considering the sniper fire lie, the NAFTA lie, the Irish Peace lie dont you think this story has

truth to it?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5331610

March 31, 2008

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.

--------

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.”

--------

The actions of Hillary and her cohorts went directly against the judgment of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel. Zeifman says that Hillary, along with Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar, was determined to gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon. And in order to pull this off, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.


Full article at this link-
http://www.northstarwriters.com/dc163.htm

I guess we wanted to believe her when she said she cared.
We wanted to like her.
We wished she was the person we wanted her to be.

Not gonna happen.

I guess I'd better go read the whole thing because that can't be right.

Nixon may have been noxious scum but even noxious scum have a right to counsel. (And sadly, next to today's scum, he even seems a bit less noxious. {{shudder}} )

Credit to yibbehobba

that Jerry Zeifman appears to be completely insane. Here are some choice quotes from his website, http://www.jzeifman.com /


On January 22, 2008 I published an article describing a dream I had in which I
“interviewed” Mrs. Roosevelt – who endorsed Barack Obama for the Democratic
nomination for President.



A lifelong Democrat, Jerry Zeifman has concluded that Hillary Clinton is ethically
unfit to be either a Senator or President – and if she were to become President, the
last vestiges of the traditional moral authority of the party of Roosevelt, Truman and
Johnson will be destroyed.




Sadly, as a life-long Democrat and chief counsel of the House Judiciary
Committee at the time of the Nixon impeachment inquiry, cannot in
good conscience vote to re-elect Bill Clinton. Having reached this
decision, I am proud to be among those Democrats who have chosen
principle over party. Defeating Mr. Clinton would help revive the
traditional moral values of the Democratic Party -- as they existed under
Presidents Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter.

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.


As a Connecticut veteran of World War II and a life-long
Democrat, I wholeheartedly support Lieberman. I recall that in
1940 during the Battle of Britain, the "America First" movement
assailed President Roosevelt for lending American destroyers to
Britain. Sadly, the most wealthy and powerful Roosevelt basher
was a Democrat, former Ambassador to Britain, Joseph Kennedy.
Prior to that Kennedy had been sacked by FDR for publicly
predicting that Hitler would conquer Britain.


On April 6, a Washington Post Editorial aptly described Mrs. Pelosi’s trip
to Demascus as a “pratfall,” – which the dictionary defines as “a fall in
which one lands on the buttocks, often regarded as comical or
humiliating.”

In my view that word was a discrete understatement. As a life-long
Democrat and former congressional chief counsel I regard her conduct
as an unconstitutional abuse of power that warrants her removal by our
Democratic Caucus,

As I previously noted in my article of April 7, she persistently fosters
what Thomas Jefferson denounced as "tyranny by the majority" — and
violates House Rules that give her the duty to maintain order, civility,
and decorum, and to foster "comity" (a word rarely used these days,
meaning "mutual respect"). Her trip to Damascus was more than a
blunder. In denying President Bush’s request as well as purporting
falsely to Speak for Israel it was a usurpation of Presidential power


Oh, by the way, the last two quotes are from articles published in NewsMax, that well-known hangout of life-long Democrats.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5331610#5333042