Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Media forgets Ken Starr wasn't hired to find out about BJ's

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 08:34 AM
Original message
Media forgets Ken Starr wasn't hired to find out about BJ's
I keep reading that Fitzgerald didn't charge anyone with the crime that he was hired to investigate. These same 'pundits' don't seem to remember that Kenny Starr was hired to investigate Whitewater NOT Lewinsky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
nothingshocksmeanymore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well it's hard to investigate a crime when the key players are all
lying to the investigator/ grand jury about that crime. That's why they are being prosecuted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. Bing-O
Good morning sweetheart. Spot on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KarenS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. very good point!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
3. I get the impression that Fitzgerald wouldn't have taken his investigation
into the Lewinsky thing as far as Starr did. When he talked about previous perjury situations, he gave me the impression that these things were based on judgment calls. Is the crime serious enough to pursue a perjury case? That's says everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. That's because Fitzgerald is a career prosecutor
who believes in the rule of law and Ken Starr was a partisan hack, who never prosecuted a case in his life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Starr is a hack. What an embarrassment for him for the world to
see how Fitzgerald is handling this professionally, and by comparison, how Starr succumbed to cheap partisan chicanery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
5. Starr was all over the map
Cattle futures, Christmas card lists, Arkansas State Troopers, Roger Clinton....
They kept coming up dry on Whitewater even after $70 million of investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. They were trolling for anything to justify their witchhunt.
After 70 MILLION they had best come up with something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broken_Hero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yep, and all they found...
was a dirty dress, and adultery.....damn, i could've found that for 1 million...:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-05 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
10. And spent 60 million dollars to find a stain on a blue dress. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC