Not just the subject. Starr was (and is) a staunch republican, who was investigating a Democratic President.
Mueller was a republican investigating a republican President. And a republican Administration.
Honorable, institutionalist blah, blah, blah. We need to never lose sight of that very basic fact.
The point that Lewinsky is making here is that there is always a double standard by which these findings from special counsels are handled. The Starr Report was made public before anyone had a chance to review and all the details, especially the salacious ones, were included in every newspaper without a rating system. Congress immediately decided that was enough to impeach Clinton. And the one person who was hurt the most was Lewinsky. Even some on this discussion board think of her as nothing but a whore for her actions. None of us are saying sheâs innocent; she herself has come out publicly and admitted she was as much at fault as he was. But it almost literally ruined her career to the point were she couldnât get jobs, visit relatives, or even be seen in public without it being splashed back in her face, with no chance at redeeming herself. Thankfully, she is able to speak about it and even poke some humor into her experience, as demonstrated with her interview with John Oliver.
Flash forward to today, where the Mueller Report is only being handled by the Attorney General, who is now using that as a weapon to go after healthcare, journalists, and other things, without giving Congress as chance to at leastread and review it so that they can decide what happens next. And since several people have already been indicted, tried, found guilty, and sentenced from their investigations, this is obviously something that requires us to not just take Barrâs word for it.
One special counsel for the indiscretions as a President and an aide vs. another special counsel for possible collusion and treason. Enough with the double standards! Yes, if F*cking Only.
I respect Mueller, am grateful for his service, etc., but I agree with you. It would be extremely naive to disregard the lifelong R behind his name. Itâs not that R means sympathy for Trump or agreement with his policies. Itâs that R (much more than D, unfortunately) designates membership of a political tribe and, very likely, social community. Rs have R friendsâand Mueller and Barr (R-DOJ) are old pals from way back. Thereâs a reason why Rosenstein (R-DOJ) was comfortable choosing Mueller (R-FBI). Rs know that, when itâs crunch time, even Rs like Mueller will exercise their judgment in such a way as to maximize R tribal interests and lose as few of their R friends as possible. Itâs what being R means.
The special counsel law that was used to investigate Clinton expired in 1999, and Congress did nothing to replace it.
Now, only the AG or the President can appoint a special counsel.
The only reason we had Mueller at all, is because Sessions recused himself and was under the cloud of possible investigation himself. If Trump has picked someone like Barr (or even Christie) as AG instead of Sessions, there would have been no Mueller investigation.
Precisely my point.
Mueller wasnât just investigating TrumpâŚhe was investigating a whole lot of republicans. Republican institionalists arenât just interested in preserving the institutions they work(ed) forâŚthey are interested in seeing those institutions run in manners that match up to their partisan views.
Its very similar to my age old complaint about Democratic Presidents constantly picking republicans to head up DoD. That only ensures that the DoD continues to build a bench of republicans, and that the public sees republicans as âtough on defenseâ, and Dems as âweak on defenseâ.
EDIT TO ADD: And lets not forget Comey, a republican, being appointed by Obama., despite very qualified Democrats being on âthe listâ. That appointment cost us the WH in 2016, and created this whole nightmare. Simply so we could claim "bipartisanship " and reinforce the notion that republicans are âtougher on crimeâ?
While I think the OPs post was out of line, this is the one aspect that has always amazed me about that entire sordid story. A normal woman would have just sent the dress to the cleaners. In no way do I defend Clinton for the Lewinsky âthingâ, but that one part of the story has always struck me as bizarre.
Letâs not forget that a certain Supreme Court Justice was involved in every bit of that, to be sure.
His primary charge was to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election. Apparently he found it. Thatâs been pretty much lost in the events of the last week.
Donât forget that 2 of Obamasâs 4 SoDâs were Republican.
Ken Starr, who was appointed to investigate a 20-year-old Arkansas land deal, found nothing, so expanded his mission to end up with Monicaâs blue dress. Ken Starr, whose office leaked like a sieve. Ken Starr, who published a report that read like a moralizing poorly written paperback romance novel. Ken Starr, who had to resign from Baylor University after it was found he covered up incidents of sexual assault by the football team. Ken Starr, who dared to show his face in public and comment on the Mueller investigation.
Sorry bible-thumpers, but the very existence of a scumbag like Ken Starr is proof there is no god
Well, because a blow job is so much more injurious to the fabric of the country than asking the Russians on television to undermine your opponent in a presidential election.
Classy as ever.
Smile big like the first time you found your niche to power. lol lol
Just didnât work out for a rich and prosperous future did it?
oh well you still be famous for trying to âkill Billâ
Yep.
Republicans are masters of the double-standard. One for them and another for anyone else who is in their way.
I just came to post the same thing. The interview was remarkable, and I have so much more empathy and respect for Ms. Lewinsky. She didnât cheat on anybody, Bill cheated on Hillary and if the two of them were ok with it, itâs really none of my business. No obstruction of justice, eitherâŚjust sayinâ.
Well, sure. But when your opponent is somehow running a child porn sex ring out of a pizza shopâŚwell the ends justify the means, just like Jesus said!
There was a rash of kiss 'n" tell stories in the tabloids in the 90âs, some of which went into almost clinical detail.
I wrote a snarky op/ed piece on the topic that got published in some newspaper in the northwest, name of which Iâve forgotten.
Yep, guys can be real jerks.
Bill Clinton (D-Sexual Predator) should have resigned immediately. His inability to control his dick even while President lead directly to George W. Bush becoming President and the tragedy that has followed ever since.
And it wasnât just consenting sex between two adults. A President having secret affairs in the Oval Office is a huge national security threat. End. Of. Story.
With President Al Gore, we might have been able to stop the sixth mass extinction. We donât even have a chance now. Nature is collapsing around us, and almost nobody but scientists are paying any attention.
Exactly. There has never been a Democratic FBI Director. Obama and Bidenâs quixotic quest for bipartisanship destroyed his presidency and the Democratic Party and led to their complete loss of power in DC.
The Democrats are forever the frogs giving rides to scorpions.
Do you mean the independent counsel, rather than special?
I saw it too and she impressed me with how level headed she is now and funny.
She was very young, she was in a very subordinate position and Bill should not have done it. I donât care if she jumped him and begged - which she didnât - he still shouldnât have. He was the fucking President. And he knew they were watching him.
You could get that book about 3 days after Starr turned in his report, right? Seemed that quickly at the time.