cacman
  • cacman
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
11 years ago
Hillary Clinton was fired from the House Judiciary Committee staff for unethical behavior as she helped prepare articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon over Watergate.

Jerry Zeifman, the general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee who supervised Clinton’s work on the Watergate investigation in 1974, and a lifelong Democrat, called Clinton a “liar” and “an unethical, dishonest lawyer.”

“She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer,” Zeifman said. “She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/60962/#yvgM3Y2ZiDrpx6F5.99 


Watergate, Whitewater, Benghazi
And we are supposed to believe and trust her now?
Why this woman is not in jail and instead is running for President just amazes me.



WhosTheCrookNow.jpg

Click to View Image254 View(s)

Burner02
11 years ago
You are confusing the left with facts.


[-x
Gene363
11 years ago
ZRX1200
11 years ago
Love the meme.

American loves anti-heros as years of programming and indoctrination have done wonders for conditioning a once strong and proud populace into a soft weak timid group of consumers.

Buckwheat
11 years ago
They all are. 🐴
Speyside
11 years ago
^ We have a winner!
youngra
11 years ago
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/zeifman.asp 

FALSE

As a 27 year old staff attorney for the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate investigation, Hillary Rodham was fired by her supervisor, lifelong Democrat Jerry Zeifman. When asked why Hillary Rodham was fired, Zeifman said in an interview, "Because she was a liar. 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.""

Origins: Former First Lady Hillary Clinton is no stranger to political scandal and controversy, and
a specific accusation concerning her work as a young lawyer on the Watergate investigation has dogged her political career for more than a decade. The claim originated with Jerry Zeifman, under whom Clinton worked in 1974 as a member of the impeachment inquiry staff for the House Committee on the Judiciary during the course of the scandal.

The notion Hillary Clinton was fired by Jerry Zeifman for "lying" and "unethical behavior" has circulated across social media and in e-mails for years. The belief that Clinton's early career was marked by this buried scandal is widespread, but is there any merit to the claim?

By Zeifman's own admission there is not. Statements made by Zeifman himself contradict the claim he fired Hillary Clinton. During a 1998 interview with the Sacramento Bee in which he discussed his work with Clinton on Watergate, Zeifman not only stated he hadn't fired her, but he didn't even have the authority to fire her:
If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her.
Ten years later, Zeifman's story had shifted. When asked by radio host Neal Boortz in April 2008 if he had fired Hillary Clinton from the Watergate investigation, Zeifman hedged by stating Clinton had been let go, but only as part of a layoff of multiple personnel who were no longer needed:
Well, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions.
Following Zeifman's 2008 interview with Boortz, a column by Dan Calabrese ("FLASHBACK: HILLARY CLINTON FIRED FROM WATERGATE INVESTIGATION FOR 'LYING, UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR'") cemented the belief that Hillary Clinton had been "fired" from the Watergate investigation in political lore:
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.
However, one need only go back to the source of the rumor and Zeifman's own statement that he did not have the power to fire Hillary Clinton to discount that now common version of political lore: the evidence indicates that, whatever Zeifman may have thought of Clinton's behavior, she was let go from the Watergate committee because she was one of a number of people who were no longer needed as the investigation wound down (and Nixon's resignation made the issue moot), not because she was "fired" over ethical issues.

Last updated: 21 October 2014
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/zeifman.asp#Is4jsAYKCYtVOxhl.99 
frankj1
11 years ago
But Nixon is still a crook, correct?
namadio
11 years ago

But Nixon is still a crook, correct?

frankj1 wrote:


But Nick is not a crook.
teedubbya
11 years ago
cacman
  • cacman
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
11 years ago
Does it really matter now?
Just the fact that there have been such controversies over her involvement in all 3 prior situations is circumstantial enough for a good conspiracy theory.
How many times has Zeifman's story changed? Wonder how much pressure was brought to bear?
Believe it's naive to think that Clinton didn't purposely keep a private email server to protect herself. And won't release the server or digital format of the emails especially after what happened with the Lewinsky affair. Paper print-outs can be altered, and carry as much weight as a photocopy.
jetblasted
11 years ago
Monica Lewinsky is HOT.
youngra
11 years ago
Agreed Carl - when you are part of the machine making the rules you can do as you please. Our "State of affairs" internally for our government is truly sad. We need some new "non dynasty" leaders, but anyone who tries to run gets shredded by the machine if they are no the anointed "next leader".
Speyside
11 years ago
So accuracy does not matter?
jackconrad
11 years ago
Buckwheat
11 years ago

But Nixon is still a crook, correct?

frankj1 wrote:



Not really a crook. More of a dishonest person, IMO.

I have to laugh at this thread because one person being a dishonest person doesn't mean that another person is not a dishonest person. The inference in the picture is that because Hillary is dishonest it in some way has a bearing on Nixon's honesty. It shows a third grade level of understanding of things. "Well she did it to".

Thunder.Gerbil
11 years ago

Not really a crook. More of a dishonest person, IMO.

I have to laugh at this thread because one person being a dishonest person doesn't mean that another person is not a dishonest person. The inference in the picture is that because Hillary is dishonest it in some way has a bearing on Nixon's honesty. It shows a third grade level of understanding of things. "Well she did it to".

Buckwheat wrote:




Well, this IS cbid...
ZRX1200
11 years ago
Yeah we're 2nd graders you prick.
frankj1
11 years ago
Buckwheat
11 years ago

Yeah we're 2nd graders you prick.

ZRX1200 wrote:



Only the "Royal We". 🌫
Users browsing this topic