Hillary Clinton MUST Apologize to Trump!

[protectionist]

There was Megyn Kelly too.

It's snot easy to pick one's favourite from the long litany of Rumpian apologetics, but I might have to go with this one:

That's OK. I'll go with Trump proposals to protect America from the ISIS Pipeline, its Nuclear attack MO, Bip warfare MO, chemical attacks MO, and the general ongoing Mexican imperialism pillaging of America. Jusy though I might remind youof this ein case they slipped your mind.

 

[protectionist]

He's trying to parse what I described as "video" into "a video", as in a recorded medium, apparently willing to appear completely ignorant that the visual component of what television transmits IS "video" -- whether anyone records it and keeps it in the archive, or not.

Obviously on that day everything recordable was being recorded anyway and is still archived as well, so that seals the deal, but you cannot by definition see something on television without "video" involved, period.

All of this is a puerile attempt to flail away my point of comparison in post 2. He can't do it so he resorts to the "play stupid" game.

Speaking of Post 2, yeah let's talk about good old Post # 2.

"Obviously", Pogo ? Yeah ? So if it's so "obvious" then you should have no trouble showing positive proof right here, that a video was made of Trump claims about Muslims in North Jersey cheering 9-11, right ? Right Pogo ? Right ? Right ? So if that's the case, how come we are 3 days into this discussion, with me asking for you to present that video, and you have FAILED to do so ?

 

[protectionist]

We just did.

I won.

A BOOBY prize, in this thread.

 

[protectionist]

Perhaps you hadn't heard.

“There was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her… wherever.” (here, and a million other places)

Followed by:

​

Then of course there's the phsical appearance comments on .... Carly Fiorina... Arianna Huffington... Rosie O'Donnell....

Then there's ...
>> Referring to Trump's bankruptcy rumours, New York Times journalist Gail Collins called Trump a "financially embattled thousandaire" in print.

In reponse, Trump allegedly sent Collins a copy of her column, with her face circled and the words "Face of a dog!" written over it << (here)

Then there was...

​

Not to mention having the hots for his own daughter....

Mind you, this is only the sexism department. Not even going into the xenophobia, the mocking of the handicapped, the blanket statements, the religious bigotry, or the contempt for the Constitution in general.

Now if a petulant child-man can't handle a pointed question from a TV talking head, from a friendly source no less ---- how the hell is he going to handle foreign affairs -- where they play for real?

None of this jibbersih compares to the ISIS PIPELINE and the Mexican imperialism.

 

[protectionist]

Zeifman is a KNOWN LIAR, all that he has said lately are BIG FAT LIES....

he didn't fire her, he couldn't, he was not her boss nor on the same committee as Hillary

hillary didn't create the idea of Nixon not having council, she was ORDERED by her boss to write this brief....not to do so, would have been insubordination.

But as noted above, Zeifman had no authority to "terminate" Hillary. They were members of different staffs, and Zeifman had no hiring or firing authority over members of the Impeachment Inquiry staff for which Hillary worked. (That authority rested with Special Counsel John Doar and, ultimately, with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino.) Quite tellingly, Zeifman made absolutely no mention of having "fired" or "terminated" Hillary Rodham, nor of telling her that he "could not recommend her for any further positions," in his 1995 book; he only started claiming so much later. Back in 1995 he noted that Hillary had remained with the inquiry staff up until the end, leaving only when President Nixon's August 1974 resignation made the issue of impeachment moot and the Judiciary Committee's impeachment inquiry staff was therefore disbanded:

Hillary was twenty-seven when the impeachment inquiry staff was disbanded. The next morning she took a train down to Little Rock, Arkansas. She moved in with Bill Clinton and they eventually married.

And again in 1998, Zeifman was quoted in a Scripps Howard News Service article as unambiguously confirming that not only did he not "fire" Hillary, but that it was not even within his power to do so:

Jerome Zeifman, chief Democratic counsel on the House Judiciary Committee in 1974 ... does not have flattering memories of Rodham's work on the committee. "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her," he said.
Zeifman made no bones about having an ax to grind with Hillary Clinton (putting out the anti-Clinton paperback Hillary's Pursuit of Power in 2006), and as its blade grew sharper over the years, he quite obviously shifted his recollections of events from the
1973-74 timeframe to conform to his current point of view rather than the other way around.

