Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/09/2015 5:40:18 AM PDT by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last
To: maggief
This entire episode is loaded with irony. Rodham served as an attorney who set her sights on Richard Nixon. To the extent that "she conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality,” her supervisor Zeifman allowed he would not recommend her to future employers.

What did Rodham do?
- [Rodham] wrote a brief arguing Nixon should not be granted legal counsel due to a lack of precedent. But [Rodham] deliberately ignored the then-recent case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who was allowed to have a lawyer during the impeachment attempt against him in 1970.

- [Rodham] bolstered her fraudulent brief by removing all of the Douglas files from public access and storing them at her office, enabling her to argue as if the case never existed.

It's clear this woman is a pathological lawbreaker. What's funny is Nixon may yet have his revenge, by having his tormentor serve the sentence she desired for him.

44 posted on 09/09/2015 7:48:06 AM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (If a border fence isn't effective, why is there a border fence around the White House?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: maggief

She forgot the #1 rule of senior national leadership: NEVER p*ss off your spooks.

They know where all the bodies are buried, and have a penchant for getting even.


47 posted on 09/09/2015 8:10:29 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: maggief

Since Democratic politicians are excessively focused on their legacies and how they will be view by history, let me offer up one possible legacy statement for Hillary Rodham Clinton:

She will be remembered in future US Histories, if any, as the 21st Century’s Benedict Arnold.

I had thought about Dr Samuel Mudd but realized that Dr Mudd’s transgression in 1865 wasn’t close to Hillary has done. And now that I think about it a little more even General Benedict Arnold’s transgressions don’t match Hillary’s!


48 posted on 09/09/2015 8:56:02 AM PDT by Nip (BOHEICA and TANSTAAFL - both seem very appropriate today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson