Posted on 02/15/2018 7:09:17 PM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
Report: Court to release documents from Bill Clinton probe Federal court is reportedly set to unseal long-secret documents stemming from former Independent Counsel Ken Starr's investigation into then-President Bill Clinton; reaction and analysis from former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. A federal judge has ordered the unsealing of documents from then-Independent Counsel Ken Starr’s two-decade old probe that led to former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment. Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted the order Monday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from CNN. According to the judge’s order, CNN journalist Katelyn Polantz requested on Feb. 9, 2018 that eight sealed matters arising from Starr’s 1998 investigation of Clinton “be unsealed and made public.”
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
” I think CNN is assuming that Ken Starr had a lot of supporting evidence on the Clinton’s that will finally make the case that Bubba should have been removed from office.”
Starr did reveal supporting evidence and Clinton should have resigned and saved us all the pain of his presidency.
However, it appears that this could be an intimidation tactic to force the Clintons to permanently retire and steer clear of the 2020 election.
I agree, this is a shot across the bow to the Clintons.
It’s a threat that CNN will disclose the results in its disgusting entirety if Hillary does not back down. Call it ‘Operation Dirty Laundry.’
If she signals that she will run again in 2020 they will torpedo her with Bill’s dirty business.
CNN is no longer the Clinton News Network, it’s reverted back to Turner’s original Communist News Network.
Yep - certain documents sitting on a table for months and months and she couldn't find them until dusting day......
They had better guard the graves of these two traitors like it’s Buckingham Palace because when the Earth is mercifully relieved of Hill and Bill, pizzing on their graves should be #1 on the Bucket List of everyone who ever loved this country.
Do you believe that as the Principal of the request and the one who paid for it, that CNN has all rights to the documents, including whether to publicize them ?
If that ends up being true, why do you think CNN now wants to expose the Clintons ? Is it all about money ? Is it just because they can get an exclusive ?
You are mistaken... Clinton’s tampering with evidence, attempting to Obstruct justice, Suborning perjury? Lying under oath are not criminal activities.....they are merely part of the Democrats’ Creed.
What a Democrat truly believes (hat tip Michael Kelly).
A Democrat believes President Bill Clinton and has always believed him. They believed him when he said he had never been drafted in the Vietnam War and believed him when he said he had “forgotten to mention” that he had been drafted in the Vietnam War.
They believed him when he said he hadn’t had sex with Gennifer Flowers and believed him later, when he reportedly says he did.
They believe the president did not rent out the Lincoln Bedroom, did not sell access to himself and the vice president to hundreds of well-heeled special pleaders and did not supervise the largest, most systematic money-laundering operation in campaign finance history, collecting more than $ 3 million in illegal and improper donations.
They believe that Charlie Trie and James Riady were motivated by nothing but patriotism for their adopted country.
A Democrat believes President Clinton when he conceded that his administration mistakenly obtained the FBI files of more than 300 people, including many top Republicans. They believe it was the result of a “completely honest bureaucratic snafu” involving security clearances.
A Democrat believes Clinton’s chief of staff, Leon Panetta, when he told reporters that “obviously a mistake was made” and apologized to the people whose FBI files wound up at the White House. They believe Clinton when he said “I completely support” what my COS Panetta said about the affair.
A Democrat believed Vice President Gore when he said that he had made dunning calls to political contributors “on a few occasions” from his White House office, and believed him when he said that, actually, “a few” meant 46. They believe in no controlling legal authority.
A Democrat believes Bruce Babbitt when he says that the $ 286,000 contributed to the DNC by Indian tribes opposed to granting a casino license to rival tribes had nothing to do with his denial of the license and believed the secretary when he said that he had not been instructed in this matter by then-White House deputy chief of staff Harold Ickes.
They believed him when he said later that he had told lobbyist and friend Paul Eckstein that Ickes had told him to move on the casino decision, but that he had been lying to Eckstein. and agree with the secretary that it is an outrage that anyone would question his integrity.
A Democrat believes in the Clinton Standard of adherence to the nation’s campaign finance and bribery laws, enunciated by the president on March 7, 1997: “I don’t believe you can find any evidence of the fact that I had changed government policy solely because of a contribution.” They note with approval the use of the word “evidence” and also the use of the word “solely” and believe that it is proper to change government policy to address the concerns of people who have given the president money, as long as nobody can find evidence of this being the sole reason.
A Democrat believes Clinton lived up to his promise to preside over the most ethical administration in American history and believe that indicted former agriculture secretary Mike Espy did not accept $ 35,000 in illegal favors from Tyson Foods and other regulated businesses. They believe that indicted former housing secretary Henry Cisneros did not lie to the FBI and tell others to lie to cover up $ 250,000 in blackmail payments to his former mistress.
They believe that convicted former associate attorney general Webster Hubbell was not involved in the obstruction of justice when the president’s minions arranged for Hubbell to receive $ 400,000 in sweetheart consulting deals at a time when he was reneging on his promise to cooperate with Kenneth Starr’s Whitewater investigation.
Democrats believe Paula Jones is a cheap tramp who was asking for it. They believe Kathleen Willey is a cheap tramp who was asking for it and believe Monica Lewinsky is a cheap tramp who was asking for it.
They believe Lewinsky was fantasizing in her 20 hours of taped conversation in which she reportedly detailed her sexual relationship with the president and begged Linda Tripp to join her in lying about the relationship.
A Democrat believes that any gifts, correspondence, telephone calls and the 37 post-employment White House visits that may have passed between Lewinsky and the president are evidence only of a platonic relationship; such innocent intimate friendships are quite common between middle-aged married men and young single women, and also between presidents of the United States and White House interns.
A Democrat sees nothing suspicious in the report that the president’s intimate, Vernon Jordan, arranged a $ 40,000-per-year job for Lewinsky shortly after she signed but before she filed an affidavit saying she had not had sex with the president. Nor do they read anything into the fact that the ambassador to the United Nations, Bill Richardson, visited Lewinsky at the Watergate to offer her a job.
A Democrat believes the instructions Lewinsky gave Tripp informing her on how to properly perjure herself in the Willey matter simply wrote themselves.
A Democrat believe as Hillary does that The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Newsweek, Time, U.S. News & World Report, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS and NPR are all part of a vast right-wing conspiracy.
Liz wrote:
“You are mistaken... Clinton’s tampering with evidence, attempting to Obstruct justice, Suborning perjury? Lying under oath are not criminal activities.....they are merely part of the Democrats’ Creed... “
Another outstanding reply, t y 4 posting.
You mean the stains on the dress? What photos of what? What other evidence did Monica have?
Plus you know Steffi probably licked that sink.
There’s not any other physical evidence as far as I know. It is her actual testimony that is umm, really something. I dropped a link on the thread that contains some of what I recall reading. It’s quite unsavory. Puking -barf alert!
At the time I read the transcript (last year), I wasn’t sure if it were for real. Now, I’m guessing that it actually was and this is why Slick-Perv is fighting to keep it sealed.
Of course, in addition to what’s known, they had phone sex on quite a few occasions while Slick ‘did something to himself.’ And they exchanged romantic poetry books as gifts.
Lewinsky —8/26/98 Deposition. #29-33. <— This is what they fight to suppress.
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.