Mueller And His Team Are Doing A Good Job

[TreeFrogTrader]

That's accurate! thank you! Although the Ivanka bit may be a stretch.

Note though that Mr. Wildchild's points have merit too though. Starr did not come on to the scene as a result of all the sex related lawsuits. So there was a period where Starr had absolutely nothing to do with all that. Later when he came up empty he went around looking in the garbage from other civil actions to see if he could find something that looked good.

 

[piezoe]

So explain to us how he "was indeed very much in the picture" -- what is the exact role of Ken Starr in the Paula Jones case? Was he the attorney for the plaintiff, was he the judge, was he an assigned counsel of any type, was he a witness, was he present in court, did he file the legal paper-work? What was the exact role of Ken Starr that makes you say he was very much in the picture of the Paula Jones case.

Starr did nothing more than pick up and read the Paula Jones legal transcript after the fact.

Gladly. See post #58 , also see tree frogs posts. You should also read my original post which was not about the Paula Jones case, but about the Lewinsky affair and the impeachment. Ken Starr was instrumental there because it was his grand jury that decided Clinton had perjured himself, not in regard to his alleged affair with Paula Jones, but rather in regard to his admitted affair with Lewinsky. There was a disagreement over the definition of sexual relations. There is a lesson to be learned. Before you have sex with someone, check to see what the legal definition of sex is, depending on the definition of "is" of course.

 

[piezoe]

Note though that Mr. Wildchild's points have merit too though.

They have merit , but not in regard to my post to which he was responding. He confused the Paula Jones case which was settled, with testimony in that same case with regard to Clinton's affair with lewinski. It was the Lewinski affair testimony that got Clinton in trouble with Starr. I completely agree with you that this Lewinski business was a perfect illustration of a witch hunt.

 

[piezoe]

In light of the recent spate of harassment cases, the Jones v Clinton harassment civil lawsuit becomes instructive. In that case the judge granted Clinton's request for summary judgement and the case was dismissed. The judge ruled that Jones was unable to show damages or "outrageous behavior" on Clinton's part (this is curious, but I suppose "outrageous is subject to interpretation and it was a he said, she said business.) Jones later appealed the courts decision. And that , i think, was after Clinton had already been impeached or was about to be. Jones, having chosen a most opportune time to launch her appeal, left Clinton with little choice. He settled without apology or admission of guilt.

In the Jones case which never reached the trial stage, the Judge slapped Clinton with a fine for Contempt because of "misleading testimony", and he ended up being disbarred in Arkansas for three years.

What is particularly interesting to me is that Clinton's lawyers had asked that the case be delayed until Clinton was out of office. They argued that a sitting President had insufficient time to be involved as a defendant in a civil lawsuit having to do with an incident prior to the defendant becoming President and that could result in a lengthy trial. The Supreme court ruled against Clinton and said the case could proceed! This would seem to bear on the question of whether a sitting President can be indicted. The Clinton precedent suggests to me that they can be, but I suppose it would depend on the particulars.

 

[wildchild]

It was perjury in the questioning of Bill Clinton in regard to the Lewinsky affair that led to the impeachment, and Ken Starr was very much in that picture.
from Wiki:
During the deposition in the Jones case, Clinton was asked, "Have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court?" The judge ordered that Clinton be given an opportunity to review the definition. It said that "a person engages in sexual relations when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person".[26][27][28] Clinton flatly denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky.[29] Later, at the Starr Grand Jury, Clinton stated that he believed the definition of sexual relations agreed upon for the Jones deposition excluded his receiving oral sex. It was upon the basis of this statement that the perjury charges in his impeachment were drawn up. Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998, on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. But despite Republican control of the Senate, Republicans were unable to muster the required two-thirds supermajority to convict or even simple majority, with 50 Senators voting guilty on the obstruction charge and 45 senators voting guilty on the perjury charge.

Incidentally, Clinton settled with Jones.

Yeah, upon investigation Ken Starr found this evidence against Bill Clinton and used it after the fact. You make it sound as if this was some sort of set up by Ken Starr. Ken Starr had no involvement in Bill Clinton's decision to commit perjury. It was not as if Ken Starr set him up. When the crime was committed, Ken Starr had absolutely nothing to do with it.

The guy is a creep, he got impeached, and he will have that stain through history and he deserves. It was by no means a set up by Ken Starr. Bill Clinton is solely responsible for it.

 

[wildchild]

In light of the recent spate of harassment cases, the Jones v Clinton harassment case becomes instructive. In that case the judge granted Clinton's request for summary judgement and the case was dismissed The judge ruled that Jones was unable to show damages or "outrageous behavior" on Clinton's part (this is curious, but I suppose "outrageous is subject to interpretation and it was a he said, she said business.) Jones later appealed the courts decision. And that , i think, was after Clinton had already been impeached or was about to be. Jones, having chosen a most opportune time to launch her appeal, left Clinto with little choice. He settled without apology or admission of guilt.

In the Jones trial, the Judge slapped Clinton with a fine for Contempt and he ended up being disbarred in Arkansas for three years.

He settled for the full amount. Case closed.

 

[piezoe]

Yeah, upon investigation Ken Starr found this evidence against Bill Clinton and used it after the fact. You make it sound as if this was some sort of set up by Ken Starr. Ken Starr had no involvement in Bill Clinton's decision to commit perjury. It was not as if Ken Starr set him up. When the crime was committed, Ken Starr had absolutely nothing to do with it.

The guy is a creep, he got impeached, and he will have that stain through history and he deserves. It was by no means a set up by Ken Starr. Bill Clinton is solely responsible for it.

Now tell us how you really feel about Clinton

 

[wildchild]

No tell us how you really feel about Clinton

I see no reason to make excuses for the guy. Through his actions, he insulted the Presidency, he insulted the Oval Office and the White House, and he insulted the country. I expect a little more than that.

If you have a person who is an idiot as President, who is doing their best but still screwing things up, like Obama did, then that is one thing. To show absolute disdain for the rule of law, that is another.

 

[piezoe]

Sorry I asked.

 

[fhl]

Yeah, mueller doing a good job by nailing flynn, NSA guy, to the wall over something without consequence.

Establishment republicans let James Clapper, DNI for obama, walk scott free after he lied under oath about something extremely important.

Now do people see why many hate establishment republicans? They're scum.