Hillary: "I don't care if it's our wedding day. It's not going to happen."
Bubbah: "There's always the bride's maids..."
Hillary: "Mmm...true!"
Posted on 04/01/2008 7:16:36 PM PDT by HAL9000
Posted 2/6/08Hillary’s Crocodile Tears in Connecticut
I have just seen Hillary Clinton and her former Yale law professor both in tears at a campaign rally here in my home state of Connecticut. Her tearful professor said how proud he was that his former student was likely to become our next President. Hillary responded in tears.
My own reaction was of regret that, when I terminated her employment on the Nixon impeachment staff, I had not reported her unethical practices to the appropriate bar associations.
Hillary as I knew her in 1974
At the time of Watergate I had overall supervisory authority over the House Judiciary Committee’s Impeachment Inquiry staff that included Hillary Rodham -- who was later to become First Lady in the Clinton White House.
During that period I kept a private diary of the behind the scenes congressional activities. My original tape recordings of the diary and other materials related to the Nixon impeachment provided the basis for my prior book Without Honor and are now available for inspection in the George Washington University Library.
After President Nixon’s resignation a young lawyer, who shared an office with Hillary, confided in me that he was dismayed by her erroneous legal opinions and efforts to deny Nixon representation by counsel -- as well as an unwillingness to investigate Nixon. In my diary of August 12, 1974 I noted the following:
"John Labovitz apologized to me for the fact that months ago he and Hillary had lied to me [to conceal rules changes and dilatory tactics.] Labovitz said. 'That came from Yale.' I said “You mean Burke Marshall [Senator Ted Kennedy’s chief political strategist, with whom Hillary regularly consulted in violation of House rules.] ' Labovitz said, 'Yes.' His apology was significant to me, not because it was a revelation but because of his contrition."
At that time Hillary Rodham was 27 years old. She had obtained a position on our committee staff through the political patronage of her former Yale law school professor Burke Marshall and Senator Ted Kennedy. Eventually, because of a number of her unethical practices I decided that I could not recommend her for any subsequent position of public or private trust.
Her patron, Burke Marshal, had previously been Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights under Robert Kennedy. During the Kennedy administration Washington insiders jokingly characterized him as the Chief counsel to the Irish Mafia. After becoming a Yale professor he also became Senator Ted Kennedy’s lawyer at the time of Chappaquidick -- as well as Kennedy’s chief political strategist. As a result, some of his colleagues often described him as the Attorney General in waiting of the Camelot government in exile.
In addition to getting Hillary a job on the Nixon impeachment inquiry staff, Kennedy and Marshall had also persuaded Rodino to place two other close friends of Marshall in top positions on our staff. One was John Doar; who had been Marshall’s deputy in the Justice Department – whom Rodino appointed to head the impeachment inquiry staff. The other was Bernard Nussbaum, who had served as Assistant U.S. Attorney in New York – who was placed in charge of conducting the actual investigation of Nixon’s malfeasance.
Marshall, Doar, Nussbaum, and Rodham had two hidden objectives regarding the conduct of the impeachment proceedings. First, in order to enhance the prospect of Senator Kennedy or another liberal Democrat being elected president in 1976 they hoped to keep Nixon in office “twisting in the wind” for as long as possible. This would prevent then-Vice President Jerry Ford from becoming President and restoring moral authority to the Republican Party.
As was later quoted in the biography of Tip O’Neill (by John Farrell) a liberal Democrat would have become a “shoe in for the presidency in 1976” if had Nixon been kept in office until the end of his term. However, both Tip O’Neil and I -- as well as most Democrats -- regarded it to be in the national interest to replace Nixon with Ford as soon as possible. As a result. as described by O’Neill we coordinated our efforts to “keep Rodino’s feet to the fire.”
A second objective of the strategy of delay was to avoid a Senate impeachment trial, in which as a defense Nixon might assert that Kennedy had authorized far worse abuses of power than Nixon’s effort to “cover up” the Watergate burglary (which Nixon had not authorized or known about in advance). In short, the crimes of Kennedy included the use of the Mafia to attempt to assassinate Castro, as well as the successful assassinations of Diem in Vietnam and Lumumba in the Congo.
