SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DMaA who wrote (5669)9/14/1998 12:50:00 PM
From: Bill  Read Replies (1) of 13994
 
Let me first say that Starr laid out the facts which are, in my opinion, a basis for impeachment. Clinton clearly is guilty of most of what is charged.

However, after reading most of the report, I am profoundly disappointed in Starr. His focus on the sex acts and his devotion to the sex details is a disservice to those of us who supported this investigation. Don't give me that nonsense that it was necessary to prove perjury. That's bull. 75% of it was unnecessary. What possible crime was he trying to prove when he highlighted the cigar episode? The easiest of Clinton's crimes to prove was the perjury. We all know Congress would not fall for the ludricrous word parsing Clinton wants everybody to believe. The details could have been supplied in an unpublished appendix. Besides, there were several other questions he lied about, so perjury was easy. He has muddied his report with sex, playing into the hands of Clinton's defenders who said all along it was about sex. You and I both know the real issues here are corruption and obstruction, but try explaining that now to dumb America.

I wanted to see more details of the real crimes committed. I wanted more discussion of the obstruction. And I thought he should have gotten more detail about Betty Currie's role as facilitator. Based on her vital role in the law breaking, Starr would have been better off cutting a deal with her than Monica.

I also disagree with his legal premise that the President's invoking privileges amounted to obstruction. With no appropriate cites, that's pure baloney.

He should have spent more time explaining how he came to be involved with this case and about crimes committed in his other investigations, and he should have indicated whether there were impeachable offenses coming from White Water.

Bottom line: In confirming Clinton's lack of credibility, Starr has damaged his own credibility.

Bill Vaughn
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News