It’s true that Hillary Clinton’s ex-boss has accused her of being a “liar” and “unethical” during the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry into Watergate, but claims that she was fired for those reasons are false. Truth or Fiction
Snopes claims NOT True
. . . "This passage leaves many readers with the belief that Hillary Rodham took it upon herself to decide that President Nixon should not be represented by counsel during evidentiary hearings, to deliberately draft a brief that ignored precedent in that area, and to personally hide evidence of the precedent she had ignored so that no one could discover her dishonesty. But nearly everything stated in this passage is wrong: Hillary Rodham didn't draft a legal brief that was "unethical" (save that it made a legal argument Zeifman didn't agree with), she didn't "confiscate" public documents, and she didn't do anything that she hadn't been directed to do by her supervisor (and Zeifman's)" . . .
Truth or Fiction claims truth AND fiction
. . . "The column was inspired by statements made by Jerry Zeifman, a Democrat who served as counsel and chief of staff for the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate investigation. Zeifman’s book, “Hillary’s Pursuit of Power,” and comments that he made on his website, which is no longer active, have been critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s actions during the Watergate investigation, and in the years that followed.
Jerry Zeifman said he supervised Hillary Rodham Clinton as she worked on the team that worked on the Watergate impeachment inquiry, and that during the investigation Hillary Clinton had “…engaged in a variety of self-serving, unethical practices in violation of House rules.”
"But while Jerry Zeifman has been consistent in his criticism of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s work on the Watergate investigation, circumstances surrounding her termination are less clear. In a 1999 interview with the Scripps Howard News Service, Zeifman said he didn’t have the power to fire Clinton, or else he would have:" . . .Keep reading
Emphasis added, TD
Since Zeifman changed his story several times- and has never produced a shred of evidence to support any of his allegations- he cannot be considered a legitimate source of anything. Maybe you should extend your research efforts- that is, if you're interested in the truth. (Hint: Rush Limbaugh is NOT a credible source.)
What statements in this entire post - assuming you read the linked articles -did you find not to be acceptable?
Post a Comment