Back in April 2008, Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign site responded to Zeifman's claims by asserting:

In a column circulating on the internet Jerry Zeifman alleges that Hillary was fired from her job on the House Judiciary Committee in the 1970s.

This is false. Hillary was not fired.

They also noted that the Washington Post's reviewer found (as we did) much of Zeifman's book to be mere repetition of speculation with little or no evidence to substantiate it:

[The book] will surely excite conspiracy buffs on the lookout for sinister coverups in high places. But those wary of such unsubstantiated theories (myself included) will find Zeifman's book an unconvincing, if imaginative, tale of intrigue.

The lack of evidence makes his theory hard to swallow. Zeifman's most reliable source — his diary — contains few revelations and seems little more than a chronicle of his suspicions and speculations. The book's jacket cover, which promises readers "truths even more startling than those brought out in Oliver Stone's movies 'Nixon' and 'JFK', " does not help matters. Perhaps the book's publicists forgot that "Nixon" and "JFK" were, after all, only Hollywood movies.


much much much more to read here:

Zeif-geist

Big PILE OF NONSENSE!!.. What a tough row to how. trying to defend Hillary Clinton, with a lifetime of lies and lack of integrity behind her. I could think of faster ways of dying.

 

[Care4all]

Zeifman is a KNOWN LIAR, all that he has said lately are BIG FAT LIES....

he didn't fire her, he couldn't, he was not her boss nor on the same committee as Hillary

hillary didn't create the idea of Nixon not having council, she was ORDERED by her boss to write this brief....not to do so, would have been insubordination.

But as noted above, Zeifman had no authority to "terminate" Hillary. They were members of different staffs, and Zeifman had no hiring or firing authority over members of the Impeachment Inquiry staff for which Hillary worked. (That authority rested with Special Counsel John Doar and, ultimately, with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino.) Quite tellingly, Zeifman made absolutely no mention of having "fired" or "terminated" Hillary Rodham, nor of telling her that he "could not recommend her for any further positions," in his 1995 book; he only started claiming so much later. Back in 1995 he noted that Hillary had remained with the inquiry staff up until the end, leaving only when President Nixon's August 1974 resignation made the issue of impeachment moot and the Judiciary Committee's impeachment inquiry staff was therefore disbanded:

Hillary was twenty-seven when the impeachment inquiry staff was disbanded. The next morning she took a train down to Little Rock, Arkansas. She moved in with Bill Clinton and they eventually married.

And again in 1998, Zeifman was quoted in a Scripps Howard News Service article as unambiguously confirming that not only did he not "fire" Hillary, but that it was not even within his power to do so:

Jerome Zeifman, chief Democratic counsel on the House Judiciary Committee in 1974 ... does not have flattering memories of Rodham's work on the committee. "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her," he said.
Zeifman made no bones about having an ax to grind with Hillary Clinton (putting out the anti-Clinton paperback Hillary's Pursuit of Power in 2006), and as its blade grew sharper over the years, he quite obviously shifted his recollections of events from the
1973-74 timeframe to conform to his current point of view rather than the other way around.

Back in April 2008, Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign site responded to Zeifman's claims by asserting:

In a column circulating on the internet Jerry Zeifman alleges that Hillary was fired from her job on the House Judiciary Committee in the 1970s.

This is false. Hillary was not fired.

They also noted that the Washington Post's reviewer found (as we did) much of Zeifman's book to be mere repetition of speculation with little or no evidence to substantiate it:

[The book] will surely excite conspiracy buffs on the lookout for sinister coverups in high places. But those wary of such unsubstantiated theories (myself included) will find Zeifman's book an unconvincing, if imaginative, tale of intrigue.

The lack of evidence makes his theory hard to swallow. Zeifman's most reliable source — his diary — contains few revelations and seems little more than a chronicle of his suspicions and speculations. The book's jacket cover, which promises readers "truths even more startling than those brought out in Oliver Stone's movies 'Nixon' and 'JFK', " does not help matters. Perhaps the book's publicists forgot that "Nixon" and "JFK" were, after all, only Hollywood movies.


much much much more to read here:

Zeif-geist

Big PILE OF NONSENSE!!.. What a tough row to how. trying to defend Hillary Clinton, with a lifetime of lies and lack of integrity behind her. I could think of faster ways of dying.

Actually, it shows everyone that the guy Zeifman is, the one and only person that said he fired Hillary from Watergate committee in his 2006 book, however in 2 previous books that he wrote immediately after Watergate Zeifman said She Was NOT fired....

S9oooooo, tell me, which STORY of Zeifman s are you going to believe, the ones he wrote right after Watergate or the STORY he wrote for a book written 30 years afterwards where he REWROTE and changed his story about Hillary to go against her presidential run???

WISE Up!!!! Sheesh!!!!!


Zeifman is a big fat liar, and its in print.

 

[edthecynic]

Hillary Clinton MUST Apologize to Trump!

[/QUOTE]

 

[edthecynic]

Come on. All the things Strump has said about Muslims? You think they haven't heard them? You think they don't use them for recruitment? Coming from the leading US presidential candidate?

Grow up.

Then you should be able to post a recruitment video with Trump in it.

I will let one of your fellow Wing-nut travelers answer.

Noncorroboration does not = refutation.

 

[Care4all]

Trumpeteers are so sensitive and fragile....

 

[Faun]

Hillary Clinton's lying is well known all around the world. Long lists of her lies have been published. Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee, to her recent lies about not having classified information on her emails (which are undoubtedly now in the hands of Russia, China, Iran, ISIS, etc).

So it's no surprise that she would lie again in connection with her current run for the presidency. It is a bit surprising though that with very high unfavorable ratings and low trustworthiness ratings, she would undertake such a foolish lie (that a video of Trump was given to ISIS), that could easily be refuted.

In order for Hillary to display an ounce of decency, and show even a modicum of trustworthiness, and not have her trust numbers sink even lower, she MUST now apologize to Donald Trump, and to the entire Republican Party, for spreading yet another video lie (while we're still reeling from the Benghazi one). If she doesn't do that, she openly admits her lack of integrity, and the stark contrast between her deceitfulness, and the clear honesty and forthrightfulness of Donald Trump.

Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee

gosh, it's so hard to keep up with all of the lies put out there by right wingers that you guys swallow up!

Hillary was NOT fired from the Watergate Commission committee she was on....

Goodness gracious, the committee she was on DISSOLVED, because Nixon had finally resigned.

Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss
Hillary Clinton's former boss says he fired her from an investigative position because she was a "liar" and "unethical"-Truth! & Fiction!
Hillarys Bold Lie Omission FIRED Staff Position | Video | C-SPAN.org

Pretty funny how Zeifman wrote a book about Nixon yet neglected to mention firing Hillary in it. Even funnier is that Hillary didn't even report to Zeifman, either directly or indirectly. They weren't on the same staff and he had no authority to fire her.

But don't let pesky facts interfere with your HDS rants.

 

[Faun]

Hillary Clinton's lying is well known all around the world. Long lists of her lies have been published. Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee, to her recent lies about not having classified information on her emails (which are undoubtedly now in the hands of Russia, China, Iran, ISIS, etc).

So it's no surprise that she would lie again in connection with her current run for the presidency. It is a bit surprising though that with very high unfavorable ratings and low trustworthiness ratings, she would undertake such a foolish lie (that a video of Trump was given to ISIS), that could easily be refuted.

In order for Hillary to display an ounce of decency, and show even a modicum of trustworthiness, and not have her trust numbers sink even lower, she MUST now apologize to Donald Trump, and to the entire Republican Party, for spreading yet another video lie (while we're still reeling from the Benghazi one). If she doesn't do that, she openly admits her lack of integrity, and the stark contrast between her deceitfulness, and the clear honesty and forthrightfulness of Donald Trump.

Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee

gosh, it's so hard to keep up with all of the lies put out there by right wingers that you guys swallow up!

Hillary was NOT fired from the Watergate Commission committee she was on....

Goodness gracious, the committee she was on DISSOLVED, because Nixon had finally resigned.

Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss
Hillary Clinton's former boss says he fired her from an investigative position because she was a "liar" and "unethical"-Truth! & Fiction!
Hillarys Bold Lie Omission FIRED Staff Position | Video | C-SPAN.org

Zeifman is a KNOWN LIAR, all that he has said lately are BIG FAT LIES....

he didn't fire her, he couldn't, he was not her boss nor on the same committee as Hillary

hillary didn't create the idea of Nixon not having council, she was ORDERED by her boss to write this brief....not to do so, would have been insubordination.

