The True WATERGATE Back Story
Ignored By The Mainstream Media
Hillary Clinton’s Role in Richard Nixon’s Impeachment Deliberations
Very few people know, but Hillary Clinton was fired by Jerry Zeifman, the man who served as chief counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, from her position as legal counsel on the Watergate committee staff. As follows:
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.
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.”[1]
Franklin Polk, once Chief Republican Counsel and Staff Director for the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate Hearings also confirmed Hillary Clinton’s illicit conduct, as well as Zeifman’s response.
Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, called Clinton a “liar” and “an unethical, dishonest lawyer.”
He contends Clinton was collaborating with allies of the Kennedys to block revelation of Kennedy-administration activities that made Watergate “look like a day at the beach.”
Her brief, Zeifman said, was so fraudulent and ridiculous, she would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.
Polk confirmed Clinton wrote a brief arguing Nixon should not be granted legal counsel due to a lack of precedent. But Clinton 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.
Moreover, Zeifman claims Clinton 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.[2]
Polk goes on to make the following observations which have never made it into the Mainstream Media.
Polk recalls Zeifman told him at the time he believed Clinton’s primary role was to alert Marshall if the investigation was taking a turn against the Kennedys’ liking.
“Jerry used to give the chapter and verse as to how Hillary was the mole into the committee works as to how things were going,” Polk said.
Polk remembered some Democrat committee members, as well as nearly all the Republicans, were upset at the attempt to deny counsel to Nixon.
Zeifman said top Democrats, including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, believed Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.
“Of course the Republicans went nuts,” Polk said. “But so did some of the Democrats – some of the most liberal Democrats. It was more like these guys – Doar and company – were trying to manage the members of Congress, and it was like, ‘Who’s in charge here?’ If you want to convict a president, you want to give him all the rights possible. If you’re going to give him a trial, for him to say, ‘My rights were denied,’ – it was a stupid effort by people who were just politically tone deaf. So this was a big deal to people in the proceedings on the committee, no question about it.”
Polk said Zeifman rightfully “went nuts,” as well, but “my reaction wasn’t so much that it was underhanded as it was just stupid.”[2]
Fast Forward to 2015 and All That Befalls Hillary Clinton
Some politicians spend their whole life in government service sowing seeds of extraordinary karmic blowback. They stay on the political stage unaware that they will reap the fruit of their actions, and often when they least expect it.
Clearly, Hillary Clinton’s unscrupulous and unlawful behavior during the Congressional Watergate investigation constituted grounds for disbarment. And, yet, here she is the overwhelming presumptive presidential nominee for the Democratic Party.
Little does Ms. Clinton know that if she were to win that nomination, the ghost of Richard Nixon stands right behind her at every turn. Mysterious — truly mysterious are the ways of karma — as the twist and turns of fate always demonstrate.
Perhaps this latest EMAILGATE is just a foreshadowing of things to come, should Hillary Clinton persist in her quest for the highest office in the land.
For if Ms. Clinton were to win the U.S. presidency, it would likely become the greatest Pyrrhic victory in modern American history. Yes, there are that many skeletons in BOTH of their closets.
State of the Nation
March 4, 2015
Author’s Note
Why do America’s top government officials and political leaders consistently comply with the Peter Principle? Not only do they ‘unfailingly’ “rise to the level of their incompetence”, they seem to revel in a similar rise to an opprobrious level of immorality, unethical behavior and lack of conscience.
Endnotes
[1] Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss