Hillary Clinton apparently learned from Nixon's experience to destroy evidence long before it becomes an issue for the United States Supreme Court.
Hillary Clinton is the new Richard Nixon.
It's NOT an April Fool's Day joke.
Hers is the ironic story of a former Goldwater girl turned Sol Alinsky devotee who married a fellow whom she expected, rightly, to become President and pave the way for her to become President too.
John Fund succinctly highlighted obvious similarities this way--"She’s secretive, scandal-plagued, and seemingly inevitable"--and reported:
"Ever since Hillary Clinton’s e-mail scandal broke earlier this month, comparisons between her secretive style and that of Richard Nixon, whom she ironically pursued as a young lawyer on the House impeachment committee, have been frequent. But with Friday’s revelation that she wiped her private e-mail server clean after her records were requested by the State Department last year, the comparisons are becoming more concrete. Washington wags note that even Nixon never destroyed the tapes, but Hillary has permanently erased her e-mails." (www.nationalreview.com/articles/416151/hillary-democrats-nixon-john-fund).
Nixon was ambitious, but he was about much more than insatiable personal ambition. He was a World War II veteran who appreciated the Communist menace and did something about it. He may have been motivated by what he believed to be the best interests of the United States during the Cold War in doing what he did in connection with the so-called Watergate scandal. He bowed to the Constitution when the United States Supreme Court ordered him to turn over his tapes and ultimately resigned to put an end to impeachment proceedings.
On November 17, 1973, months before resigneing, he famously declared: "I made my mistakes, but in all of my years of public life, I have never profited, never profited from public service — I earned every cent,” he said. “And in all of my years of public life, I have never obstructed justice. And I think, too, that I could say that in my years of public life, that I welcome this kind of examination, because people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I am not a crook. I have earned everything I have got."
Hillary Clinton apparently learned from Nixon's experience to destroy evidence long before it becomes an issue for the United States Supreme Court.
Hillary Clinton's candid version of Nixon's famous statement that ultimately failed to reassure might read like this: “I made NOT made mistakes...except not having separate official and private email accounts when I was making the world better as Secretary of State because the United States was not yet ready for a female President and Barack Obama conned voters by pretending to be for traditional marriage and campaigned to become the first black President of the United States. In any case, what does it matter now? In all of my years of public life, I have never profited, never profited from public service — I earned every cent, and deserved much more. And in all of my years of public life, I have never obstructed justice. Whatever I do is just. And I think, too, that I could say that in my years of public life, that I never deserved and nevertheless have graciously welcomed this kind of examination, although it is terribly unfair to me and a waste of public money and my time. But people have got to know whether or not their president-to-be is a crook. Well, I am not a crook. I have earned everything I have got. End of story.”
Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.
Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.
The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.
Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.
Cover
•
Commentary
•
Books & Reviews
•
Climate Change
•
Site Links
•
Feedback
