The Truth will prevail, But only if we Demand it from Congress!
9-11 Inside Job and Neocons Hacked 2004
Hillary's History of Lieing
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.
Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and
others in our discussion forum.
To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this
writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask
them to carry it.
