Day 28 – My journey to find reasons to vote for Hillary rather than just against Trump.

She served on the House Judiciary Committee for Nixon’s impeachment hearings at 26 (turning 27 while on the committee).

I think this is a fascinating point, even though her role on the committee was not significant – mostly, she researched and wrote briefs to support the efforts of her bosses. It seems incomprehensible to me, given the historic significance of the hearings, that this did not influence her long-term thinking.

First off, who gets an appointment like this at 26?

Secondly, how could it not affect you?

Although my goal here is to find reasons to support her rather than condemn her, I’m intrigued that her personal response to trouble is to resist intrusion (avoiding press conferences and sometimes obfuscating) rather than deciding transparency is the better choice. And this is decidedly a negative. I would love to know whether her resistance has been life-long or was adopted over time.

I’m choosing to put this experience in the plus column, in part, because she was so young to be given such an important job; in part because I think (emphasis on “I think”) it is impossible not to have been powerfully and negatively influenced by the experience at her age; and because I think it, in small measure, explains her resistance to investigation on an emotional level.

I also think it was an aberrant, but in many ways honest, introduction to the seamy side of politics and the lengths to which some people will go to win. Her mistrust of other politicians may have been built in early on.

There are, of course, rumors that she personally deprived Nixon of legal counsel (at 27!) and that she was fired from the committee.

For those, I deliver:

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