Trump’s lawyer is totally wrong about Nelson RockefellerBreaking News
tags: Trump, Rockefeller
● The media missed this Trump whopper, forgetting the true history of Rocky's confirmation hearings as veep (citing Rocky biographer Richard Norton Smith)
Standing before a room full of journalists in New York this morning, Sheri Dillon, the lead attorney hired by Donald Trump to help advise him on his financial conflicts of interest, decided to offhandedly say something false about former Vice President Nelson Rockefeller.
Rockefeller, a longtime governor of New York and leader of the Republican Party’s moderate wing, became vice president under unusual circumstances. Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace, which elevated Gerald Ford to the presidency and created a vacancy, which Rockefeller filled.
Rockefeller was very rich, an heir to the famous Rockefeller fortune, which posed some potential financial conflicts of interest. Dillon characterized the similarity between the situations this way: “You know, the business empire built by President-elect Trump over the years is massive, not dissimilar to the fortunes of Nelson Rockefeller when he became vice president. But at that time, no one was so concerned.”
It is simply not true that no one was so concerned. On the contrary, in a September 1974 article, Linda Charlton reported for the New York Times: “Rockefeller Vows Full Cooperation.”
comments powered by Disqus
- JFK's diary reveals fascination with Hitler, compared to 'legend'
- Secret South Korean Nuclear Weapons Program Created Anxiety in Washington in Mid-1970s
- The President Is Under FBI Investigation. Is This Normal?
- President Trump Praised Both Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay
- Nativism, Violence, and the Origins of the Paranoid Style
- Douglas Brinkley says there’s a "smell of treason in the air"
- Mary Maples Dunn, Advocate of Women’s Colleges and President of Smith, Dies at 85
- Gil Troy says Jews and Israelis are the victims of a “Hate Swarm”
- Eric Foner interviews Matt Karp about his new book on slaveholders
- Are historians ignoring the history of originalism?