can't have a paid official abuser of children investigating the consequences to abused children as the best appointee merely because such official received a fee and will again receive another fee.

There are ways of ridding public treasury's world wide of these rent seeking parasites both of their unwanted services and their destructive ideas. THE KEY AREA OF THEIR DOMINION AND CONTROL IS THE PUBLIC TREASURY.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28295282
Retired judge Baroness Butler-Sloss has said she is stepping aside as the head of an inquiry into allegations of historical child abuse.

Downing Street said "it was entirely her decision" and a new chair would be appointed within days.

Lady Butler-Sloss has been under pressure to quit from MPs and victims concerned about her family links.

Her late brother, Sir Michael Havers, was attorney general in the 1980s.

Downing Street said it would "take a few days" to appoint a new chairman and appeared to indicate that whoever was chosen would not be so closely linked to the establishment.

David Cameron's spokesman said there had been no change in the view of the prime minister or Home Secretary Theresa May about Lady Butler-Sloss's integrity or suitability for the job.

"She has taken the decision to step down as chair of the panel inquiry," he said. "It is entirely her decision.

"The government's view hasn't changed, that she would have done a first-class job as chair. The reasons for her appointment still absolutely stand in terms of her professional expertise and her integrity, which I don't think has been questioned from any quarter whatsoever, and rightly so."

No 10 said the decision had not been prompted by suggestions a co-chairman might be appointed to the panel.

Mrs May spoke to Lady Butler-Sloss over the weekend after she was informed of her decision.

BBC political correspondent Norman Smith said questions had been raised over Lady Butler-Sloss's age - she will be 81 next month.

[[Readers can ignore the above lies and covering language used of the publicly paid for mass media and other publicly paid for bureaucrats to explain the shameless U-Turn. These peoples are equally hostage to and dependant on the public treasury, hence their running of disinformation and interference. The following link gives a thematic outline of why such and such a socialist staff worker or such and such socialist ideals are no longer considered good things by the growingly disgruntled masses.]]

http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=23871.msg234015#msg234015  

Go Up