![]() |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by kimilseung
(Post 11865156)
I did not know.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Leslie
(Post 11865151)
Kissinger, revisited. This is something that has obviously been bugging Bernie. :lol: Remember, Clinton was on the Judiciary Committee that brought down Nixon.
Specifically, she wrote a brief seeking to deny the right of counsel to Nixon and hid the fact that there was at least one major precedent for the right to counsel in impeachment proceedings (Supreme Court Justice Douglas). Lawyers know that to file a brief and to knowingly hide a contrary precedent, is unethical behaviour, which could lead the court to recommend proceedings for disbarment. Also, according to her boss on the Committee, Zeifman, a Democrat by the way, she also took the records of the Douglas case and hid them in her office, which put them beyond the reach of others and the public. If, of course, all this is true. I'm sure the usuals will come down on me like a ton of bricks, so I'm not staking out the position that it is true, or even that I hope it is true. I simply would not at all be surprised if it were true. Thing I like about Bernie is he seems to be honest and ethical, even though I disagree with all of his positions. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Leslie
(Post 11865120)
Missed the first few minutes. I didn't realize that PBS was moderating the Dem debate, that's a good sign.
How wonderfully refreshing to hear two intelligent adults having a fairly substantial debate about meaningful topics. Comparing this debate to the last Republican debate, it's hard to believe they are both in the same country and heading for the same goal. I really cannot fathom why there are such strong feelings against Clinton; she's clearly smart and experienced. She's not the most affable person on the planet, but I don't get how she inspires such strong feelings. I really do like Bernie; very good to listen to. But given the amount of opposition Obama faced in the Congress, how could Bernie ever get anywhere with his more extreme positions. Clinton's last remarks about Bernie not supporting Obama were a mistake, I feel. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11865206)
Supposedly she was fired from that Committee for unethical practices: Fact Check: Was Hillary Clinton fired from Watergate investigation? | jacksonville.com
Specifically, she wrote a brief seeking to deny the right of counsel to Nixon and hid the fact that there was at least one major precedent for the right to counsel in impeachment proceedings (Supreme Court Justice Douglas). Lawyers know that to file a brief and to knowingly hide a contrary precedent, is unethical behaviour, which could lead the court to recommend proceedings for disbarment. Also, according to her boss on the Committee, Zeifman, a Democrat by the way, she also took the records of the Douglas case and hid them in her office, which put them beyond the reach of others and the public. If, of course, all this is true. I'm sure the usuals will come down on me like a ton of bricks, so I'm not staking out the position that it is true, or even that I hope it is true. I simply would not at all be surprised if it were true. FALSE: Jerry Zeifman Fired Hillary Clinton from the Watergate Investigation : snopes.com |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Steerpike
(Post 11865247)
How wonderfully refreshing to hear two intelligent adults having a fairly substantial debate about meaningful topics. Comparing this debate to the last Republican debate, it's hard to believe they are both in the same country and heading for the same goal.
Originally Posted by Steerpike
(Post 11865247)
Clinton's last remarks about Bernie not supporting Obama were a mistake, I feel.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Leslie
(Post 11865151)
Kissinger, revisited. This is something that has obviously been bugging Bernie. :lol: Remember, Clinton was on the Judiciary Committee that brought down Nixon.
What was the basis for Clinton being on the Judiciary Committee ... was this when she was a budding lawyer? It really speaks to her experience in the political process at this point. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11865206)
Supposedly she was fired from that Committee for unethical practices: Fact Check: Was Hillary Clinton fired from Watergate investigation? | jacksonville.com
Specifically, she wrote a brief seeking to deny the right of counsel to Nixon and hid the fact that there was at least one major precedent for the right to counsel in impeachment proceedings (Supreme Court Justice Douglas). Lawyers know that to file a brief and to knowingly hide a contrary precedent, is unethical behaviour, which could lead the court to recommend proceedings for disbarment. Also, according to her boss on the Committee, Zeifman, a Democrat by the way, she also took the records of the Douglas case and hid them in her office, which put them beyond the reach of others and the public. If, of course, all this is true. I'm sure the usuals will come down on me like a ton of bricks, so I'm not staking out the position that it is true, or even that I hope it is true. I simply would not at all be surprised if it were true. Thing I like about Bernie is he seems to be honest and ethical, even though I disagree with all of his positions. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Steerpike
(Post 11865262)
I thought she handled it rather well; I despised Kissinger as an idealistic teenager growing up in the UK, but have grown to appreciate some of his achievements over time. She pretty much made the logical point that you shouldn't refuse input from anyone.
What was the basis for Clinton being on the Judiciary Committee ... was this when she was a budding lawyer? It really speaks to her experience in the political process at this point. I think, despite Gloria Steinem's poor attempts at pop psychology, it is understandable that Hillary may have become more conservative with age and marriage. This tends to happen to women and men. What doesn't make sense in Steinem's assessment is ... if women become more radical with age then why are older women supporting Hillary? Bernie is clearly more liberal. Yes, Hillary was a Washington wonder-kid in the 70s. Even then it was the children who were really running the Nation's Capital. ;) |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Giantaxe
(Post 11865250)
Agreed. It was a pretty lame attempt to shore up the black vote by trying to paint Sanders as critical of Obama. It really didn't work. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11865206)
Thing I like about Bernie is he seems to be honest and ethical
From the article: So what are we to make of all this? Calabrese’s interview with Zeifman has been published around the Internet and repeated by pundits such as Rush Limbaugh and Neil Boortz. But there is nothing to out-and-out confirm Zeifman’s rendition. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t be true, but it makes it difficult to arrive at the truth. Your version: Supposedly she was fired from that Committee for unethical practices It would be, er, honest, for you to say that one person claims that she was fired and that those claims are unverified. But that wouldn't have the spin that you were looking for. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP
(Post 11865566)
You like "honest and ethical", yet you aren't honest enough to properly quote an article that you cite.
From the article: So what are we to make of all this? Calabrese’s interview with Zeifman has been published around the Internet and repeated by pundits such as Rush Limbaugh and Neil Boortz. But there is nothing to out-and-out confirm Zeifman’s rendition. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t be true, but it makes it difficult to arrive at the truth. Your version: Supposedly she was fired from that Committee for unethical practices It would be, er, honest, for you to say that one person claims that she was fired and that those claims are unverified. But that wouldn't have the spin that you were looking for. Zeifman was her boss, and he was the person who fired her for the reasons he stated, which - if we both read the same article - was based primarily on the brief she wrote, which failed to acknowledge and argue against an important precedent. Had that brief been presented to the Court it could have gotten her disbarred for failing to be candid with the Court. Maybe Zeifman really fired her because being a young, if rather unattractive, lawyer in his office, she refused to give him oral sex upon request; and he has since scrambled to justify the firing. I'll grant you something along those lines. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11865771)
Zeifman was her boss, and he was the person who fired her for the reasons he stated, which - if we both read the same article - was based primarily on the brief she wrote, which failed to acknowledge and argue against an important precedent. Had that brief been presented to the Court it could have gotten her disbarred for failing to be candid with the Court.
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11865771)
Maybe Zeifman really fired her because being a young, if rather unattractive, lawyer in his office, she refused to give him oral sex upon request; and he has since scrambled to justify the firing. I'll grant you something along those lines.
So what's up next? "Hillary Clinton killed Vince Foster" perhaps? |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11865771)
You are so full of surprises and fresh takes on things, aren't you? I wasn't spinning anything, but you're such a rigid leftie and a true believer you just can't believe that anyone on the Left could ever be anything less than pure as the driven snow or that anyone on the Right could ever be less than evil incarnate.
Zeifman was her boss, and he was the person who fired her for the reasons he stated, which - if we both read the same article - was based primarily on the brief she wrote, which failed to acknowledge and argue against an important precedent. Had that brief been presented to the Court it could have gotten her disbarred for failing to be candid with the Court. Maybe Zeifman really fired her because being a young, if rather unattractive, lawyer in his office, she refused to give him oral sex upon request; and he has since scrambled to justify the firing. I'll grant you something along those lines. At some point, you should recognize that this persistent tilting at windmills just makes you look gullible and neurotic. Time for you to find new tactics. |
Re: 2016 Election
Now that Gilmore has suspended, this will really mix things up for the GOP!
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/12/jim-gilmore-suspends-presidential-campaign/ |
Re: 2016 Election
Did not know he was in.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 3:23 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.