But as noted above, Zeifman had no authority to "terminate" Hillary. They were members of different staffs, and Zeifman had no hiring or firing authority over members of the Impeachment Inquiry staff for which Hillary worked. (That authority rested with Special Counsel John Doar and, ultimately, with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino.) Quite tellingly, Zeifman made absolutely no mention of having "fired" or "terminated" Hillary Rodham, nor of telling her that he "could not recommend her for any further positions," in his 1995 book; he only started claiming so much later. Back in 1995 he noted that Hillary had remained with the inquiry staff up until the end, leaving only when President Nixon's August 1974 resignation made the issue of impeachment moot and the Judiciary Committee's impeachment inquiry staff was therefore disbanded:

Hillary was twenty-seven when the impeachment inquiry staff was disbanded. The next morning she took a train down to Little Rock, Arkansas. She moved in with Bill Clinton and they eventually married.

And again in 1998, Zeifman was quoted in a Scripps Howard News Service article as unambiguously confirming that not only did he not "fire" Hillary, but that it was not even within his power to do so:

Jerome Zeifman, chief Democratic counsel on the House Judiciary Committee in 1974 ... does not have flattering memories of Rodham's work on the committee. "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her," he said.
Zeifman made no bones about having an ax to grind with Hillary Clinton (putting out the anti-Clinton paperback Hillary's Pursuit of Power in 2006), and as its blade grew sharper over the years, he quite obviously shifted his recollections of events from the
1973-74 timeframe to conform to his current point of view rather than the other way around.

Back in April 2008, Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign site responded to Zeifman's claims by asserting:

In a column circulating on the internet Jerry Zeifman alleges that Hillary was fired from her job on the House Judiciary Committee in the 1970s.

This is false. Hillary was not fired.

They also noted that the Washington Post's reviewer found (as we did) much of Zeifman's book to be mere repetition of speculation with little or no evidence to substantiate it:

[The book] will surely excite conspiracy buffs on the lookout for sinister coverups in high places. But those wary of such unsubstantiated theories (myself included) will find Zeifman's book an unconvincing, if imaginative, tale of intrigue.

The lack of evidence makes his theory hard to swallow. Zeifman's most reliable source — his diary — contains few revelations and seems little more than a chronicle of his suspicions and speculations. The book's jacket cover, which promises readers "truths even more startling than those brought out in Oliver Stone's movies 'Nixon' and 'JFK', " does not help matters. Perhaps the book's publicists forgot that "Nixon" and "JFK" were, after all, only Hollywood movies.


much much much more to read here:

Zeif-geist

Snopes is not a credible source, and calling Jerry Zeifman a "known liar" does not make your case.

Funny, since you can never find a single article snopes got wrong; rendering your attempted impeachment of them void. Sources aren't dismissed merely because they prove you wrong.

Hell, YOU even proved Zeifman is a liar. You're just too stupid to know it.

 

[320 Years of History]

Hillary Clinton's lying is well known all around the world. Long lists of her lies have been published. Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee, to her recent lies about not having classified information on her emails (which are undoubtedly now in the hands of Russia, China, Iran, ISIS, etc).

So it's no surprise that she would lie again in connection with her current run for the presidency. It is a bit surprising though that with very high unfavorable ratings and low trustworthiness ratings, she would undertake such a foolish lie (that a video of Trump was given to ISIS), that could easily be refuted.

In order for Hillary to display an ounce of decency, and show even a modicum of trustworthiness, and not have her trust numbers sink even lower, she MUST now apologize to Donald Trump, and to the entire Republican Party, for spreading yet another video lie (while we're still reeling from the Benghazi one). If she doesn't do that, she openly admits her lack of integrity, and the stark contrast between her deceitfulness, and the clear honesty and forthrightfulness of Donald Trump.

Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee

gosh, it's so hard to keep up with all of the lies put out there by right wingers that you guys swallow up!

Hillary was NOT fired from the Watergate Commission committee she was on....

Goodness gracious, the committee she was on DISSOLVED, because Nixon had finally resigned.

Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss
Hillary Clinton's former boss says he fired her from an investigative position because she was a "liar" and "unethical"-Truth! & Fiction!
Hillarys Bold Lie Omission FIRED Staff Position | Video | C-SPAN.org

Pretty funny how Zeifman wrote a book about Nixon yet neglected to mention firing Hillary in it. Even funnier is that Hillary didn't even report to Zeifman, either directly or indirectly. They weren't on the same staff and he had no authority to fire her.

But don't let pesky facts interfere with your HDS rants.

