Posted on 12/02/2004 12:38:49 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
Kenneth Starr says he never should have led the investigation that resulted in the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton.
The former independent counsel, now dean of the Pepperdine University law school, says "the most fundamental thing that could have been done differently" was for somebody else to have investigated Clinton's statements under oath denying he had an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
I agree. Clinton was impeached, disbared and had to pay a big settlement to Paula Jones. Reno lost her bid for Florida Gov. Jeb got it right? Bush ran on "restoring honor to the White House (among other things) and he won. Gore had to run away from Clinton and lost. Mark Geragos, who got Susan MacDougal off for the contempt charge and trashed Starr unmercifully in the process just lost the Petersaon case a few weeks ago. His reputation is in tatters. Carville cracked an egg on his head on Meet the Press the other day because his party is in the tank. So what goes around comes around.
They are way too partisan to ever be appointed to nvestigate someone of the opposite party. You have be realistic.
Ooops. Sorry.
I don't think either side was conspiring to distract from anything. But it worked out that the Lewinsky matter distracted from the other investigations. That's the way the cards fell.
Bingo! Clinton must have taken out his copies of the 900 FBI files that he had kept in the White House for many months. I think he blackmailed his way out of impeachment as well as further investigation of his many scandals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.