Posted on 04/30/2005 7:33:07 PM PDT by doug from upland
Hillary Rodham Clinton was not happy that Richard Nixon said some critical things about her in his final years. At an event in a West Coast home with some of the Hollywood elite, she had some interesting comments.
As she was introduced to the assembled guests, the man introducing her commented that Richard Nixon had said: "Watch out for Hillary Rodham Clinton. She is the next Eleanor Roosevelt."
And then, Hillary begins ---
"In fact...um...a little aside...um, that a...Nixon, um, spent quite a bit of time in his later years, a, criticizing me for all kinds of things without necessarily disclosing that I was on the impeachment staff...um...in 1974. You remember, that was the constitutional impeachment staff." Big laughs come from the leftist lapdog crowd.
Unfortunately, Hillary didn't necessarily disclose to her Hollywood pals what the Democrat chief counsel who supervised the attorneys investigating Nixon has subsequently disclosed.
For those who do not yet understand the danger posed by Hillary Rodham Clinton, read what Jerome Zeifman has written. I have spoken a couple of times on the phone with him. ZEIFMAN ARTICLE
Zeifman's book is Without Honor: The Impeachment of President Nixon and the Crimes of Camelot
(Here are some excerpts from his 1999 NY POST article)
By Jerry Zeifman
IN December 1974, as general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, I made a personal evaluation of Hillary Rodham (now Mrs. Clinton), a member of the staff we had gathered for our impeachment inquiry on President Richard Nixon. I decided that I could not recommend her for any future position of public or private trust.
Why? Hillary's main duty on our staff has been described by as "establishing the legal procedures to be followed in the course of the inquiry and impeachment." A number of the procedures she recommended were ethically flawed. And I also concluded that she had violated House and committee rules by disclosing confidential information to unauthorized persons.
In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel.
Hillary then advocated that the official rules of the House be amended to deny members of the committee the right to question witnesses.
During my 14-year tenure with the House Judiciary Committee, I had supervisory authority over several hundred staff members. With the exception of Ms. Rodham, Doar and Nussbaum, I recommend all of them for future positions of public and private trust.
-end excerpt-
Zeifman is a lifelong Democrat, not a member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. The lesson for all is that, if it serves her interest and agenda, there is literally nothing that she will not do. She believes herself to be above the law.
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments/nixon.htm
I found this, but now you've got me thinking that this could be wrong.
During my 14-year tenure with the House Judiciary Committee, I had supervisory authority over several hundred staff members. With the exception of Ms. Rodham, Doar and Nussbaum, I recommend all of them for future positions of public and private trust
Nixon would have been impeached and removed had he not resigned - republicans on the judiciary committee were even voting against him. we don't need to engage in revisionist history about Nixon just because we are republicans.
http://watergate.info/
Some day the movie, "The Great Pretender" will be remade, but next time it will be titled, " The absolute fakes" and will expose the Clinton clowns for what they are-buffoons.
As Bill O'Reilly says :"the powerful protect themselves". Unfortunately W seems to agree with that policy. He had more than enough to prosecute corruption charges against the (gag) clinton administration.
Amen to that.
Amen to that.
We will be getting you all up to speed about David Rosen, her senate campaign finance chief in 2000. His 4-count indictment was unsealed in Los Angeles in January. Although the trial was scheduled to being on May 3, I just found out that it has been postponed.
Ping
I thought it was very strange that all the information about the JFK Jr. plane crash had to be passed through the White House.
I have been closely following the Rosen story and I, too, knew the trial was supposed to start May 3. I had not heard about the postponement.
Has it been rescheduled or is the delay without a new date?
Could he be striking a deal?
http://www.chron.com/content/interactive/special/watergate/impeachment.html
http://watergate.info/impeachment/impeachment-articles.shtml
http://www.landmarkcases.org/nixon/nixon.html
http://www.library.umaine.edu/cohen/house/hlegjud.htm
The first one's an AP article.
do you really think any of these people facing trial are going to give her up?
Yes, I was disappointed from the beginning when the vandalizing of the White House was patently ignored. I think something should have been done then - and I find the chuminess of the Bush family and Bill Clinton almost nauseating. (Come to think of it - take "almost" out of that last sentence.)
Good God.
Do you think that is helpful?
I'm outa here.
Again
I think it might have been a typical defense attorney one week delay. They get a few delays for virtually no reason at all.
Rotten, sorry SOB's. But this might not be what it seems to be.
Yeah, I can tell what you "feel".
Well I shall look forward to her downfall! I can't wait.
I'm sorry...what do you think it "seems" and are you presuming I'm thinking it "seems" to be something it's not?
I stick to facts.
Period.
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.