After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader “Tip” O'Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O'Neill's statement that: "To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series."
Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee’s then most recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.
I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff -- where they were no longer accessible to the public.
Hillary had also made other ethical flawed procedural recommendations, arguing that the Judiciary Committee should: not hold any hearings with – or take depositions of -- any live witnesses; not conduct any original investigation of Watergate, bribery, tax evasion, or any other possible impeachable offense of President Nixon; and should rely solely on documentary evidence compiled by other committees and by the Justice Departments special Watergate prosecutor .
Only a few far left Democrats supported Hillary’s recommendations. A majority of the committee agreed to allow President Nixon to be represented by counsel and to hold hearings with live witnesses. Hillary then advocated that the official rules of the House be amended to deny members of the committee the right to question witnesses. This recommendation was voted down by the full House. The committee also rejected her proposal that we leave the drafting of the articles of impeachment to her and her fellow impeachment inquiry staffers.
It was not until two months after Nixon's resignation that I first learned of still another questionable role of Hillary. On Sept. 26, 1974, Rep. Charles Wiggins, a Republican member of the committee, wrote to ask Chairman Rodino to look into “a troubling set of events.” That spring, Wiggins and other committee members had asked "that research should be undertaken so as to furnish a standard against which to test the alleged abusive conduct of Richard Nixon." And, while "no such staff study was made available to the members at any time for their use," Wiggins had just learned that such a study had been conducted - at committee expense - by a team of professors who completed and filed their reports with the impeachment- inquiry staff well in advance of our public hearings.
The report was kept secret from members of Congress. But after the impeachment- inquiry staff was disbanded, it was published commercially and sold in book stores. Wiggins wrote: “I am especially troubled by the possibility that information deemed essential by some of the members in their discharge of their responsibilities may have been intentionally suppressed by the staff during the course our investigation." He was also concerned that staff members may have unlawfully received royalties from the book’s publisher.
On Oct. 3, Rodino wrote back: "Hillary Rodham of the impeachment-inquiry staff coordinated the work. The staff did not think the manuscript was useful in its present form." No effort was ever made to ascertain whether or not Hillary or any other person on the committee staff received royalties.
Two decades later Bill Clinton became President. As was later to be described in the Wall Street Journal by Henry Ruth -- the lead Watergate courtroom prosecutor -- “The Clintons corrupted the soul of the Democratic Party.”
I like your analysis. Her inflated sense of moral certitude, and the concomitant ability to rationalize any means to achieve it, are scary. This is the mindset of a "true believer."
Addendum: The original sin was to think that you could make yourself to be like God. She seems to be so certain of herself that she has no conscience in terms of how she treats others. The rest of us are just “little people” in comparison to “her goddess.”
Another Hillary ping!
Her complete moral bankruptcy was evident even to other Democratic lawyers at a young age!
Ping!
She seems to be the only female in the entire story. I suppose that she can make a claim of sexism as the reason for her firing back then, although it won’t fly here.
It has been obvious for many years that Shrillary is a depraved and despicable opportunist, but I really had no idea she had proved so contemptible from such an early age. I imagined that somehow Arkansas politics and Bill had corrupted her in the ‘80s, but this and similar pieces have made it obvious that she was scum from early on, all of her own doing.
Well, to be fair, there were still some within the Party back in the '70s with higher ethical standards than Her Royal Thighness. Probably a bit of a generation gap at the time.
Thanks for the ping!
Posted on 06/17/2002 7:45:40 AM PDT by doug from upland
The following is an e-mail message that a group of Democrats are sending to any Democrat or Republican who will listen to reason. Please read this message and pass it on to anyone you have an e-mail address for, regardless of party affiliation.
Having long championed traditional Democratic causes, I simply cannot accept Mr. Clinton's shameless election-year surge to the right as his chosen means of winning a second term. And like most if not all traditional Democrats, I have grave reservations about the Clintons' morality and ethics. In my view there is now probable cause to consider our president and first lady as felons, who are likely to be indicted after the Nov. 5 election.
The misdeeds of the Clinton administration have fallen into a pattern of deceit and corruption that now clearly justifies denying Mr. Clinton a second term in office. To date more than 30 high administration officials have been investigated, fired or forced to resign, and the White House has illegally obtained more than 900 confidential FBI files. Four independent counsels have been appointed, three to investigate cabinet members and one to investigate the president himself.
