[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten

Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam

Terrorists shut down Park Avenue.

Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala.

The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US

Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today

Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear?

France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront

Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England.

George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed.

Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus.

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles

Title: Reporter Who Exposed Hillary’s Secret Intel Operation: Who Authorized & Financed It?
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern ... on-who-authorized-financed-it/
Published: Mar 29, 2015
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2015-03-29 23:27:47 by out damned spot
Keywords: Intel, operation, Hillary
Views: 99152
Comments: 168

One of the reporters who exposed what appears to have been former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s clandestine and rogue intelligence service said that there are more questions than answers regarding the operation, which was exposed in the hacked emails of Clinton’s longtime confidante Sidney Blumenthal.

Appearing on Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot channel 125, Jeff Gerth, a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, told host and Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon that he still wanted to know “who authorized or tasked this network to do what they did” and “who was paying for this?”

Gerth, the former New York Times reporter who now works for ProPublica, co- authored the report on Clinton’s rogue intelligence operation with Gawker’s Sam Biddle. He said the intelligence operation revealed in the Blumenthal emails reminds him of the Ed Wilson scandal in Libya and the Iran-Contra scandal. He noted that in both cases people were sent to jail or convicted of various crimes.

“You don’t just pick this stuff up from the Internet,” he said, noting “there were human intelligence sources inside of Libya that were gathering this information” and relaying it to Blumenthal, who then forwarded the accounts to Clinton’s private email account.

Gerth emphasized that the Blumenthal emails are “just a minor tiny percentage of what was going on here.” He said “we got a few pieces but don’t have anywhere near the full puzzle” because journalists have to work “with what the hacker chose to download” and take screenshots of two years ago.

According to the Gawker/ProPublica report, “starting weeks before Islamic militants attacked the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, longtime Clinton family confidante Sidney Blumenthal supplied intelligence to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gathered by a secret network that included a former CIA clandestine service officer.” Blumenthal’s emails “include at least a dozen detailed reports on events on the deteriorating political and security climate in Libya as well as events in other nations” and they came to light when a Hacker called Guccifer posted them in 2013.

On August 23, 2012, less than three weeks before the Benghazi attacks that killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, an email, according to the report, cites “‘an extremely sensitive source’ who highlighted a string of bombings and kidnappings of foreign diplomats and aid workers in Tripoli, Benghazi and Misrata, suggesting they were the work of people loyal to late Libyan Prime Minister Muammar Gaddafi.”

As the report points out, Hillary Clinton claimed “that U.S. intelligence officials didn’t have advance knowledge” of security threats in Benghazi, but Blumenthal’s email “portrays a deteriorating security climate” even if the memo, according to Gawker, “doesn’t rise to the level of a warning about the safety of U.S. diplomats.” On the day after the Benghazi attacks, Blumenthal reportedly sent an email sent an email saying a “sensitive source” said that interim Libyan president Mohammed Yussef el Magariaf “was told by a senior security officer” that the Benghazi attacks were “inspired by an anti-Muslim video made in the U.S,” which was the Obama administration’s preferred spin.

The next day, though, Blumenthal reportedly sent an email that “said Libyan security officials believed an Islamist radical group called the Ansa al Sharia brigade had prepared the attack a month in advance and ‘took advantage of the cover’ provided by the demonstrations against the video.” Another email in October of 2012 notes “that Magariaf and the Libyan army chief of staff agree that the ‘situation in the country is becoming increasingly dangerous and unmanageable’ and ‘far worse’ than Western leaders realize.”

The report notes that though the intelligence notes were sent under Blumenthal’s name, they “appear to have been gathered and prepared by Tyler Drumheller, a former chief of the CIA’s clandestine service in Europe who left the agency in 2005.” He has since reportedly established a consulting firm– Tyler Drumheller, LLC. The emails also show that “Cody Shearer, a longtime Clinton family operative,” was also in “close contact with Blumenthal.”

Blumenthal’s hacked emails also show that “he and his associates worked to help the Libyan opposition, and even plotted to insert operatives on the ground using a private contractor.” The emails reveal that Blumenthal and Shearer were negotiating with former Army General David Grange “to place send four operatives on a week-long mission to Tunis, Tunisia, and ‘to the border and back.'” Grange, “a major general in the Army who ran a secret Pentagon special operations unit before retiring in 1999,” according to the report, “subsequently founded Osprey Global Solutions, a consulting firm and government contractor that offers logistics, intelligence, security training, armament sales, and other services.”

The Libyan National Transition Council and Grange’s Osprey Global Solutions, according to documents, agreed that Osprey would “‘assist in the resumption of access to its assets and operations in country’ and train Libyan forces in intelligence, weaponry, and ‘rule-of-land warfare.'” Another email reportedly shows that Drumheller appealed to “then-Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zeidan offering the services of Tyler Drumheller LLC, ‘to develop a program that will provide discreet confidential information allowing the appropriate entities in Libya to address any regional and international challenges.'”

In addition to intelligence information from Libya, the Blumenthal memos, according to the report, “cover a wide array of subjects in extreme detail, from German Prime Minister Angela Merkel’s conversations with her finance minister about French president Francois Hollande–marked ‘THIS INFORMATION COMES FROM AN EXTREMELY SENSITIVE SOURCE’—to the composition of the newly elected South Korean president’s transition team.”

A Clinton spokesman reportedly told the outlets that the Blumenthal emails were part of the nearly 33,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over to the State Department.

As the report notes, “Blumenthal, a New Yorker staff writer in the 1990s, became a top aide to President Bill Clinton and worked closely with Hillary Clinton during the fallout from the Whitewater investigation into the Clinton family.” Hillary Clinton even reportedly “tried to hire him when she joined President Obama’s cabinet in 2009, but White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel reportedly nixed the idea” because of Blumenthal’s attacks on Obama during the 2008 Democratic primary. On Breitbart News Sunday, Gerth also reminded listeners how close Blumenthal is to the Clintons–he was the last person, for instance, Hillary Clinton spoke to before she went on the Today show during the Monica Lewinsky affair to allege a “vast right-wing conspiracy” against the Clintons.

The emails raise more questions about whether all of the more than 30,000 emails that Clinton deemed to be “personal” were really not “work-related.” Clinton refused to turn her email server over to a third party and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who chairs the House Select Benghazi Committee, revealed on Friday that Clinton had wiped her email server “clean.” Gowdy, citing “huge gaps” in the emails that his committee has received, has indicated that there may be many relevant emails regarding Libya that Clinton may not have turned over, which is why he has indicated that the House may take legal action to get access to Clinton’s email server.

“There are gaps of months and months and months. And if you think to that iconic picture of her on a C-17 flying to Libya, she has sunglasses on and she has her handheld device in her hand, we have no e-mails from that day. In fact, we have no e-mails from that trip, Gowdy said on a recent appearance on CBS’s Face the Nation. “So, it’s strange credibility to believe that if you’re on your way to Libya to discuss Libyan policy that there’s not a single document that has been turned over to Congress. So, there are huge gaps. And with respect to the president, it’s not up to Secretary Clinton to decide what is a public record and what’s not.”

Gerth pointed out that “these things these usually have layers to them” and there is a lot more that needs to be unearthed.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 111.

#1. To: out damned spot, TooConservative, tomder55 (#0)

The stinking plot thickens.

These Xlintons learned much from Nixon.

redleghunter  posted on  2015-03-30   0:17:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: redleghunter (#1)

These Xlintons learned much from Nixon.

You can't be ignorant enough to be serious!

I am no fan of Richard "Wage and Price Controls,and lets open relations with China while we are at it!" Nixon,but ALL he was guilty of was participating in the coverup. He had no part in the actual crime.

On the other hand,BOTH Clintons have been involved in treason since their college days. Hillary was even caught manufacturing evidence against Nixon when she worked for the Watergate committee,and hiding evidence favorable to him and was fired for it by Archibald Cox with the recommendation that "she never be hired or appointed to any position of trust with the government in the future."

sneakypete  posted on  2015-03-30   6:42:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: sneakypete, redleghunter (#4)

Hillary was even caught manufacturing evidence against Nixon when she worked for the Watergate committeeand hiding evidence favorable to him and was fired for it by Archibald Cox with the recommendation that "she never be hired or appointed to any position of trust with the government in the future."

Urban myth.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/zeifman.asp

FALSE

Is this true or false?

As a 27 year old staff attorney for the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate investigation, Hillary Rodham was fired by her supervisor, lifelong Democrat Jerry Zeifman. When asked why Hillary Rodham was fired, Zeifman said in an interview, "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.""

Origins: Former First Lady Hillary Clinton is no stranger to political scandal and controversy, and a specific accusation concerning her work as a young lawyer on the Watergate investigation has dogged her political career for more than a decade. The claim originated with Jerry Zeifman, under whom Clinton worked in 1974 as a member of the impeachment inquiry staff for the House Committee on the Judiciary during the course of the scandal.

The notion Hillary Clinton was fired by Jerry Zeifman for "lying" and "unethical behavior" has circulated across social media and in e-mails for years. The belief that Clinton's early career was marked by this buried scandal is widespread, but is there any merit to the claim?

By Zeifman's own admission there is not. Statements made by Zeifman himself contradict the claim he fired Hillary Clinton. During a 1998 interview with the Sacramento Bee in which he discussed his work with Clinton on Watergate, Zeifman not only stated he hadn't fired her, but he didn't even have the authority to fire her:

If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her.

Ten years later, Zeifman's story had shifted. When asked by radio host Neal Boortz in April 2008 if he had fired Hillary Clinton from the Watergate investigation, Zeifman hedged by stating Clinton had been let go, but only as part of a layoff of multiple personnel who were no longer needed:

Well, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions.
Following Zeifman's 2008 interview with Boortz, a column by Dan Calabrese ("FLASHBACK: HILLARY CLINTON FIRED FROM WATERGATE INVESTIGATION FOR 'LYING, UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR'") cemented the belief that Hillary Clinton had been "fired" from the Watergate investigation in political lore:

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.

However, one need only go back to the source of the rumor and Zeifman's own statement that he did not have the power to fire Hillary Clinton to discount that now common version of political lore: the evidence indicates that, whatever Zeifman may have thought of Clinton's behavior, she was let go from the Watergate committee because she was one of a number of people who were no longer needed as the investigation wound down (and Nixon's resignation made the issue moot), not because she was "fired" over ethical issues.

Last updated: 21 October 2014

nolu chan  posted on  2015-03-30   17:04:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: nolu chan (#11)

Snopes? Couldn't find anything from Huffpo on this?

Dead Culture Watch  posted on  2015-03-30   20:25:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Dead Culture Watch (#13)

Snopes? Couldn't find anything from Huffpo on this?

Provide a credible source to substantiate the claim that either Zeifman, Cox, or anyone else fired Hillary, as alleged.

You complain about Snopes as a source. There is not one credible source cited for this monumental event.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-04-01   1:05:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: nolu chan (#23) (Edited)

You complain about Snopes as a source.

I didn't think I was complaining at all. And Snopes is not exactly a serious source on many topics. How can it be, given the page-length they seem to impose?

She was terminated in a reduction-in-force without recommendation for rehire in government work, ending her career as a congressional lawyer wannabe.

It was one thing to let her go ASAP, much more serious that she didn't get a recommend for rehire. Around this time, she failed to pass the bar exam in D.C. and moved to Arkansas where she did pass the bar and ended up married to a philandering provincial governor.

Hillary got shuffled out the door. How furious she must have been.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-04-01   4:25:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: TooConservative (#24)

She was terminated in a reduction-in-force without recommendation for rehire in government work, ending her career as a congressional lawyer wannabe.

It was one thing to let her go ASAP, much more serious that she didn't get a recommend for rehire. Around this time, she failed to pass the bar exam in D.C. and moved to Arkansas where she did pass the bar and ended up married to a philandering provincial governor.

Hillary got shuffled out the door. How furious she must have been.

Fact check your nonsense before posting it.

In January 1974, Hillary Rodham began work for John Doar, special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee. Nixon resigned in August 1974. Hillary resigned shortly after in August and went to Arkansas to be with Bill and in still in August, became an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Arkansas School of Law. After Nixon resigned, the impeachment jobs ended.

Hillary got her J.D. from Yale law in 1973. She was admitted to the Arkansas Bar on October 18, 1973. That is a year before your asinine idea that she practiced on the impeachment committee staff minus a license.

Before her 1974 stint in D.C., she had lived with Bill in California and New Haven, and after D.C. she went to Arkansas to live with Bill. They got married in their home in Arkansas.

Hillary joined the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock in 1976. Bill Clinton became Governor of Arkansas in 1977. Hillary became a partner at Rose Law in 1979.

There is plenty of serious issues to use for criticism of Hillary. Resort to ridiculous fairy tales that have been around for nearly twenty years is counter-productive.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-04-02   0:53:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: nolu chan (#28) (Edited)

Hillary got her J.D. from Yale law in 1973. She was admitted to the Arkansas Bar on October 18, 1973. That is a year before your asinine idea that she practiced on the impeachment committee staff minus a license.

So,you are now claiming a Arkansas law license was required to work on a feral impeachment committee in DC?

Gee,and here I was thinking you had to have a license to practice law wherever you were,like,practicing law.

Hillary joined the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock in 1976. Bill Clinton became Governor of Arkansas in 1977.

Kinda overlooking the fact that Bubba Bill was the Arkansas AG before he became the Governor,ain't ya?

sneakypete  posted on  2015-04-02   9:29:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: sneakypete (#31)

So, you are now claiming a Arkansas law license was required to work on a feral impeachment committee in DC?

Gee,and here I was thinking you had to have a license to practice law wherever you were, like, practicing law.

If that is what you think, you would do better not to think at all.

A licensed attorney of any state bar can practice for the federal government in D.C. without taking the D.C. bar exam. Hillary never passed the D.C. bar exam. Most attorneys in D.C. do not take the D.C. bar exam.

She had to be a licensed attorney to practice in D.C. starting in January 1974. She was. She was a member of the Arkansas State Bar.

Attorneys for the federal government require a J.D. and membership in good standing in any state bar. They do not need to be members of the bar where they are employed.

You do not have a clue what you are talking about.

Kinda overlooking the fact that Bubba Bill was the Arkansas AG before he became the Governor, ain't ya?

No. Hillary became an Arkansas lawyer in 1973, worked in D.C., returned to Arkansas and was a law professor in 1974, and joined Rose Law in 1976, all before Bill was elected as State AG. Kinda desperately grasping at straws, ain’t ya?

nolu chan  posted on  2015-04-02   18:15:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: nolu chan (#33)

No. Hillary became an Arkansas lawyer in 1973, worked in D.C., returned to Arkansas and was a law professor in 1974, and joined Rose Law in 1976, all before Bill was elected as State AG. Kinda desperately grasping at straws, ain’t ya?

No,that would be you doing that.

Bubba Bill had the skids greased for him from day one,thanks to the Soviet mole Senator William Fullbright and his influence.

The whole "law professor" thing is a popular scam by the DNC to park future candidates until they can find a spot for them where they will have influence.

Hell,Barry Obobmer was a law professor too,and he's dumber than dirt. Still smarter than Joe Biden and Goober Gore,but still dumber than dirt.

Bubbette! got the law professor job PURELY because of his connection to Bubba and because she couldn't do anything else other than be the "bag lady" for Bubba.

Now I guess you are going to tell us all it was her vast experience as a successful entrepreneur that got her the board seat at Wal-Mart?

sneakypete  posted on  2015-04-02   21:43:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#77. To: sneakypete, nolu chan (#36)

Bubba Bill had the skids greased for him from day one,thanks to the Soviet mole Senator William Fullbright and his influence.

The whole "law professor" thing is a popular scam by the DNC to park future candidates until they can find a spot for them where they will have influence.

Bubbette! got the law professor job PURELY because of his connection to Bubba and because she couldn't do anything else other than be the "bag lady" for Bubba.

Now I guess you are going to tell us all it was her vast experience as a successful entrepreneur that got her the board seat at Wal-Mart?

Well, Pete is totally spot on in these brief assessments of the Klintoons. I don't know if it's germane to your debate.

That said, can one (or both of you) of you please succinctly explain the actual gist or contention of your respective debate? A lot of energy and thought has been expended. Thanks...

Liberator  posted on  2015-04-10   13:01:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#99. To: Liberator, sneakypete (#77)

That said, can one (or both of you) of you please succinctly explain the actual gist or contention of your respective debate? A lot of energy and thought has been expended. Thanks...

sneakypete repeated an off-topic urban legend at #4 that Hillary Clinton was fired from the Impeachment Inquiry Staff in 1974 by Archibald Cox. At #11, I posted two words of my own, "Urban myth," and the Snopes debunking of the urban myth, showing that Hillary was not fired and that Jerry Zeifman never fired her either. At #19 sneakypete claimed that he never said that Zeifman fired her, but that "[t]he way I remember it, it was Archibald Cox that fired her."

At #25, sneakypete tried to weasel out of responsibility for his #4 claim that "Hillary was even caught manufacturing evidence against Nixon when she worked for the Watergate committee,and hiding evidence favorable to him and was fired for it by Archibald Cox …" He claimed he said it was only as he remembered it. And then he decided to call he "shithead." Since then I have adied and abetted him in his display of his stream of unconsciousness.

Archibald Cox had been fired from his Executive Branch position Special Prosecutor in the Saturday Night Massacre in 1973, before Hillary was employed, in 1974, in her Legislative Branch position with the Impeachment Inquiry staff of the House Committee on the Judiciary, headed by Special Counsel John Doar. She was not fired by Archibald Cox, she was not fired by Jerry Zeifman, she was not fired. Richard Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974 and the Impeachment Inquiry staff was disbanded as you cannot impeach an ex-President. Along with others, when her position was abolished, her employment was terminated. She was not fired for misconduct, and Jerry Zeifman lacked authority to do it had he wanted to. It didn't happen.

Of course, had he really posted and quoted from memory, he should know what "his" allegations were about, and he demonstrably does not.

The urban myths originate from the column spun from the Dan Calabrese article which falsely claimed that Jerry Zeifman had fired Hillary Clinton, attributing the act to Zeifman but not quoting.

As for Zeifman's ability to fire Hillary, consider the following from his book, Without Dishonor, and guess whether he would have been told to eff off. Special Counsel John Doar and his senior assistants were the pros from Dover (M.A.S.H. ref) brought in to handle the case.

At 92:

I said to Doar, "And now what can I do to help?" Doar replied, "The first thing I want to do is talk to Lois alone." Surprised by his curtness, I suggested that we talk to Lois together—and then have lunch together to talk about the investigation that had been already begun under my supervision.

Doar and Lois and I then sat alone in Room 2141. Doar turned to Lois, and without consulting me, they began formulating policies for putting lawyers and investigators on the committee's payroll.

I was confused and angered by Doar all afternoon—and concerned about his latching on to Lois in a way that is intended to bypass me in his dealings with Rodino and the committee.

Zeifman was miffed. They were not equals. Doar was there because Zeifman was not competent to do the job. Doar did not need to consult with Zeifman. Doar did not answer to Zeifman.

At 99:

Doar also wanted to hire some individuals to whom he had personal ties. One of these was his longtime companion Renata Adler, who was a write. … I was particularly concerned about one applicant because of her close ties to Burke Marshall. This was Hillary Rodham, who had been Marshall's protoge at Yale and who had been recommended by Peter Edelman, a former top aide to Robert Kennedy.

At 119:

Although I objected to allowing Doar to put her [Adler] on the payroll, Rodino eventually agreed.

