Title: Did Jerry Zeifman Fire Hillary Clinton from the Watergate Investigation? | Snopes.com
Headings: Did Jerry Zeifman Fire Hillary Clinton from the Watergate Investigation?
Did Jerry Zeifman Fire Hillary Clinton from the Watergate Investigation?
A 26-year-old Yale Law School graduate then known by her maiden name of Hillary Rodham worked on the Watergate inquiry.
Claim
Rating
Origin
Keep Snopes Debunking
Editors' Picks
Under HIPAA Rules, Can Businesses Ask If You Have Been Vaccinated Against COVID-19? Where does HIPAA's privacy rule apply?

Content: In order to pull this off, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception. The brief involved precedent for representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. When Hillary endeavored to write a legal brief arguing there is no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding, Zeifman says, he told Hillary about the case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt in 1970. “As soon as the impeachment resolutions were introduced by (then-House Minority Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer,” Zeifman said. The Judiciary Committee allowed Douglas to keep counsel, thus establishing the precedent. Zeifman says he told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files. So what did Hillary do? “Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public,” Zeifman said. Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding — as if the Douglas case had never occurred. This passage leaves many readers with the belief that Hillary Rodham took it upon herself to decide that President Nixon should not be represented by counsel during evidentiary hearings, to deliberately draft a brief that ignored precedent in that area, and to personally hide evidence of the precedent she had ignored so that no one could discover her dishonesty.