Ken Starr's Report had NO "MAYBEs" or "MIGHT HAVEs". It was CLEAR

Grokmaster

Well-known member
Contributor
Ken Starr's report to Congress, unlike the MISHMASH of BULSHIT Mueller just turned in, along with his asinine comments about "EXONERATION", which has nothing to do with a PROSECUTOR's JOB.

See the STARK DIFFERENCES; PRECISE CLEARLY DELINEATED CRIMES CITED, not "well, could have maybe been", " I couldn't really make a determination", and other SUCH BULLSHIT as that from Mueller:



The Starr report cited 11 specific possible grounds for impeachment in four categories: five counts of lying under oath, four counts of obstruction of justice, one count of witness tampering and one count of abuse of constitutional authority. All of which arose from his liaison with Ms. Lewinsky and not from the Whitewater land deal and other matters Starr investigated. [8]

The outlined eleven possible grounds for impeachment allegedly committed by President Bill Clinton were given in the Introduction of the report as:

"1. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil case when he denied a sexual affair, a sexual relationship, or sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.

2. President Clinton lied under oath to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

3. In his civil deposition, to support his false statement about the sexual relationship, President Clinton also lied under oath about being alone with Ms. Lewinsky and about the many gifts exchanged between Ms. Lewinsky and him.

4. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Ms. Lewinsky concerning her involvement in the Jones case.

5. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth about their relationship by concealing gifts subpoenaed by Ms. Jones's attorneys.

6. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth of their relationship from the judicial process by a scheme that included the following means: (i) Both the President and Ms. Lewinsky understood that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their sexual relationship; (ii) the President suggested to Ms. Lewinsky that she prepare an affidavit that, for the President's purposes, would memorialize her testimony under oath and could be used to prevent questioning of both of them about their relationship; (iii) Ms. Lewinsky signed and filed the false affidavit; (iv) the President used Ms. Lewinsky's false affidavit at his deposition in an attempt to head off questions about Ms. Lewinsky; and (v) when that failed, the President lied under oath at his civil deposition about the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

7. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice by helping Ms. Lewinsky obtain a job in New York at a time when she would have been a witness harmful to him were she to tell the truth in the Jones case.

8. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Vernon Jordan concerning Ms. Lewinsky's involvement in the Jones case.

9. The President improperly tampered with a potential witness by attempting to corruptly influence the testimony of his personal secretary, Betty Currie, in the days after his civil deposition.

10. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice during the grand jury investigation by refusing to testify for seven months and lying to senior White House aides with knowledge that they would relay the President's false statements to the grand jury -- and did thereby deceive, obstruct, and impede the grand jury.

11. President Clinton abused his constitutional authority by (i) lying to the public and the Congress in January 1998 about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky; (ii) promising at that time to cooperate fully with the grand jury investigation; (iii) later refusing six invitations to testify voluntarily to the grand jury; (iv) invoking Executive Privilege; (v) lying to the grand jury in August 1998; and (vi) lying again to the public and Congress on August 17, 1998 -- all as part of an effort to hinder, impede, and deflect possible inquiry by the Congress of the United States."[9]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starr_Report
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CITED ACTUAL CRIMES...NO SPECULATION...and no BULLSHIT "EXONERATION" declarations, either.


PROSECUTORS EITHER BRING/RECOOMMEND CHARGES, as STARR DID; MUELLER DID NEITHER.
 
Ken Starr wasn't limited by a department guideline that said a sitting President couldn't be indited, and for that matter, Ken Star was restricted by anything or anybody, he had full control over what he investigated, how long it took him to investigate, and what he could do in the investigation

Not even a good "whataboutism"
 
Lying about BLOW JOBS!! Wow, STARR was a fucking genius.

Did you really type that out loud?

PS Starr also handed over ALL unredacted materials and supporting evidence as soon as his report was handed over! Anyone see a difference?

PSS NO 'evidence' of wrong doing for WHITE WATER, FILE GATE nor TRAVELGATE. Did that make FOX back then? And not even any questions about VINCE FOSTER'S death. (A Kavanaugh "disinformation" OPERATION, by the way).
 
Last edited:
Ken Starr should have been hired to find out if Trump got any blow jobs. That's important.
 
Always worth remembering:

I put the probability at about 99.9 percent that every single conservative posting on this forum, put on a cheerleader's skirt, picked up some pom-poms, and cheered from the sidelines as a Republican congress impeached and tried to remove from office a president for lying about a blowjob with a consenting female.
 
Ken Starr wasn't limited by a department guideline that said a sitting President couldn't be indited, and for that matter, Ken Star was restricted by anything or anybody, he had full control over what he investigated, how long it took him to investigate, and what he could do in the investigation

Not even a good "whataboutism"

BULLSHIT, MADEUP NONSENSE. Starr DID NOT IDICT the PRESIDENT. The ABOVE IS HIS REPROT TO CONGRESS.


SPECIFIC CRIMES. Mueller has MUDDIED THE WATERS because he HAD NO CASE....or he would have RECOMMENDED CHARGES to CONGRESS.
 
Always worth remembering:

I put the probability at about 99.9 percent that every single conservative posting on this forum, put on a cheerleader's skirt, picked up some pom-poms, and cheered from the sidelines as a Republican congress impeached and tried to remove from office a president for lying about a blowjob with a consenting female.

Please quote the IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS citing a SINGLE SYLLABLE of what you just LIED ABOUT.


I listed what Clinton was impeached over in the OP. LYING UNDER OATH, and OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE.


Not "maybe might've, could've"...DID.
 
Since he's been in the WHITE HOUSE? Maybe he paid a maid. He ain't getting any from HER!

These are important questions. I doubt Bob Mueller looked into Trump's sex life. Probably stuck to shit like Russian connections and if there was some kind of cover-up. We need to get Ken Starr on this ASAP!
Did Trump get a blow job? How about anal sex, any of that? 'Water Sports', there's rumors. Why aren't Republicans DEMANDING this???



:bigthink:
 
Ken Starr's report to Congress, unlike the MISHMASH of BULSHIT Mueller just turned in, along with his asinine comments about "EXONERATION", which has nothing to do with a PROSECUTOR's JOB.

See the STARK DIFFERENCES; PRECISE CLEARLY DELINEATED CRIMES CITED, not "well, could have maybe been", " I couldn't really make a determination", and other SUCH BULLSHIT as that from Mueller:



The Starr report cited 11 specific possible grounds for impeachment in four categories: five counts of lying under oath, four counts of obstruction of justice, one count of witness tampering and one count of abuse of constitutional authority. All of which arose from his liaison with Ms. Lewinsky and not from the Whitewater land deal and other matters Starr investigated. [8]

The outlined eleven possible grounds for impeachment allegedly committed by President Bill Clinton were given in the Introduction of the report as:

"1. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil case when he denied a sexual affair, a sexual relationship, or sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.

2. President Clinton lied under oath to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

3. In his civil deposition, to support his false statement about the sexual relationship, President Clinton also lied under oath about being alone with Ms. Lewinsky and about the many gifts exchanged between Ms. Lewinsky and him.

4. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Ms. Lewinsky concerning her involvement in the Jones case.

5. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth about their relationship by concealing gifts subpoenaed by Ms. Jones's attorneys.

6. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth of their relationship from the judicial process by a scheme that included the following means: (i) Both the President and Ms. Lewinsky understood that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their sexual relationship; (ii) the President suggested to Ms. Lewinsky that she prepare an affidavit that, for the President's purposes, would memorialize her testimony under oath and could be used to prevent questioning of both of them about their relationship; (iii) Ms. Lewinsky signed and filed the false affidavit; (iv) the President used Ms. Lewinsky's false affidavit at his deposition in an attempt to head off questions about Ms. Lewinsky; and (v) when that failed, the President lied under oath at his civil deposition about the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

7. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice by helping Ms. Lewinsky obtain a job in New York at a time when she would have been a witness harmful to him were she to tell the truth in the Jones case.

8. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Vernon Jordan concerning Ms. Lewinsky's involvement in the Jones case.

9. The President improperly tampered with a potential witness by attempting to corruptly influence the testimony of his personal secretary, Betty Currie, in the days after his civil deposition.

10. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice during the grand jury investigation by refusing to testify for seven months and lying to senior White House aides with knowledge that they would relay the President's false statements to the grand jury -- and did thereby deceive, obstruct, and impede the grand jury.

11. President Clinton abused his constitutional authority by (i) lying to the public and the Congress in January 1998 about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky; (ii) promising at that time to cooperate fully with the grand jury investigation; (iii) later refusing six invitations to testify voluntarily to the grand jury; (iv) invoking Executive Privilege; (v) lying to the grand jury in August 1998; and (vi) lying again to the public and Congress on August 17, 1998 -- all as part of an effort to hinder, impede, and deflect possible inquiry by the Congress of the United States."[9]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starr_Report
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CITED ACTUAL CRIMES...NO SPECULATION...and no BULLSHIT "EXONERATION" declarations, either.


PROSECUTORS EITHER BRING/RECOOMMEND CHARGES, as STARR DID; MUELLER DID NEITHER.

Why would there be a maybe?
There was cum on the dress!
 
Please quote the IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS citing a SINGLE SYLLABLE of what you just LIED ABOUT.


I listed what Clinton was impeached over in the OP. LYING UNDER OATH, and OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE.


Not "maybe might've, could've"...DID.

dear fucking idiot

they did Impeach him


Impeach means the process not the removal you dumb fuck


even the republicans could not win that stupid debate

Clintons removal AFTER the Impeachment process was VOTED DOWN


fuck you very much
 
Please quote the IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS citing a SINGLE SYLLABLE of what you just LIED ABOUT.


I listed what Clinton was impeached over in the OP. LYING UNDER OATH, and OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE.

Not "maybe might've, could've"...DID.

ABOUT BLOW JOBS! You got em or you didn't. And you lied about them because--YOU WERE EMBARRASSED and YOU DIDN'T WANNA TELL YOUR WIFE. Pretty easy shit to comprehend. How many pages was it? I could have covered, obstructing, lying and all in what 5 pages?

 
BULLSHIT, MADEUP NONSENSE. Starr DID NOT IDICT the PRESIDENT. The ABOVE IS HIS REPROT TO CONGRESS.


SPECIFIC CRIMES. Mueller has MUDDIED THE WATERS because he HAD NO CASE....or he would have RECOMMENDED CHARGES to CONGRESS.

Did I say Star indited Clinton? No, but Star wasn't limited by the rules, guidelines, and regulations that Mueller was, in reality, Star was on his own, as I said could go anywhere and take as much time as he wanted, he could "clearly cite crimes"

"Starr was under a separate statute, which expired. Mueller was under an internal DOJ regulation. Totally different legal regimes. Starr was required to report to Congress. Mueller was required to report to Barr.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/05/factchecking-trumps-response-to-mueller/
 
Starr investigated the Clinton's entire lives looking for something, anything to charge them with. His result was about a consensual affair Bill had with a woman. Not much of a threat to the country, was it? It was all they could find after years of humiliating and aggressive use of the Starr Commission. It was a terrible time for American justice .Now rightys are going back there again. That is because they suspect what kind of criminal activity Trump has been involved in. They are in full distraction mode.
 
Back
Top