Rodham went on the payroll as well. Zeifman had no power of a veto over what Doar wanted. In Hillary's Pursuit of Power, (2006), Jerry Zeifman wrote at 6, "One of the first lawyers to be hired by Doar was Marshall's star pupil, Hillary Rodham." [italics added]

At 101:

All last week Doar insisted, "I'm going to do things my own way." I told him … [t]he impeachment of the President is not going to be done yourway, my way, Peter Rodino's way, or Tip O'Neil's or Jack Brooks's way. It is going to be done the congressional way. No one person's judgment can be relied on. The judgments of Congress are collective judgments. That is what the Congress is about! That is what democracy is all about."

Stonefaced, Doar replied, "That is not what this case is about! I will do this case in my own way." At one point in our discussions he also said: "You have had no actual experience in the prosecution of criminal cases, I have. I was an Assistant Attorney General."

I told Doar that this was not a criminal prosecution, but rather a civil proceding based on a congressional investigation. I added that I had previously headed a congressional investigation…

Zeifman did not tell Doar what to do.

Zeifman has blessed us with this gem from "Without Honor," at 31:

When Dean was chosed to be White House Counsel, Rodino, myself, and his other Judiciary Committee friends were pleased. He had attained his position of years of intense devotion to the combined crafts of law and politics. Envied by other, less-skilled executive branch lawyers, Dean had become an extraordinarily clear-eyed legal and political counselor.

As a convicted felon, John Dean was disbarred.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-04-12   20:05:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#111. To: nolu chan, sneakypete (#99)

Thanks for the overview, Chan. I enjoy and appreciate your penchant for detail and documentation.

Your respective quibbling is obviously between approaching the issues from your legalese "burden of proof" court perspective, versus that of the presumption of guilt based on "proof" constructed via circumstantial, testimony, and dot-connecting.

With respect to Hitlery's "firing" or technically "let go" from her position and involvement in Nixon's Impeachment proceedings, the unofficial "word on the street" was that Hitlery was sloppy, ventured into darker gray areas, and acted inappropriately in any case (no, please don't ask for citations :-)

Technically and legally, you may be right. But then knowing how history has often been "revised" or redacted when the Clintons (or 0webuma) are the subject, the validity of the official narrative will always be questioned.

Liberator  posted on  2015-04-15   11:40:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 111.

#143. To: Liberator, sneakypete (#111)

With respect to Hitlery's "firing" or technically "let go" from her position and involvement in Nixon's Impeachment proceedings, the unofficial "word on the street" was that Hitlery was sloppy, ventured into darker gray areas, and acted inappropriately in any case (no, please don't ask for citations :-)

I will not ask for citations because none exist. Despite the descriptions of Hillary’s presentation of procedures to the committee, the transcript of the proceedings indicate she did not say a mumbling word. The junior counsel do not get speaking roles in the high drama. The presentations were made by John Doar, Special Counsel, and Joseph Woods., Senior Associate Special Counsel.

I did find one place where Hillary Rodham’s name came up. In Book I where the Impeachment Inquiry Procedures were presented to the subcommittee, Rep. Kastenmeier (chairman) presiding.

From page 378:

Mr. KASTENMEIER: In any event, I will ask our stafff, including the senior associate counsel, Joseph Woods in addition to Mr. Samuel Garrison to identify the other counsel present for the reporter and for the committee, following which I would ask you to start reading the draft to the committee.

Mr. WOODS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On my left is Hillary Rodham and John Labovitz; on the far right John Davidson of the inquiry staff.

The following is the draft of procedures to which the chairman referred.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. It is captioned “Impeachment Inquiry Procedures,” is that correct?

Mr. WOODS: That is correct, sir.

The document referred to is herein titled “Impeachment Inquiry Procedures.”

The Committee on the Judiciary states the following procedures applicable to the presentation of evidence in the impeachment inquiry pursuant to House Resolution 803, subject to modification by the committee as it deems proper as the presentation proceeds. [Reading:]

On page 400, it shows that the procedures, as amended, were adopted unanimously.

To see how the Impeachment Inquiry Staff actually functioned, and how the neophyte attorney Hillary Rodham was actually assigned “grunt work” see the following from the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum.

In Joseph Woods recorded interview by Timothy Naftali, October 27, 2011, the Richard Nixon Oral History Project of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, one finds:

At ii:

Biographical Note

Joseph Woods served as Senior Associate Special Counsel to U.S. House of Representatives Impeachment Inquiry Staff in 1974. Woods headed the Constitutional and Legal Section of the Inquiry Staff.

At 6-7:

Naftali: What role did Mr. Doar play in these discussions?

Woods: Of course, he was the ultimate decider of all issues that had to do with the functioning of the staff.

[...]

Woods: … The organization of the inquiry staff was quite different. Each task force within the operation was made up of committee staff and minority staff so that Weld and Davidson, for example, who were on the minority staff were members of my unit, my task force, and Weld was involved in the writing of the grounds of impeachment memo. As I recall it, Davidson was not. He was involved with other projects. I think we worked effectively.

[...]

And [keep] in mind that there were no criminal statutes of the United States at the time that the Constitution was adopted but the Constitution had in it high crimes and misdemeanors. It couldn’t have meant crimes as it came to be defined in the criminal statutes of the United States because there was no United States and therefore there were no such statutes. There were no federal crimes.

At 8:

Naftali: When your staff completed this memo in a month, I believe, it just took you a little over a month.

Woods: Yes.

The Grounds of Impeachment report was issued in February 1974, printed by the GPO, and the foreward was signed by Peter Rodino on February 22, 1974.

At 10:

Naftali: Let me ask you before we move from the story of the memo on the constitutional grounds for impeachment, what role do you remember Hillary Rodham playing? What did she do as part of your team?

Woods: She did not work on the memo. Her principle role came later in working with me to draft the procedures that the committee would follow in conducting its hearings on the evidence. She and I essentially did that. Obviously with John Doar’s approval, but Hillary and I wrote those procedures.

[...]

Woods: Well, the starting point is the rules for the conduct of those procedures could be whatever the committee decided they were going to be. They dirivited from the fact that the sole power of impeachment is lodged in the House of Representatives is the proposition that the House can make its own rules. And those rules could be as restrictive and as secretive, provide for secrecy. Then there’s the liberal cast of the Democrats on the committee who were firmly committed to the proposition that there has to be due process about everything and that open hearings and the opportunity to confront witnesses, the opportunity to present a rebuttal case, and all these things that are part of what the United States are all about.

At 11:

Woods: I tried not to take a position as to what the rules should be. I took a position on what the rules could be which was unlimited in their scope and let the committee express its views. Actually, it was more a subcommittee of the committee, express its views on what the rules ought to be and then we, Hillary and I, tried to write rules that reflected what we understood the committee – the subcommittee to be saying to us. I do not believe that we recommended to the subcommittee any set of rules other than to say that here is what we think you said. Committee, do we have it right? The subcommittee was chaired by Representative Casimir from Wisconsin and I remember that one of the members of the committee was Representative Hungate. I think he was from Missouri. Wherever he was from, Mr. Hungate was very clear about the importance of forwarding proper latitude to the defense and I would say that he, as much as anybody, was the architect of the spirit of the rules that were finally adopted and what Hillary and I did was try to put on paper our understanding of what was necessary. The details that were appropriate to give effect to that spirit.

At 15:

Naftali: … Thank you. Mr. Woods, let me ask you whether you were involved at all in the decision to recruit Professor C. Vann Woodward to do a study of presidential abuses of power?

Woods: I knew about it and I knew that Hillary had a key role in that project but I did not – and I met Dr. Woodward when he was down at the staff offices at one time but no, I did not have anything to do with the decision to retain him or with the project with him as it went forward.

Naftali: Can you recall what role Hillary Rodham played in that?

Woods: Well, I think she was the liaison with Dr. Woodward. Beyond that, I can’t answer the question.

Naftali: Was this Mr. Doar’s idea do you know?

Woods: That, I don’t know. Certainly, it was one that he approved of or it wouldn’t have happened.

At 21-23:

Naftali: Tell me a bit about – well, let me ask you this. Given the prominence that she would have later, what was it like to work with Hillary Rodham?

Woods: Well, she was an excellent person to work with. She is the one person that I asked for to be on my task force. I was very much impressed by her when I met her the day that she and I both reported for duty back then and I specifically requested John Doar to put her on my task force, which he did. She would do what you asked her to do. I never heard her express any reticence to undertake a task that might seem mundane given that she had recently finished a prestigious law school. She was a very diligent worker. Was easy to work with. I give her very high marks all around.

Naftali: Since she did not write or help write the memo on the constitutional grounds for impeachment, what were her first tasks?

Woods: John Doar was very distrustful of computers and, in any event, they were in their infancy at the time. When I got there in January of ’74 there was not such a thing as a memory typewriter in the organization and I believe that was probably true in the Congress but I’m not sure about that. It certainly was a fact in the inquiry staff and I was able to, after some argument, to get an IBM Selectric typewriter for my secretary and whenever people had things they wanted to be able to revise they were forever seeking her assistance because she had the one machine in the office that was capable of any sort of memory.

Against that background, we had to have some kind of system to try to make a given bit of information available to people in various categories of inquiry. Let’s take an incident that took place that both John Doar and I had great significance. It took place in Key Biscayne when Mr. Nixon learned of the Watergate report of the apprehension of the Watergate burglars. He threw an ashtray across the room. Both Doar and I thought that that was the disgust of a person who said they blew it. That it was not the anger of someone who thought it was the wrong thing to have done. Now, that makes very nicely the distinction between the Statement of Information and the fact, if you will. And so the Statement of Information ultimately would be just a report of the throwing of the ashtray without any comment as to what the significance of that might’ve been. With that particular incidents could’ve had ramifications for different people looking into little bits of this and that somewhere in the factual investigation so, if we had computers, it would’ve been easy to bring up that information. It certainly would be now and I think it would’ve been then, to bring up that information in various context. But we didn’t have that capability. So what we did was to develop a system of punch cards where we put these pieces of information on the card and then we notched out things that it didn’t apply to and assigned little holes to different categories of inquiry and then if you wanted to find all of the incidents that fell within a certain category, you ran a long knitting needle through the holes at the end and you pulled up the cards that hadn’t been notched out. It was that primitive. And as a way station toward developing those cards, we had a system of little, not even 3X5, even smaller than that, coupons that were produced in carbon in numerous copies and these were filed in different databases, if you will.

And designing those little coupons and working out the system of the cards that were going to be picked up by the knitting needles was something that Hillary and I worked on. And that’s what she was doing, which is essentially grunt work, while some of the other people had the fun of writing the grounds memo. And she never complained.

Naftali: Then you gave her the more interesting task of working on the procedures.

Woods: Well, that’s true.

Naftali: By the way, this whole process emerged because Mr. Doar didn’t like computers.

Woods: Well, I’m not sure what the capabilities of computers were at that time and I’m not sure I understand what they are yet. But I’m gradually getting there, but very gradually.

Naftali: So you and Hillary Rodham worked then with the library. With Maureen, because the library – wasn’t that where all these coupons were placed in the end?

Woods: Beats me where they were. I don’t remember. I simply don’t remember. I get the general impression that the system was not very successful. That it didn’t serve the purpose very well. But of course I’m not sure that the computers of that day would’ve been that helpful either.

Naftali: I’m just wondering, where you got the idea for the knitting needle and the – where did that come from? I know it’s been a long time, but do you remember where that came from?

Woods: No. No, I do not.

Naftali: But anyhow, you and Hillary basically distilled the material down to these cards which would then be transferred to these punch cards.

Woods: No, I’m not trying to say that she was making the entries on the cards. I’m saying that she and I worked on trying to figure out what the system was going to be. I think it was a mighty a labor to produce a mouse, to define one now. It was just not a successful thing.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-04-16 23:56:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 111.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com