The White House suppressed documents under subpoena. The Department of Justice, the FBI and the Treasury Department have been politicized and misused to prosecute or investigate innocent staffers of the White House Travel Office. The president's Health Care Task Force operated secretly in gross violation of federal disclosure laws, misled the federal courts and ignored conflict-of-interest laws.
The most recent scandal, involving former Commerce Department official and Democratic Party fund-raiser John Huang (who still has failed to answer a summons issued by District Judge Royce C. Lamberth), is but another hauntingly familiar throwback to my days as an investigator of Watergate crimes and a wide variety of other forms of presidential misconduct. The 1972 Republican Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP) was involved in many shady operations that mixed legitimate government funding operations with the illegitimate refunneling of money through backdoor corporate contributions into CREEP coffers.
Now it appears that Mr. Huang, and his former associates from the Indonesian Lippo financial conglomerate, were unlawfully funneling contributions from foreign sources (that had both corporate and political interests in U.S. policy) into Democratic Party coffers. This mixing of U.S. policy with partisan fund-raising -- not to mention the questionable background of some of the institutions and individuals given top clearance by the White House and the DNC -- has produced a cancer on the Clinton presidency painfully reminiscent of the cancer that brought down Nixon.
I am particularly saddened that the Clintons now believe that their unethical and unlawful acts in the pursuit of power will be condoned by all but a few Democrats in the name of party unity. During the Nixon impeachment inquiry it was my view that the core of Nixon's corruption was his belief that in politics his ends justified any means at all.
Ironically, it is now the Clinton administration that has given renewed intensity to the corrupt notion that immoral means can be legitimized in the pursuit of political ends. If Mr. Clinton is re-elected it will be testimony to his success in putting politics before principle. A second Clinton term would polarize the nation even more dangerously than did Richard Nixon's -- this time with Republicans as the new defenders of integrity in government and Democrats as the defenders of a corrupt administration. If Mr. Clinton is defeated, Democrats may find a new strength -- and long remember the folly of marching in lockstep in support of a corrupt president in the name of party unity.
By all accounts Robert Dole is a man of personal integrity. His principles are conservative, and I will continue to oppose them. Yet because I must remain true to my traditional Democratic moral values, I will vote for Mr. Dole.
Jerome M. Zeifman, The Wall Street Journal 10/25/96
JEROME ZEIFMAN -— New York Needs You Now
Politics/Elections Opinion Keywords: ZEIFMAN, STOP HITLERY
Source: dfu opinion
Published: 7-7-00 Author: dfu
Posted on 07/08/2000 19:59:40 PDT by doug from upland
I had the great pleasure on two occasions to speak with Jerome Zeifman, lead Democratic counsel during Watergate. On one occasion, on the George Putnam show, I told him that I never really could understand Germany in the 1930s and how an entire nation accepted that black was white and wrong was right. I never understood, that is, until the United States, circa 1992.
Zeifman responded that what I said was really disturbing and I thought he was going to castigate me. Yes, it was disturbing but he agreed with my assessment.
Zeifman and I have exchanged a few e-mails. After Watergate concluded there were two attorneys for whom he would not provide a letter of reference. Those two attorneys were Bernie Nussbaum and Hillary Rodham.
I just sent another e-mail to Mr. Zeifman suggesting that he do a political commercial for Rick Lazio in New York. Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, was shocked and sickened that his once great party would not throw Bill Clinton out of office. He recognized both of the Clintons as likely serious felons.
Let’s hope he responds favorably and that Lazio’s staff sees the wisdom in Zeifman’s help. As an aside, Algore tormentor Katherine Prudhomme (who asked Al the rape question)said that she would do a commercial.
I hope that key people will step up to the plate and tell New Yorkers what they need to know before they vote for their senator.
Interesting, isn’t it, that Ted Kennedy was one of the first big Dems to come out and back Obama. Now according to this he was the one to first place Hillary in places to do political dirty work.
Looks like Hillary was started out on her career of political scorched earth by the Kennedys. My one consolation is that I believe in divine judgement, that the whole wretched crew will someday answer for what they have done to this country.
