TO ALL: The House has voted no confidence in Ken Starr!
I'll bet that got your attention...<g>
Actually, of course, it was a come-on. There was no such formal vote of no confidence. But the mere fact that the Republicans insisted on expanding the impeachment inquiry beyond the Starr referral indicated, to me, that they were very unhappy about the fact that referral was limited to Monicagate, providing no evidence of Clinton's guilt in any other "gate." And I posed the question: "What makes the House think that the Judiciary Committee can find something on these gates that Starr could not??"
Thanks for your response to that question, j_b, which was:
If you go back to when Starr was first appointed, you will see that the Democrats
actually liked him and the Republicans did not. He was seen as not motivated to
find wrongdoing on the part of the President because Starr had Supreme Court
aspirations. Some people blamed Starr's findings about Vince Foster on those
aspirations. It may be that the House Republicans feel that Starr has purposely
not looked at much of the information available, and isn't really trying to "get"
Clinton. After all, so much "proof" has been put forward by people other than
Starr, that it seems suspicious that Starr wasn't able to come up with anything. I
don't agree with this, but I have heard this put forward by House Republicans
on C-Span.
Let me also cite a couple of randomly selected "anti-Starr" pronouncements found on gung-ho ImpeachClinton! sites. The depth of their distrust of Starr may not surprise you, but it sure surprised me:
1) In a collaborative talk on Tuesday, July 28, Dr. Arthur Barrons and Dr. Garth Wailthor were asked to speak briefly on the significance of recent events and turns in the Grand Jury investigation of the alleged affair between president Bill Clinton and Ms. Monica Lewinsky.
Arthur explained in an opening statement that his opinion of the investigation of the Grand Jury of Judge Starr had not changed with recent media releases regarding depositional statements taken under the umbrella of immunity. "The arguments are still shills," he explained. "The point of much of these investigations are to find an excuse to broadly investigate many of the wrongs of the Clinton/Gore Administration and then absolve responsibilities for them by the mere fact that they had been investigated and dismissed."
Furthering the point, Garth pointed-out Starr's willingness to rapidly dismiss over 100 still-outstanding serious investigatory questions regarding the death of Vince Foster and over 50 other individuals closely associated with the president and vice-president; the ignorance of other items in his purview such as abuse of the IRS and USPS; the felonious collection and use of "enemy files" on over 900 identified individuals and organizations; and Executive Orders specifically targeting families for dissolution and removal of legal protections.He also explained that ultimately the Administration is the employer of Judge Starr, attacking him in the mass media (with full complicit agreement cooperation), making the convenience factor itself too close to evidentiary in the hands of a White House which functions in "PR languishment."
impeachclinton.com
2) (From a May 20th piece on "Chinagate)
Here's a prediction: Kenneth Starr's long-awaited report on impeachable offenses
by the president is going to be completely overshadowed by the latest revelations of
a direct connection between Chinese military intelligence and illegal Democratic
Party campaign contributions. Starr's independent counsel investigation has
been, until now, either a comedy of errors or itself a scandalous political cover-up
in the making.
The day Starr fired Miquel Rodriguez, his own top prosecutor charged with
investigating the death of Vincent Foster, those of us familiar with his probe
understood he would never get to the bottom of the most serious crimes of the
Clinton administration. The fix was in. This was a political investigation by a
political animal, not a criminal probe by a serious law enforcement officer. For
whatever reason, Starr and his top lieutenants were not interested in rocking the
boat too much.
The Monica Lewinsky/Kathleen Willey phase of the investigation was never going
to bring down the presidency. Not only did it not resonate with the American
people, it was like trying to nail an organized crime figure on a charge of
soliciting call girls or talking dirty to his mob molls....
worldnetdaily.com, ed. Arthur
|
