An email says that Hillary
Clinton — then Hillary Rodham — was fired for lying and being unethical when
she was a 27-year-old working on the Watergate investigation. Is this true?
The viral email is mainly derived from a column published on
March 31, 2008, by Dan Calabrese, founder of North Star Writers Group,
according to fact-finder TruthOrFiction.com. North Star was a newspaper
syndicate that provided services until early 2012.
Calabrese’s information came from Democrat Jerry Zeifman, a
counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised
Clinton on the Watergate investigation. Zeifman’s 2006 book, “Hillary’s Pursuit
of Power,” states that she “… engaged in a variety of self-serving unethical
practices in violation of House rules.”
On his now-shuttered website, Zeifman said, “Hillary Clinton is
ethically unfit to be either a senator or president — and if she were to become
president, the last vestiges of the traditional moral authority of the party of
Roosevelt, Truman and Johnson will be destroyed.”
Specifically, Zeifman contends that Rodham and others wanted
Richard Nixon to remain in office to bolster the chances of Sen. Ted Kennedy or
another Democrat being elected president.
Zeifman said that in 1974 a young lawyer who shared an office
with Clinton came to him to apologize that he and Clinton had lied to him. The
lawyer, John Labovitz, is quoted as saying that he was dismayed with “… her
erroneous legal opinions and efforts to deny Nixon representation by counsel —
as well as an unwillingness to investigate Nixon.”
Zeifman charges that Rodham regularly consulted with Ted
Kennedy’s chief political strategist, a violation of House rules.
Hillary Rodham’s conduct, according to Zeifman, also was the
result of not wanting Nixon to face an impeachment trial because Democrats
worried that Nixon might bring up abuses of office by President John Kennedy.
Zeifman — ironically, a consultant to a member of the Judiciary
Committee that impeached President Bill Clinton — said Democrats feared putting
Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand. Hunt, Zeifman said,
might report on his knowledge of nefarious activities in the Kennedy
administration “including Kennedy’s purported complicity in the attempted
assassination of Fidel Castro.”
Zeifman also asserts that Rodham joined Burke Marshall, Ted
Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair and Rodham’s former law professor;
special counsel John Doar; and senior associate special counsel (and future
Clinton White House counsel) Bernard Nussbaum in trying to gain enough votes on
the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.
In order to pull this off, Zeifman said that Rodham wrote a
fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents.
After the Nixon impeachment investigation was finished, Zeifman
fired Rodham and said he refused to give her a letter of recommendation.
According to the Calabrese column as reported by
TruthOrFiction.com, Zeifman said he regrets not reporting Rodham to the
appropriate bar association.
So what are we to make of all this? Calabrese’s interview with
Zeifman has been published around the Internet and repeated by pundits such as
Rush Limbaugh and Neil Boortz. But there is nothing to out-and-out confirm
Zeifman’s rendition. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t be true, but it makes it
difficult to arrive at the truth.
In addition, neither www.TruthOrFiction.com nor we could find any
response from Hillary Clinton to Zeifman’s book or to his accusations.
|
Hillary Clinton Ex-Boss Says He Fired Her from Her Work on the
Watergate Investigation for Being a "Liar" and
"Unethical"-Truth! & Fiction!
|
|
|
Summary of the eRumor:
As a 27-year-old
working on the Watergate investigation in the 1970s, Hillary Rodham Clinton
was “fired” from her position for being a “liar” and “unethical"
|
FLASHBACK:
HILLARY CLINTON FIRED FROM WATERGATE INVESTIGATION FOR FOR ‘LYING, UNETHICAL
BEHAVIOR’
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.http://patdollard.com/2013/05/flashback-hillary-clinton-fired-from-watergate-investigation-for-lying-unethical-behavior-conspiracy-to-violate-the-constitution/
--------------------------------------------
Original eRumor as it appeared in 2008:
Watergate-Era Judiciary Chief of Staff: Hillary Clinton Fired For Lies,
Unethical Behavior
by
Dan Calabrese Dan Calabrese
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.
The Staff: True or not, you readers must decide and do some research as I did to find this information. If incorrect, please post your comment and proof so all can see.
