Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary fired for lies, unethical behavior from Congressional job: former boss

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 04:46 AM
Original message
Hillary fired for lies, unethical behavior from Congressional job: former boss

Hillary fired for lies, unethical behavior from Congressional job: former boss

5:55 pm on April 1, 2008 By Ed Morrissey, Hot Air

Dan Calabrese’s new column on Hillary Clinton’s past may bring the curtain down on her political future. Calabrese interviewed Jerry Zeifman, the man who served as chief counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, has tried to tell the story of his former staffer’s behavior during those proceedings for years. Zeifman claims he fired Hillary for unethical behavior and that she conspired to deny Richard Nixon counsel during the hearings:

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.”

This isn’t exactly news. When her lachrymose performance arguably won her New Hampshire, Zeifman tried to tell people about Hillary’s duplicity. Patterico noticed the effort, but few others picked it up. Zeifman wrote at his website:

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 .

The right to counsel is considered one of the inviolable tenets of our justice system. It doesn’t speak well of ambitious attorneys working on a highly-charged political investigation that she wanted to deny someone the right to an attorney. Small wonder Zeifman questioned her ethics.

If all she did was to propose that as a tactic, that would not make it terribly concerning — but she did much more than just spitball ideas. When informed that public evidence showed a precedent for the right to counsel, she absconded with the files to eliminate the evidence. Does that remind anyone of later incidents in the Clinton narrative, such as the billing records for the Rose Law offices and the 900+ raw FBI files on political opponents of the Clintons?

Hillary’s advocates could accuse Zeifman of conjuring up these stories in order to draw attention to himself in the middle of a presidential campaign. However, Calabrese reports that Zeifman kept diaries during this period, urged on by friends mindful of the historical nature of the Watergate investigation. No one would have known at the time that this 27-year-old barracuda would have any sort of national significance — which makes Zeifman’s testimony all the more compelling.

We know that the Tuzla Dash covered for something much more significant in Hillary’s character. Zeifman shows that all of this forms a pattern of lies, obfuscations, deceit, and treachery. Don’t miss a word on either site.

Update: Not Senate, but the House. I changed the title to Congressional, but Zeifman worked for the House Judiciary Committee.

Source: Hot Air

Posted on Wednesday, April 2, 2008 at 7:01 am


http://hotair.com/archives/2008/04/01/hillary-fired-for-lies-unethical-behavior-from-senate-job-former-boss/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LeftishBrit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 04:54 AM
Response to Original message
1. hotair.com is a very right-wing source..
I wouldn't trust them on anything, especially not anything connected with the Clintons.

(Not particularly pro-Hillary here; just anti-right-wing.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 04:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Here also. I'm sure digging will show the truth if necessary
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 05:01 AM by Life Long Dem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 05:13 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Same article on Zeifman's site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 05:19 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. A democrat for life showing her lies go back 40 years.
We all see the pattern - at least the ones who admit it - in her lies. And this - as long as it is true - tells the pattern starting long ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 05:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. the pattern is people posting rumors about Hillary
and the rumors reinforcing people's perceptions of Hillary.

That's the pattern, seen repeatedly here at DU.

And the "as long as it's true" stuff is disingenuous. The truth about this Zieman guy can be found trivially through Google.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Oh, I see....
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 07:37 AM by Hepburn
...it was merely a rumor that she said they landed under sniper fire in Bosnia, right?

:eyes:

Face it, OK? Hillary has a VERY disturbing pattern of making up shit to make herself look good.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. the Zeifman info is based on historical record and facts. Documented. In his notes from the time,
which are available publicly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #14
21. really? provide a link to his contemperaneous notes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #7
35. rumors my ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Let's see. He "talks" to Eleanor Roosevelt's ghost about Hillary
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 05:39 AM by cornermouse
doesn't want Bill to get a second term, beats up Ted Kennedy in fine republican style, wants Pelosi removed, does a tap dance of happiness over Wright's removal and replacement with Trent Lott (Hello?), accuses John and Robert Kennedy of planning political assassinations in Congo, Vietnam, and the Dominican Republic, announces his open support of Lieberman in the last election, accuses the democrats of wanting to keep Nixon in office "twisting in the wind".

...Did you say this guy is a democrat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. Hillary Clinton also talks to Eleanor Roosevelt. This guy you trash has facts/historical records
backing him up regarding what Hillary did working on that committee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. I repeat.
Let's see. He "talks" to Eleanor Roosevelt's ghost about Hillary, doesn't want Bill to get a second term, beats up Ted Kennedy in fine republican style, wants Pelosi removed, does a tap dance of happiness over Wright's removal and replacement with Trent Lott (Hello?), accuses John and Robert Kennedy of planning political assassinations in Congo, Vietnam, and the Dominican Republic, announces his open support of Lieberman in the last election, accuses the democrats of wanting to keep Nixon in office "twisting in the wind".

...Did you say this guy is a democrat?




What part of this did you not understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. Has Zeifman released any of his diaries
or am I just supposed to take the asshole's word?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #19
46. yes, Zeifman has them in the George Washington University Library.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #2
13. So is Zell Miller.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suziedemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Yeah, this seems like much ado about nothing to me.
First - I am NOT a Hilary supporter, although she will probably get my vote next month, I'm not that fond of her. But, taking the files to the office <could> have been a misunderstanding. She WAS probably ambitious and out of line. But he makes it sound like she was this shark, but what he describes is pretty tame stuff.

My guess - he just didn't like her. And, she is NOT that likable, so it is understandable.

Now I may be out of line saying this, but it was the early 1970's, and if you look at old pictures of Hilary, she was not a Bridget Bardot look-a-like. Back in those days sexual harassment was typical office behavior and women's lib was very controversial. I'm guessing he didn't want to f*** her, she was young, ambitious, misguided, and questioned his authority <gasp! - the nerve>, and therefore didn't like her. Like I said, maybe I am out of line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #8
43. You don't support her but you are going to vote for her?
You do realize there is another candidate running?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suziedemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #43
49. The candidates I supported were treated terribly by the Obama camp in the Iowa caucuses.
And I'm holding a grudge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
12. Fascist sources are acceptable if they attack Clinton.
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 07:43 AM by QC
That seems to be the new rule here at Free Republic II.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
54. Many BO fans here on DU sound just like the RW--not progressives
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taxmyth Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
5. Obama hit squad fires again
You think the same crap posted over and over again would be tiring but they never seem to get tired of putting it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Well, as long as...
...the Hillbots keep drinking her Kool Aid and buying her lies, someone has to keep posting the truth in order to combat the lying bullshit coming out of her mouth.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taxmyth Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #11
38. Why
To make yourself look important or to sell Obama to the nation. If anyone is drinking kool aid it is those that think Obama wins anything just by smearing Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SwampG8r Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
64. maybe
we are tired of looking foolish for defending congenital liars over and over and getting proven wrong?
after the clinton history its hard to NOT believe what is said about her
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:38 AM
Response to Original message
10. Please self-delete
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 07:39 AM by cali
this is a right wing hit job. It's been posted here before. There is no corroboration of it beyond Zeifman. It's disgusting to see people slavering over such a stinking pile of dogshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wrando Donating Member (949 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
16. debunked
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 08:27 AM by wrando
stop listening to Rush

http://mediamatters.org/items/200804040011?f=h_latest

there is more to life than hating Hillary

also consider your sourcing

bill from ct
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. good link, but if you want it to remain
you should remove "you fool".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #18
24. cali, whether it's true or not, which I doubt it is
Nixon didn't deserve legal council to begin with, LOL. J/K
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #24
34. So someone is automatically guilty without any rights?
I know you don't mean that, just as much as I don't really know if this is true or not, but if it isn't true, then I won't be saying it again. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #16
23. MediaMatters is only debunking that she was fired, not that her supervisor questioned her ethics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wrando Donating Member (949 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #23
30. another idiot with an agenda (zeifman)
He's probably hawking a new book or some of his old ones. Look at the crowd he's running with.

Neal Boortz is as wacky a right winger as anyone you could name, including, Adam's Apple Annie.