Same here. It's a daughter-father thing but I have only suspicions to back this up
“Same here. It’s a daughter-father thing but I have only suspicions to back this up”
A long time ago I read something about her relationship with her father (she was raised in Park Ridge, IL, a suburb not very far from the one I live in, in the Chicagoland area). Supposedly he was very demanding but withholding of praise, and therefore she was always trying to please him by excelling in school and trying to win his favor and praise which she didn’t get much of. So, you guys are right, it goes back to the father-daughter relationship.
“Same here. It’s a daughter-father thing but I have only suspicions to back this up”
A long time ago I read something about her relationship with her father (she was raised in Park Ridge, IL, a suburb not very far from the one I live in, in the Chicagoland area). Supposedly he was very demanding but withholding of praise, and therefore she was always trying to please him by excelling in school and trying to win his favor and praise which she didn’t get much of. So, you guys are right, it goes back to the father-daughter relationship.
Hillary’s father ——>>>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18984501/page/4/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18984501/page/3/
Hillary: "I don't care if it's our wedding day. It's not going to happen."
Bubbah: "There's always the bride's maids..."
Hillary: "Mmm...true!"
His own brothers always said so.
| 2008 Q2 FReepathon. Target: $72,000 | Receipts & Pledges to-date: $455 | |||
|
||||
| Thank you for your support!! | ||||
THE REAL HILLARY CLINTON: Episode #12 - Hillary Lied to Zeifman, Rigged Nixon Impeachment Protocols
NewsMax and other sources | 12-30-02 | dfu; Limbacher
Posted on 12/30/2002 10:04:30 PM PST by doug from upland
#1 - FJB
#2 - Children in Hospital
#3 - She Throws Coffee in Marine's Face
#4 - Dissing Health Care Execs Who Offered Solution
#5 - Hillary, the Commies, and the Black Panthers
#6 - Defiling the White House Christmas Tree
#7 - Hillary Calls the Police Murderers
#8 - How Did She Get Her Name?
#9 - Sister Frigidaire
#10 - Troopers and Secret Service as Servants
#11 - Beep, Beep, Get Out of My #$%&@&$ Way
NOTE: the survival of our Republic is threatened by two things -- fundamentalist Islamic terrorists and Hillary Rodham Clinton. President Bush is leading the fight against the terrorists. It is up to those of us who know the real Hillary Clinton to lead the fight against her. We must shine the light of truth on this dangerous woman so that all Americans may know the real Hillary.
#12 in the continuing series.
FROM NEWSMAX
The House Judiciary Committee’s former chief counsel, Jerome Zeifman, waited 22 years to unleash his bombshell, which would reveal that the deck was stacked against Nixon by none other than the wife of the man who now faces a similar fate. It was Hillary Clinton who rigged the proceedings against the 37th president, as Zeifman revealed in a little-noticed passage of his 1996 book, "Without Honor: The Impeachment of President Nixon and the Crimes of Camelot." Zeifman quoted his own 1974 diary, which reports that just four days after Nixon resigned "John Labovitz came to my office and apologized for having participated to some extent to conceal from me the work that was being done. Some months ago, he and Hillary lied intentionally to me and told me there were no drafts of proposed rules of procedure for the [Nixon] impeachment inquiry."
COMPLETE ARTICLE:
How Hillary Nuked Nixon
Carl Limbacher
October 1, 1998
"This is the most fun we've had since Watergate." -- Washington Post managing editor Ben Bradlee, during the Iran-Contra investigation.
OYSTER BAY, N.Y. -- On July 12, Charles McCarry's New York Times op-ed piece was titled, "Bill Clinton's John Dean?" It was a rumination on the similarities between Linda Tripp and the White House counsel who turned on Richard Nixon, thereby setting Watergate's wheels in motion.
As intriguing as the comparison was, the real eye-opener of McCarry's piece came toward the end, when he quoted Henry Ruth, Leon Jaworski's Watergate deputy prosecutor. McCarry recalled Ruth's memo, sent to Jaworski just 10 days after supposed "smoking gun" evidence forced Nixon into ignoble early retirement, which cited 10 areas of Watergate then under criminal investigation.
