Posted on 01/17/2014 12:07:14 PM PST by Tigen
Hillary Clinton might have a pretty hefty scandal brewing. It turns when she was an attorney working on the Watergate investigation, she was fired by her supervisor for “lying, unethical behavior.” Jerry Zeifman, who said he is a lifelong Democrat, was a supervisor for 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. When the investigation was complete, Zeifman said he fired Hillary and refused to give her a recommendation. “Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said. “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. Dan Calabrese reports More
(Excerpt) Read more at downtrend.com ...
“So what, who cares?”- RAT response.
Yep, 3 years should be enough time to condition the low info voters on just about every scandal this worthless bitch has ever been involved with.
Thanks for posting this. I had not heard of it before. Funny how the mainstream media has ignored it.
The only two attorneys that were refused a positive referral from work on the committee were Hillary and Bernie Nussbaum.
Until she’s forced to answer the questions about it, it never happened. Whether it be in an interview or during one of her future debates, unless someone brings it up, won’t matter one bit.
It would be nice to see her deny it. Then we’ll all have to wait to see if this lifelong democrat Jeffery Zeifman is willing to challenge her version. But, by then he’ll probably meet the same fate as Foster, Brown, etc etc etc. I think the tally by the Clinton’s is in the 60’s if I’m not mistaken.
Did she actually think that no one on the Judiciary Committee staff would have remembered events 4 years prior?
If the Republicans had any guts, the next presidential campaign would be largely about honesty, after all the lying Obama has done. But I can already hear the campaign message of next rino in line, Hillary is smart and capable, but is the wrong person for (insert mundane issue here).
“But, what difference does it make NOW?” -PIAPS
Being a dishonest, unethical liar, is just part of the job description and is a condition of employment, for liberal. One cannot be a good rat, without first mastering the fine art of continuously lying through one 's teeth, with a straight face, while asking, what difference at this point, does it make?
I guess that shows the criminal has some “skills”.
-
Canadian editorial humor directed at US that I found a little humor in also.
(For good reason this makes our country appear stupid)
This is Canada ‘s Top Ten List of America ‘s Stupidity :
10) Only in America ... could Democrat politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.
9) Only in America - could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General and roughly 20% of the federal workforce is black while only 14% of the population is black.
40% of all federal entitlements go to black Americans – 3X the
rate that go to whites, 5X the rate that go to Hispanics!
8) Only in America ... could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Democrat Timothy Geithner (the head of the Treasury Department) and Democrat Charles Rangel (who once ran the Ways and Means Committee), BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.
7) Only in America ... can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.
6) Only in America ... would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege, while they discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just ‘magically’ become American citizens.
5) Only in. America - could people such as Tea Party and Libertarians who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as “extremists.”
4) Only in America - could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.
3) Only in America ... could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).
2) Only in America - could the Democrat Administration collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year - for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.
1) Only in America - could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.
-
There are no words to adequately describe my disdain for rats.
Zeifman wrote some long articles on this in 2000.
I think up until the 1970s....there was a standard Democrat, who believed in the process and the general ethics of the nation. After the 1970s...it was obvious that there were two types of Democrats. One bent on accomplishing everything...with no ethical anchor tied to them, and the old-fashioned type.
We are still at this point today.
Defender of Benghazi and keeper of the FBI files
I would like to know, who are the old fashioned types? I can not think of any, though there may be some out there.
It doesn’t matter to the sheeple; a large number have no longer even heard of Watergate.
In other words, only in America are the people too dumb to be called Americans.
The American people never met a liar that really gave them much pause.
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.