Bill from ct
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #30
42. Now, now. We wouldn't want to discredit someone simply because
of who they hang out with, right? If we do that, then we would seriously have to question some of Hillary's new right wing associates. Some who have gone as far as to accuse her of murder, I might add.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ORDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #16
40. Thanks! I support O, but this is pure BS. We shouldn't be sourcing RW crap. n/t
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bensthename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #16
56. Lol.... That link does not help Hillary's case..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
20. Hillary's alleged sin: wanting to ensure a Democrat was elected president
Zelfman's story has been, at least in part, debunked, and I suspect much of the rest of it is exagerrated, untrue, etc. In any event, consider what Zelfman seems most upset about: HRC supposedly wanted to delay the process so Nixon would still be in office and could be hung around the necks of repubs in the elections.

My goodness, DUers should be appalled that a Democrat wanted to go to extremes to help the Democratic party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. What am I missing? Z seems most upset because HR wrote a brief that
he says she knew wasn't supported by research that he thinks she intentionally hid from the rest of the staff. The brief was arguing that Nixon wasn't entitled to a lawyer during impeachment hearings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. link here

"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.

SNIP

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.

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/31689

If its all right with everyone, I'll stay off the Zeifman bandwagon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #20
33. In other words, subvert the Constitution for personal political gain. Cute.
Reminds me of the current failure to IMPEACH the criminals.

NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
22. Walmart attorney, Walmart Director, Errand runner for insurance and worse
A lifetime of lying about her record and what she has done.

Hillary is in it for Hillary. That is her only loyalty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #22
27. That's a partisan statement and typical of a right wing comment
That being said, please show proof to back up your statements or otherwise you lose credibility for posting those statements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
26. You must feel like such an ass
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 08:22 AM by mtnsnake
Even the Obamabots don't believe your Right Wing tactics, except for a few of the less intelligent ones. lmao
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
29. This reads like patent bs. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
31. I tried to read the article, but I felt dirty being on that site
and had to get off... Sorry this site sucks, and I don't take anything they say at face value....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemVet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
32. Much ado about nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
36. Zeifman is a RW shill who writes hit attack pieces on Pelosi, Kennedy McAuliffe and others.
He has only managed to publish books on Hillary in the 90s and is trying to peddle another now that she is in the news. We have documented this every time this story has been resurrected here.

Why on earth does anyone think that anyone on DU gives a rat's ass about Richard Nixon anyway? Most people here figure that he can rot in hell, I would assume. This might capture attention on a right wing board but you are not going to build up outrage in the left---even if anyone believed it.

I will bet that this guy Zeifman sexually harassed her and she turned him down and that is why he has a vendetta against her. It happens all the time to young women in the workplace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crankychatter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
37. Accusing a child rape victim of "fantasizing about older men"
THAT speaks to character

this OP, not a big deal I think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
41. This comes as absolutely no surprise to many, unfortunately...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #41
45. Really? No surprise that this lie keeps getting posted every day at DU, you mean?
This story isn't even being told the way that the liar has told it. The right wing can not keep its own lie straight.

Maybe after they post this own another 20 times here at DU they will have it consistent. Maybe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 02:27 AM
Response to Original message
44. (Yawn) Media Matters is now debunking this one . Will the RW never give up?
I know that the RW thinks that the sun used to shine out of Dick Nixon's ass and that the world would have been a better place if he could have been named czar for life, but do they really think Dems care?
Plus, the source is a rw shill who does nothing but attack Democrats on made up charges. And the other rw shills are lying about what Zeifman said. Pretty low.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200804040011

Summary: Rush Limbaugh asserted that Jerry Zeifman, former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, was "the guy who fired" Sen. Hillary Clinton when she worked as an attorney on the committee, apparently basing his claim on an article that cites Zeifman. But Zeifman's reported claim is undermined by his own previous reported acknowledgement that he did not fire Clinton and did not have the power to do so.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
47. This is a copy of a locked thread.
Which is still against DU rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
48. More and more Like the FR everyday!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimper Donating Member (142 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
50. Poor old girl looks washed up now ...
Such a nice person too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maine-ah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
51. if I could still give you a rec, I would
but here's a kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
52. Consider the similarity of the 'twisting in the wind' strategy to Bush's nonimpeachment
It has a extremely familiar ring to it, don't you think?

When all the dust settles are we going to find out 30 years from now that those asshats in congress left bush in office for the same reason?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
53. When posting an Op-Ed piece like this
Other then an article written on hearsay evidence, do you have any other sources or references to support this article? Does Ziefman have any other sources or references to support his claim? If not, he could and should be held libel for slander because it's clear he's trying to defame her to give the readers an unfavorable impression of her. I believe Skinner should initiate a directive that states a poster can not source an Op-Ed piece unless there is substantiative evidence that it is true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #53
55. I like your post--including the last line
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #53
60. Contemporaneous diaries are considered a primary historical source. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
57. I think this story is a dud...
I was interested in it at first too until I found out this article or a similar one is posted on Zeifman's website promoting his latest book. This story has apparently been around for decades and never gained traction, despite multiple attempts from the right.

Hillary has a lot of legitimate negative story lines, but this seems like a hit piece to me. I really think we should drop it and focus on the legitimate reasons why she isn't going to be the nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
58. ***ANOTHER BO FOLK SOUNDING JUST LIKE THE RW-AND USING THEIR SOURCES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bensthename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #58
61. That link is even worse for Hillary.. I hope this doesnt get out to MSM in the next couple of weeks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #58
65. To be fair...
The article APPEARS legitimate at first glance and it's only with a little digging do you find out that it's essentially a hit piece.

I'm willing to give the poster the benefit of the doubt that he/she wasn't posting this as an attempt to promote RW sources. Many Obama supporters have debunked the article and many have posted info to that end on DU.

I encourage all Obama supporters to recognize the article for what it is... trash.

I encourage all Hillary supporters to occasionally give us a break and not condemn all Obama supporters based on the posting of one erroneous article.

Come on now. Let's hug it out.
:grouphug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
59. Stop listening to Rush--Media matters has DEBUNKED YOUR LIE:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bensthename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #59
62. That link is even worse for Hillary.. I hope this doesnt get out to MSM in the next couple of weeks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
63. Media matters does not rebut this story. That is a false claim.
From media matters this is a partial transcript of Zeifman's interview with Boortz. The man is obviously no fan of Clintons but I see nothing to indicate he is fabricating this recollection.

BOORTZ: Yeah. Now, Richard Nixon resigned, and do you think that his resignation, before you proceeded with the investigation, do you think that might have saved Hillary Clinton's legal career?

ZEIFMAN: Uh --

BOORTZ: Because the judge never saw her memorandum that she prepared?

ZEIFMAN: No. No, I can't speculate about that. I -- my point, however, let me put it this way.

BOORTZ: OK.

ZEIFMAN: At that time, to be very frank, I really had a kind of compassion for Hillary. She was a pleasant enough young lady, and she certainly treated me with respect and courtesy. And in retrospect, she was corrupted, and I think that was a tragedy.

BOORTZ: You fired her, didn't you?

ZEIFMAN: 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.

BOORTZ: Why not?

ZEIFMAN: Because of her unethical conduct.

BOORTZ: Now, to get this on the record, you are now, were then, and you are a lifelong Democrat, are you not?

ZEIFMAN: Yes, very much so.

BOORTZ: How do you feel about her candidacy for president of the United States right now?

ZEIFMAN: Well, I think that for any intellectually honest Democrat, her -- it would be a moral imperative to vote against her.

BOORTZ: Because of her lack of ethics when she was working for you?

ZEIFMAN: Well, no. Frankly, I had hoped when she eventually became first lady, I had hoped that we had taught her a lesson. And I had voted for Bill Clinton, knowing that he was advocating a two-for-one presidency. But after two -- excuse me --

BOORTZ: That happens to me all the time, too. And I'm on the radio, so --

ZEIFMAN: There I go again.

BOORTZ: Yeah.

ZEIFMAN: And I don't even smoke. Now, what happened was that I voted for Bill Clinton out of loyalty to the Democratic Party. And -- but within a short time, I became very disenchanted with the Clinton administration because of its corruption and deceit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #63
66. it questions Zeifman's credibility
points out the contradiction with another interview where he says, "if I had had the power to fire her, I would have."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleyAppendage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-07-08 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
67. lachrymose?
Edited on Mon Apr-07-08 09:14 AM by NoodleyAppendage
adj.

Weeping or inclined to weep; tearful.
Causing or tending to cause tears.



lachrymosely lach'ry·mose'ly adv.
lachrymosity lach'ry·mos'i·ty (-mŏs'ĭ-tē) n.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC