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

Jack said:
Ken Starr should have been hired to find out if Trump got any blow jobs. That's important.
Click to expand...

Desperate DODGE of the EMBARRASSING (for you) FACTS, duly noted.


MUELLER CITED NO CRIMES...STARR DID. PERIOD.


Muller "ALLUDED TO" a BUNCHA BULLSHIT, as he HAD NO CASE, but COULDN'T ADMIT IT, in TRUE TDS STYLE....
 
Grokmaster said:
Desperate DODGE of the EMBARRASSING (for you) FACTS, duly noted.


MUELLER CITED NO CRIMES...STARR DID. PERIOD.


Muller "ALLUDED TO" a BUNCHA BULLSHIT, as he HAD NO CASE, but COULDN'T ADMIT IT, in TRUE TDS STYLE....
Click to expand...

Only because Mueller DIDN'T hire crack investigator Ken Starr. :(
 
Celticguy said:
Good point. Poor Bob only had innuendos to peddle.
Click to expand...

Exactly . HE'S PISSED that HE FAILED TO "GET TRUMP" , even with the MASSIVELY ANTI-TRUMP BIAS of the WITCH HUNT, as he HAD NO CASE, so he ALLUDED TO A PACK OF "MAYBE's".


Total BULLSHIT.
 
Gonzomin said:
Or was giving them to Putin.
Click to expand...

Confused about who Putin's " More Flexibility After My Election; Order Our Intel to Stand Down and Not Interfere With the Russians in 2016; Refuse to Arm Ukraine" BITCH ACTUALLY IS AND WAS, we see....
 
evince said:
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
Click to expand...

Not for getting a blowjob , STUPIDFUCK, as the DUMBASS I was responding to tried to claim.

For the ELEVEN CRIMES SPECIFCALLY CITED BY STARR, WITH NO "AMBIGUITY" NONE OFM WHICH WERE "GETTING A BLOWJOB", you BRAINDEAD DOGFUCK.


Try to KEEP UP, SHIT FOR BRAINS....
 
What an obtuse comparison. Trump's crimes are surrounded by a network of cronies and business ties encompassing multiple continents and a huge cast of players who Mueller stated scrubbed evidence, whereas Clinton's crime was a lie about one blow job...:wall:

And btw OP...Mueller was crystal clear.
 
Grokmaster said:
Desperate DODGE of the EMBARRASSING (for you) FACTS, duly noted.


MUELLER CITED NO CRIMES...STARR DID. PERIOD.


Muller "ALLUDED TO" a BUNCHA BULLSHIT, as he HAD NO CASE, but COULDN'T ADMIT IT, in TRUE TDS STYLE....
Click to expand...

Why would Mueller cite a crime, he couldn't proceed with it, and he knew fully well that Barr was going to edit whatever he came up with, Starr on the other hand, had no guidelines and was free to cite anything he wanted

They are simple facts, don't understand why you keep repeating fiction
 
archives said:
Why would Mueller cite a crime, he couldn't proceed with it, and he knew fully well that Barr was going to edit whatever he came up with, Starr on the other hand, had no guidelines and was free to cite anything he wanted

They are simple facts, don't understand why you keep repeating fiction
Click to expand...

Hardly any of that is fact lol.

Mullet was prevented from making an indictment. He was not prevented from concluding crimes were committed. It would be utterly asinine to appoint an SC with the understanding he could only investigate and not conclude. It’s absurd on its face.

Mullet is a snake oil salesman and I’m glad he’s catching grief even from some people who stood up for him against Trump.
 
Darth Omar said:
Hardly any of that is fact lol.

Mullet was prevented from making an indictment. He was not prevented from concluding crimes were committed. It would be utterly asinine to appoint an SC with the understanding he could only investigate and not conclude. It’s absurd on its face.

Mullet is a snake oil salesman and I’m glad he’s catching grief even from some people who stood up for him against Trump.
Click to expand...

“As set forth in the report, after the investigation, if we had confidence that the president did not clearly commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not.”

Wipe the Trumpjizz off your chin
 
Grokmaster said:
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.
Click to expand...

You can’t compare Starr with Mullet

For one they were two separate laws governing their activities.

For two. Starr is an honorable man. Mullet is a scumbag deep stater
 
domer76 said:
“As set forth in the report, after the investigation, if we had confidence that the president did not clearly commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not.”

Wipe the Trumpjizz off your chin
Click to expand...

What’s with the torturous verbiage lol?

Someone took a minute putting that sentence together. Mullet lacked confidence that a crime wasn’t committed. What the hell are we supposed to do with that? Prosecutors can’t charge someone based on something like that.

That sentence equals *no charge* and the subject is considered innocent under the law.

That’s right, Mullet effectively declared Trump innocent.
 
Darth Omar said:
What’s with the torturous verbiage lol?

Someone took a minute putting that sentence together. Mullet lacked confidence that a crime wasn’t committed. What the hell are we supposed to do with that? Prosecutors can’t charge someone based on something like that.

That sentence equals *no charge* and the subject is considered innocent under the law.

That’s right, Mullet effectively declared Trump innocent.
Click to expand...

Wrong, illiterate dumbfuck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top