Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kenneth Starr to lead legal team challenging campaign finance legislation
Associated Press ^ | 3-21-02 | JIM ABRAMS

Posted on 03/21/2002 1:29:30 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:39:59 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

WASHINGTON (AP) --

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: campaignfinance; cfr; cfrlist; kennethstarr; kenstarr; silenceamerica
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 341-348 next last
To: *CFR list;*Silence, America!
index bump
41 posted on 03/21/2002 1:54:16 PM PST by Fish out of Water
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Hey, the media got this bill passed and they have the most to gain.

It's a total mistake. I'l bet the democraps are laughing themselves silly....

42 posted on 03/21/2002 1:54:56 PM PST by Cogadh na Sith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Nothing against the honorable Judge Starr but what a PR nightmare. It is something to change the focus at any time, any place the media chooses. DUH!
43 posted on 03/21/2002 1:55:57 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seeking the truth
Kenneth Starr may be a fine constitutional lawyer, but CFR is about politics and politics ain't bean bag.
44 posted on 03/21/2002 1:56:43 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Seeking the truth
Just a moment folks. This is actually Starr's area of expertise if I recall his background correctly.

Doesn't matter. It'll be another "VRWC," and every Republican will catch flack.




45 posted on 03/21/2002 1:57:09 PM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I've read over and over on these threads that Ted Olsen would go before the USSC and argue that CFR was not constitutional and would kill it once and for all.

The article says that the DOJ will argue for CFR.

This is not good, if true.

46 posted on 03/21/2002 1:57:35 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Ken Starr is an EXCELLENT constitutional attorney.

I suspect a lot of knee-jerk naysayers will be pleasantly surprised when this is over.

47 posted on 03/21/2002 1:57:52 PM PST by newgeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
Yeah, what about Ted Olson. Bush should DEMAND that he take the case.
48 posted on 03/21/2002 1:57:56 PM PST by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Valley Hospital Association, Inc. v. Mat-Su Coalition for Choice (11/21/97), 948 P 2d 963

James Bopp was one of the attorneys that handled the case. The case was won by the other side.

49 posted on 03/21/2002 1:58:00 PM PST by duck soup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Notice this little quip from Daschle?

"But he added there is a clause in the legislation to ensure that the rest of the bill is unaffected if one part of it is struck down in the courts."

Hmmm....hmm.hmm.hmm.

50 posted on 03/21/2002 1:58:06 PM PST by DJ88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Remember that Linda Tripp told Ken Starr that she had evidence directly linking the Klintoons to Filegate and a the finance scandal, but Starr refused to ask her about it and then told Congress that there was no evidence to implicate them in those scandals.
51 posted on 03/21/2002 1:58:29 PM PST by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
A-men!
52 posted on 03/21/2002 1:58:40 PM PST by father_elijah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Capitalist Eric
Would you rather they hired David Boies?
53 posted on 03/21/2002 2:00:30 PM PST by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
My gut reaction was similar to yours, but Ken Starr did have a fine reputation before he was demonized by the bubba boys. However this will be a (God, I can't believe I am using this word) diverse legal group with strange bedfellows. Maybe the best from all sides.
54 posted on 03/21/2002 2:00:40 PM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Howlin, I don't know how you are staying calm through all of this but, ....yes, star is wonderful. BUT THE MEDIA HAS AMMO OUT THE WAZOO. All they have to do if something is not going their way is DIVERT ATTENTION. Start talking about Starr (now relevant) but in the past, all the crap they used to say about him. (not relevant)
55 posted on 03/21/2002 2:00:55 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
"I suspect a lot of knee-jerk naysayers will be pleasantly surprised when this is over."

Me too.

56 posted on 03/21/2002 2:02:11 PM PST by eureka!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: chookter
Given Starr's protections of the Republican Party during impeachment ...

(by focusing down his million-dollar mound of evidence to a glob of DNA-specific semen on the sink -- AND -- by his decision to prosecute a case of perjury re: the President's "personal life" ... thereby opening the door to BOTH George H. Bush's and Bob "Down Boy" Dole's protestations that actual removal on these grounds would sully the semen-stained office)

... I doubt very seriously Starr's anything but precisely the team-player the two-party Corporation needs to protect their vital interests where "corporate governance", free speech and the individual's -- much less the Third Party's -- ability to participate in elections are concerned.

57 posted on 03/21/2002 2:02:52 PM PST by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Kathleen Sullivan should do a good job here. She's argued against encryption regulations and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (aka Fair Use Elimination Act) and appears to have a much better grasp of the Bill of Rights than most of our our so-called leaders.
58 posted on 03/21/2002 2:03:09 PM PST by ThinkDifferent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Politically big mistake. Legally good move. Starr is good lawyer.
59 posted on 03/21/2002 2:03:20 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
The legality of campaign finance legislation has been an issue since the last effort to limit campaign spending in 1974. In 1976, in Buckley v. Valeo, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress could set limits on contributions, but that limits on spending violated free speech rights.

And the spin begins.

60 posted on 03/21/2002 2:03:22 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 341-348 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson