Hillary's History of Lies and Coverups

Perhaps it comes out of desperation. The Clinton campaign has lost momentum and appears to be falling apart at the seams. Poll numbers are down, contributions are down and support even among 'Super Delegates' is waning. There is an obvious sense of desperation in the Clinton camp and perhaps that explains why Hillary Clinton, who has run a flawless campaign for over a year now seems to be committing one gaffe after another.

With the growing popularity of her opponent, Barack Obama, Hillary seems desperate to enhance her image. The problem is Hillary has chosen to create an image of herself which exists only in her mind. Over the past several months she has included in her stump speeches a wide range of concocted stories designed to boost her image as a statesman, as a leader, and/or to create sympathy.

We have watched as Hillary bites her lip and excuses one mis-statement after another by claiming she had a memory Loss or was mis-quoted or quoted out of context.

These 'memory lapses' range from her claim of landing under 'enemy sniper fire' (bravery under fire)...to worries about Chelsea jogging around the world trade center at the time of 9/11 crashes ( Chelsea was at a friend's house from which she called her mother)...to impossible claims of being named after Sir Edmund Hillary ( He was unknown at the time Hillary was born)...to her claim of facing racism while participating on her High School Soccer team (there was no team) to denial of involvement in the White House travel Office firings (witnesses observed her saying 'fire their a**es) to having no knowledge of the Rose Law Firm Billing records (which turned up in her private quarters with her notes on them).

Of course no one knows whether these are true memory lapses or outright lies, but all of these 'mis-statements' have a common intent. They all benefit Hillary.

Supporters of Hillary would say these statements are 'honest mistakes' and Hillary is an honest and ethical person who would never intentionally deceive or attempt to distort the facts. Certainly, Hillary would never do anything illegal.

Do the facts justify that conclusion?

There is convincing evidence that Hillary has an early and long track record of unethical conduct dating back to 1974 when 27 year old Hillary Rodham worked as a young lawyer on the judiciary committee investigating impeachment charges against Richard Nixon. Her behavior while serving on this committee was so unethical the General Counsel and and Chief of Staff of the White House Judicial Committee, Jerry Zeifman ( a life-long Democrat), fired her from the committee staff and refused to give a recommendation. When asked why she was fired Zeifman stated, "Because she was a liar 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". [Source]

What could Hillary have done to warrant such a rebuke?

It appears that during the investigation into Richard Nixon's Watergate mis-conduct Democrats on the investigation committee were intent on denying Nixon the right to be represented by an attorney in investigation hearings. Democrats on the committee and in particular Ted Kennedy (who had recommended Hillary for the assignment) feared that if Nixon were to be represented by an attorney Whitehouse witnesses, including E. Howard Hunt, would provide testimony more damaging to Kennedy and the Kennedy administration than to Nixon. Hunt, for example knew many details of unethical behavior of the Kennedy administration including Kennedy's involvement in the plot to assassinate Castro.

For this reason Democrats on the committee sought to change the House rules to deny Nixon legal representation. In support of the rules change and with the urging of her fellow Democratic committee members, Hillary Rodham volunteered to write a legal brief stating there was no precedent for legal representation in an impeachment investigation. Zeifman (who was Hillary's boss) says he told Hillary about the case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt in 1970. During the investigation Douglas was granted legal representation after approval by the Judicial Committee, setting precedent for such representation. Zeifman then told Hillary that she could find these files documenting the precedent in the Judicial Committee's files.

Zeifman had assumed that telling Hillary that these files existed would end the matter, but instead, Hillary proceeded to remove all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public. ( a la Sandy Berger). Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding - as if the Douglas case had never occurred.

It is unknown whether Hillary would have filed the brief (she did prepare it for filing)....as Nixon resigned before the investigation reached the point of requiring legal counsel. In the opinion of Zeifman, the brief was so fraudulent and dis-honest that had Hillary filed it she could have been disbarred.

During Zeifman's 17 year career Hillary was one of only three employees Zeifman would fire and refuse to recommend. His reason:

"Because she was a liar,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"

To those who believe that Hillary's recent mis-statements are honest mistakes and are something new, I would suggest that you read Zeifman's book.