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. What is clear is that Zeifman did not fire Mrs. Clinton. In a 1999 interview with the Scripps Howard News Service and that was published in The Sacramento Bee, Zeifman said he didn’t have the power to fire Clinton, or else he would have: "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her," he said.

The temerity suffuse in Mr. Zeifman is so astounding that I am disinclined to put stock in his voice or in his silence. In a 2008 interview with nationally syndicated radio host Neal Boortz:

"You fired her [Clinton], didn't you?"
Zeifman responded, "Let me put it this way, I terminated her along with other staff members who we no longer needed."
(Boortz says that the interview is available to Boortz Blast Subscribers… you have to register, but it’s free.)​

So just what transpired between 1999 and 2008 whereby in 1999 Zeifman lacked the power to fire Mrs. Clinton and then have actually done so in 2008, this all with regard to events and circumstances in 1974?

 

[Faun]

Hillary Clinton's lying is well known all around the world. Long lists of her lies have been published. Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee, to her recent lies about not having classified information on her emails (which are undoubtedly now in the hands of Russia, China, Iran, ISIS, etc).

So it's no surprise that she would lie again in connection with her current run for the presidency. It is a bit surprising though that with very high unfavorable ratings and low trustworthiness ratings, she would undertake such a foolish lie (that a video of Trump was given to ISIS), that could easily be refuted.

In order for Hillary to display an ounce of decency, and show even a modicum of trustworthiness, and not have her trust numbers sink even lower, she MUST now apologize to Donald Trump, and to the entire Republican Party, for spreading yet another video lie (while we're still reeling from the Benghazi one). If she doesn't do that, she openly admits her lack of integrity, and the stark contrast between her deceitfulness, and the clear honesty and forthrightfulness of Donald Trump.

Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee

gosh, it's so hard to keep up with all of the lies put out there by right wingers that you guys swallow up!

Hillary was NOT fired from the Watergate Commission committee she was on....

Goodness gracious, the committee she was on DISSOLVED, because Nixon had finally resigned.

Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss
Hillary Clinton's former boss says he fired her from an investigative position because she was a "liar" and "unethical"-Truth! & Fiction!
Hillarys Bold Lie Omission FIRED Staff Position | Video | C-SPAN.org

Pretty funny how Zeifman wrote a book about Nixon yet neglected to mention firing Hillary in it. Even funnier is that Hillary didn't even report to Zeifman, either directly or indirectly. They weren't on the same staff and he had no authority to fire her.

But don't let pesky facts interfere with your HDS rants.

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. What is clear is that Zeifman did not fire Mrs. Clinton. In a 1999 interview with the Scripps Howard News Service and that was published in The Sacramento Bee, Zeifman said he didn’t have the power to fire Clinton, or else he would have: "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her," he said.

The temerity suffuse in Mr. Zeifman is so astounding that I am disinclined to put stock in his voice or in his silence. In a 2008 interview with nationally syndicated radio host Neal Boortz:
[/I]

"You fired her [Clinton], didn't you?"
Zeifman responded, "Let me put it this way, I terminated her along with other staff members who we no longer needed."
(Boortz says that the interview is available to Boortz Blast Subscribers… you have to register, but it’s free.)​

So just what transpired between 1999 and 2008 whereby in 1999 Zeifman lacked the power to fire Mrs. Clinton and then have actually done so in 2008, this all with regard to events and circumstances in 1974?[/I]

Hysterically, SJ posted a link which noted Zeifman's 1999 interview where he admitted he didn't fire Clinton. SJ apparently doesn't read his own references.

 

[320 Years of History]

Hillary Clinton's lying is well known all around the world. Long lists of her lies have been published. Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee, to her recent lies about not having classified information on her emails (which are undoubtedly now in the hands of Russia, China, Iran, ISIS, etc).

So it's no surprise that she would lie again in connection with her current run for the presidency. It is a bit surprising though that with very high unfavorable ratings and low trustworthiness ratings, she would undertake such a foolish lie (that a video of Trump was given to ISIS), that could easily be refuted.

In order for Hillary to display an ounce of decency, and show even a modicum of trustworthiness, and not have her trust numbers sink even lower, she MUST now apologize to Donald Trump, and to the entire Republican Party, for spreading yet another video lie (while we're still reeling from the Benghazi one). If she doesn't do that, she openly admits her lack of integrity, and the stark contrast between her deceitfulness, and the clear honesty and forthrightfulness of Donald Trump.

Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee

gosh, it's so hard to keep up with all of the lies put out there by right wingers that you guys swallow up!

Hillary was NOT fired from the Watergate Commission committee she was on....

Goodness gracious, the committee she was on DISSOLVED, because Nixon had finally resigned.

Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss
Hillary Clinton's former boss says he fired her from an investigative position because she was a "liar" and "unethical"-Truth! & Fiction!
Hillarys Bold Lie Omission FIRED Staff Position | Video | C-SPAN.org

Pretty funny how Zeifman wrote a book about Nixon yet neglected to mention firing Hillary in it. Even funnier is that Hillary didn't even report to Zeifman, either directly or indirectly. They weren't on the same staff and he had no authority to fire her.

But don't let pesky facts interfere with your HDS rants.

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. What is clear is that Zeifman did not fire Mrs. Clinton. In a 1999 interview with the Scripps Howard News Service and that was published in The Sacramento Bee, Zeifman said he didn’t have the power to fire Clinton, or else he would have: "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her," he said.

The temerity suffuse in Mr. Zeifman is so astounding that I am disinclined to put stock in his voice or in his silence. In a 2008 interview with nationally syndicated radio host Neal Boortz:
[/I]

"You fired her [Clinton], didn't you?"
Zeifman responded, "Let me put it this way, I terminated her along with other staff members who we no longer needed."
(Boortz says that the interview is available to Boortz Blast Subscribers… you have to register, but it’s free.)​

So just what transpired between 1999 and 2008 whereby in 1999 Zeifman lacked the power to fire Mrs. Clinton and then have actually done so in 2008, this all with regard to events and circumstances in 1974?[/I]

Hysterically, SJ posted a link which noted Zeifman's 1999 interview where he admitted he didn't fire Clinton. SJ apparently doesn't read his own references.

The far too frequent predilection of so many folks to merely see a headline or hear a soundbite and accept it as true, or worse extrapolate its meaning beyond what all plausible reality is part of why I created this thread: CDZ - Why is so much political discourse filled with unsupported claims? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum . I suspect that very few, if any, folks who have or who seek public office have skeletons, or what can be make to look like skeletons, in their closet. Moreover, I think that if any such person truly lacks skeletons or what may seem like skeletons, it's because they have not, for whatever reason, not actually held any really important positions.

When one holds a position of high responsibility and/or authority, one will inevitably be forced to make choices that, under the scrutiny of hindsight and "arm chair quarterbacking," can be shown to be or made to appear as blunders, lapses in judgment, outright mistakes, etc. The only people who would not understand that are people who've never been in or near having that kind of responsibility. About the only thing that distinguishes one (potential) public official from another is the extent to which the details of their life prior to seeking or attaining public office has occurred in the public eye, and the impact of that is that it is harder to find the skeletons (or potential skeletons), not that they don't exist.

If one is going to "throw stones" at another person's character or choices, then least one can do is be sure to present the full set of facts surrounding the accusation. To do less than that demonstrates a clear lack of integrity and says at least as much about the accuser's character as it does about the accused. As one can see from my having been able to find Zeifman's published statement that he lacked the power to fire Mrs. Clinton, his statement to that effect was not hard to find. All it took was (1) a modicum of intellectual curiosity, (2) the willingness to give the benefit of the doubt until one has the facts indicating that benefit is no longer deserved (in other words, respecting the principle of "innocent until proven guilty"), and (3) actually endeavoring to find out just what really happened and who really said exactly what.

Just what will have to happen before folks realize that biased political commentators, regardless of whether they are left-wing or right-wing, rarely will deliver the full story. Every damn one of them "has an axe to grind." If one obtains any information from any one of them, the very next thing one must do if one is of a mind to repeat that information, is verify it, for content and contextual accuracy.

 

[S.J.]

He didn't fire her, he just terminated her along with others who were "no longer needed". The point is Hillary is a liar and was acting unethically (big surprise, huh?) and Zeifman found a way to remove her. Same thing as firing her.

 

[edthecynic]

The point is Hillary is a liar and was acting unethically (big surprise, heh?)

And that, of course, is a lie (big surprise, heh?)

 

[Faun]

He didn't fire her, he just terminated her along with others who were "no longer needed". The point is Hillary is a liar and was acting unethically (big surprise, huh?) and Zeifman found a way to remove her. Same thing as firing her.

WTF?? Now you're calling yourself an idiot. Aren't these the links YOU posted earlier...???

• Hillary FIRED for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss

• Hillary Clinton's former boss says he FIRED her from an investigative position because she was a "liar" and "unethical"-Truth! & Fiction!

• Hillarys Bold Lie Omission FIRED Staff Position | Video | C-SPAN.org

... why yes, yes they were. Now you're back pedaling as fast as you can.

 

[320 Years of History]

He didn't fire her, he just terminated her along with others who were "no longer needed". The point is Hillary is a liar and was acting unethically (big surprise, huh?) and Zeifman found a way to remove her. Same thing as firing her.

??? Since when does the disappearance of a group's raison d'etre constitute someone's having found a way to remove one or several members of that group? Are you intimating that Zeifman made Nixon resign before he was impeached? If all of the U.S.' enemies, real and imagined were to vanish and the DHS, CIA, NSA, etc. disbanded, it wouldn't matter what immoral, unethical, dubious, debatably illegal, or decidedly criminal acts they committed, the reason for releasing all or most of the employees is there would no longer remain a need for their services. That is what happened with Mrs. Clinton and the other Watergate investigation team members tasked with researching the legal underpinnings of the impeachment process.

The point that is patently clear from Zeifman's very own remarks is that he will say anything and whether what he says bears any resemblance to the truth is a serendipitous circumstance not a deliberate effort on his part. The point is that anyone wanting to cite Zeifman's remarks would, lest they impugn their own credibility, want to at least check to see whether anything he says is in fact so. With regard to Zeitman's remarks about having fired Mrs. Clinton, the fact is he lied; he did not; it is not so.

With regard to his remarks about her legal judgment, they are largely irrelevant now as they were when he made them, at least in the context of what value her role on that investigation team may have to help one form an opinion of the kind of woman she is now; Mrs. Clinton graduated from law school in 1973.

• Just how pivotal do you really think was her contribution to the Watergate investigation given her relative inexperience practicing law at that point in her career? I know the answer. Barely to not at all.
• Just how much weight do you think the far more experienced attorneys leading that investigation placed on her opinions at that point in her career? Again, I know the answer. Little to none.
• Just how many 60 year old professionals -- attorneys, doctors, accountants, consultants, architects, engineers, etc. -- do you think can say they made no mistakes and/or had no misunderstandings of one or more things pertaining to their profession's core practice elements in their first year of practicing it? Once again, I know the answer. None.

Why you or anyone else thinks Mrs. Clinton, and circumstances for her, would be any different from that of the thousands of other professionals just starting their careers is practically beyond me. "Practically beyond me" because I don't know you or those other folks, not because I cannot posit plausible and actual reasons why you or they exist with any such misperceptions.

 

[Care4all]

He didn't fire her, he just terminated her along with others who were "no longer needed". The point is Hillary is a liar and was acting unethically (big surprise, huh?) and Zeifman found a way to remove her. Same thing as firing her.

NO, no he didn't find a way to fire her or terminate her...

IT WAS NOT his decision to make.... he was NOT her boss. Her boss, was also his boss, but they did not work on the same committee.

Everyone on her committee were finished with their job, once Nixon resigned.

And she did not do anything unethical....she wrote a brief that her BOSS asked her to write. Whether she agreed with her boss or not, on the brief he asked her to write... she HAD to write it...
It would have been insubordination for her to not follow his orders and do her own thing.

She had no power, she was a peon....

 

[Faun]

He didn't fire her, he just terminated her along with others who were "no longer needed". The point is Hillary is a liar and was acting unethically (big surprise, huh?) and Zeifman found a way to remove her. Same thing as firing her.

NO, no he didn't find a way to fire her or terminate her...

IT WAS NOT his decision to make.... he was NOT her boss. Her boss, was also his boss, but they did not work on the same committee.

Everyone on her committee were finished with their job, once Nixon resigned.

And she did not do anything unethical....she wrote a brief that her BOSS asked her to write. Whether she agreed with her boss or not, on the brief he asked her to write... she HAD to write it...
It would have been insubordination for her to not follow his orders and do her own thing.

She had no power, she was a peon....

Furthermore, there's no evidence her brief was either wrong or unethical. That was merely Zeifman's personal opinion. And keep in mind, he's been caught in multiple lies over the matter. He claims he fired her, when he did not. He now claims she confiscated records he then claimed were taken by John Doar.