Ruth informed Jaworski: "None of these matters at the moment rises to the level of our ability to prove even a probable criminal violation by Mr. Nixon."
McCarry followed the Ruth quote with his own observation that the ultimate historical irony here was that Richard Nixon, whom historians have told us for 24 years had been caught dead to rights, may not have needed a pardon after all.
What about the June 23, 1972, "smoking gun" tape where Nixon ordered the CIA to block the FBI's Watergate investigation? Or where Nixon discussed the possibility of paying hush money to the Watergate burglars? Or the so-called enemies list kept by the Nixon White House on reporters hostile to the administration? Apparently, prosecutor Ruth couldn't find any evidence regarding these transgressions that he thought would stand up in court.
The tapes, however, sounded damning enough. And even Nixon, who at first thought those recordings would be exculpatory, realized after he reviewed them that his goose was cooked – politically, if not legally. In July 1974, as the House Judiciary Committee was reviewing the tapes and earmarking Nixon's supposed crimes, two young staffers were assigned by the committee's chief counsel, Jerome Zeifman, to research the protocols for impeachment. John Labovitz and another young lawyer, just 26 years old with the ink barely dry on her Yale law degree, began the arduous task of poring over constitutional archives. Labovitz's partner was Hillary Diane Rodham.
And research done by Labovitz and Rodham became the roadmap for three articles of impeachment reported out of the House Judiciary Committee that promptly destroyed any remaining congressional support for Nixon. Before the full House vote on the articles of impeachment, three senior Republican senators apprised Nixon of the handwriting on the wall. The Nixon presidency ended on Aug. 8, 1974.
The House Judiciary Committee’s former chief counsel, Jerome Zeifman, waited 22 years to unleash his bombshell, which would reveal that the deck was stacked against Nixon by none other than the wife of the man who now faces a similar fate. It was Hillary Clinton who rigged the proceedings against the 37th president, as Zeifman revealed in a little-noticed passage of his 1996 book, "Without Honor: The Impeachment of President Nixon and the Crimes of Camelot."
Zeifman quoted his own 1974 diary, which reports that just four days after Nixon resigned "John Labovitz came to my office and apologized for having participated to some extent to conceal from me the work that was being done. Some months ago, he and Hillary lied intentionally to me and told me there were no drafts of proposed rules of procedure for the [Nixon] impeachment inquiry."
The New York Daily News noticed this earthquake confession, and sought Zeifman's elaboration on the historic subterfuge perpetrated by our current first lady. The Daily News reported:
If the United States was going to topple its own president, rules were important, Zeifman told us Friday. "Suppose we were going to have the World Series next week and suddenly one of the team managers says, 'We want to change the rules to two strikes and you're out.'"
That's basically what [Hillary] Clinton and Labovitz did, Zeifman claims. In other words, they drew up new impeachment protocols to replace those in existence since Jefferson's day -- and then denied it. Congress -- and the country -- would have been completely polarized if it had seemed Nixon was being railroaded out of office with new rules, Zeifman said. (New York Daily News – Feb.12, 1996)
Nixon was likely guilty of the Watergate cover-up. But Ruth's memo to Jaworski shows there really wasn’t any "smoking gun" evidence of it.
And that's likely why Hillary Diane Rodham, who regarded Nixon as "evil," according to Clinton biographer David Maraniss, had to discard impeachment rules in place for two centuries in order to nail her quarry.
Now that America faces its second impeachment crisis in as many generations, it's worth remembering how the rules were bent by partisans committed to destroying a presidency -- when the target was Richard Nixon. And how the media looked the other way when it happened.
=======================================
I have had the opportunity to speak with Mr. Zeifman on two or three occasions. He told me that Hillary Rodham tried to convince the committee to deny legal counsel to Nixon for impeachment. Had the committee agreed to that, Zeifman was prepared to resign. On the George Putnam Show, he said on two occasions that both Clintons were likely felons. This was a life-long Democrat who broke ranks and recognized what the Clintons were doing to his party.
Zeifman also told me a story that I don't know think has seen print in any major paper. Of all the people who worked on the Nixon impeachment, there were only two whom were denied a referral by Zeifman -- Bernie Nussbaum and Hillary Rodham.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.