re: Did republicans hold closed door meetings impeaching Clinton?

Im good with that. I cant imagine what they even expect to glean from such info. It wasnt any presentation specifically as to Trump that was even put on front of the grand jury. That would be pretty strange if so because we had Mueller there telling us there was never any intent to determine whether Trump committed any crime. Thus a grand jury wouldn't quite be needed for Trump.

Buuut I guess they'd love to do some more of that interpretation and presumption and assumption and speculation, hoping to apply other peoples' cases to Trump. Silly silly.

Clinton's AG Reno appointed an Independent Counsel Starr to investigate Clinton's relations to Whitewater crimes.

As Starr pursued Whitewater, he kept running across other crimes committed by Clinton

Each time Starr reported findings back to Reno. Reno kept expanding his mission to include those crimes.

This investigation ultimately led to perjury connected with Paula Jones lawsuit - combined with suborning perjury and obstructing justice. Somehow the "blue dress" semen stains got into the mix and Clinton further abused his power to silence/protect/bribe Monica Lewinsky - including more perjury and suborning perjury from his secretary.

All this investigation was conducted by Kenneth Starr with rules written by Democrat congress after Watergate, and under the supervision of Clinton's AG Janet Reno - and was done as are all criminal investigations = grand juries to produce indictments.

Part of his mandate was to identify any crimes that may be relevant to Impeachment inquiries. Starr wrote a report - gave the results to Congress - and they voted to initiate an Impeachment inquiry.

After that point - the vast majority of all congressional hearings were public (may have been a few closed meetings)

All of the above is from my personal memory - but I was too busy working my arse off at NASA to pay absolute attention.

But nothing resembling this hoax of a clown show was ever even contemplated, let alone done.

This current conspiracy is a secret mission to try and find something that can be used to fool the public (with the assistance of the media) into cobbling together an "impeachment" foregone conclusion.

This is sedition writ large.

edit - any closed meetings were done to not further humiliate Clinton or the women he abused.

Clinton's defense team were directly involved in every step of the HoR process. The GOP bent over backward to afford them every possible protection and defense mechanism.

quote:

---

There were some closed door depositions.. AFTER a vote to open proceedings. Committee members were all there. Majority and minority chairs had equal subpoena powers. There was no one sided shite like this, and the vote was public.

---

Damn....









Don't you Trumptards ever get tired of always spewing idiocy and falsehoods? Even when what you're talking about will support a lot of your positions, if they are referenced correctly and accurately, but you STILL insist on referring to them inaccurately??

Don't you ever get that funny feeling deep inside to once - just ONCE - try to read a fricking book and educate yourself about what it is you always vomit about on this forum?? Just to see how it feels to actually get ONE thing right?


Damn.....


No, there were NO closed door depositions AFTER the vote to open proceedings. Kenneth Starr received approval from Attorney General Janet Reno to expand his Whitewater Investigation of President Clinton to include the possible perjury in the Paula Jones civil case.

Starr convened his Grand Jury on August 17, 1998. That was the infamous day that Clinton testified and gave his "it depends on what the meaning of the word "is", is..." statement.

On September 9, 1998, Starr submits his 445-page Starr Report to the House of Representatives. On Sept. 11, 1998, the House put the report on the internet for public consumption.

On September 21, 1998 video of the grand jury testimony by President Clinton was released to the US public by the House of Representatives.

October 8, 1998 - the Republican-led House votes to impeach President Clinton. The House Judiciary Committee chooses not to engage in it's own House-led investigation, but rather to rely on the Starr Report findings. The impeachment proceedings resumed during the post-election “lame duck” session of the 105th Congress.

On December 19, 1998 the House impeached Clinton of lying under oath and obstruction of justice charges. Two other counts failed, including one accusing Clinton of abuse of power.

January 7, 1999 the Senate begins the impeachment trial for President Clinton. Sitting Supreme Court Chief of Justice William Rehnquist presides as judge. On February 12, 1999 Clinton was acquitted on both counts as the Senate failed to render the minimum votes for conviction in either count.

No one in the House of Representatives were "all there" during the Starr Grand Jury proceedings. No one at the House of Representatives fully knew what was in the Starr Report until he dropped some 35 boxes of documents off with the Sergeant at arms at the Congressional buildings on Sept. 9th......

As far as majority and minority subpoena powers, that no longer exists for House Committee investigations, but that was a change at the hands of a Republican-held House in 2015, not by Democrats....


Please educate yourself at least some. This is YOUR country that you're being totally ignorant about.....

quote:

---

ETA...and Trump's explanation and actions, as they stand without twisting or alternate interpretation, they were perfectly acceptable and in line with same or similar arrangements that we've entered into with countless countries for countless years. Nothing off about his arrangement if it's exactly as he stated it.

---

Alternate interpretation, as in, standing Trump's explanations and actions against the truth, against what is legally allowed, and against what has historically been done under past Presidents.

Yeah, as long as we don't do any of that, then what Trump says and does, seems pretty OK....

Much of the investigation of Clinton was secret, especially by Starr, who was operating at the behest of the GOP.

quote:

---

DOJ cronies

---

Holder is gone.

I dont think there exists any other ways to address this with you. This is where further efforts to explain the simple reality only begin to sound more and more complicated.

Just keep this in mind: the truth in this situation is what was in Trump's mind, his intent - the only concrete evidence of which were his actual words. He used plain old straightforward words. How in God's name can you or anyone else not named Donald Trump determine what the truth was in his mind?? Especially given the fact, once again, that his convo with Uk's president used those straightforward words that make no reference to expecting oppo research or political dirt.

If you'll just take a time out and ponder how in the hell you or anyone else can seriously try to tell another human being that you know better than they do what they were thinking and intending.

quote:

---

I'm numb to it all now.....

---

You sure do post like an angry emotional fellow for someone who is numb to it.

quote:

---

bzzzzzzzzt. Wrong. Starr was a special counci, just like Mueller was. He was not a HofR investigator holding closed door meetings.

---

Starr was Independent Counsel, not Special Counsel. Based on the provisions of the Ethics of Government Act of 1978. During the Supreme Court Morrison v. Olson case, it was ruled that:

"With respect to all matters within the independent counsel's jurisdiction, the Act grants the counsel "full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions and powers of the Department of Justice, the Attorney General, and any other officer or employee of the Department of Justice."

Also:

"The Act also states that an independent counsel "shall, except where not possible, comply with the written or other established policies of the Department of Justice respecting enforcement of the criminal laws." 594(f). In addition, whenever a matter has been referred to an independent counsel under the Act, the Attorney General [487 U.S. 654, 663] and the Justice Department are required to suspend all investigations and proceedings regarding the matter. 597(a).

An independent counsel has "full authority to dismiss matters within [his or her] prosecutorial jurisdiction without conducting an investigation or at any subsequent time before prosecution, if to do so would be consistent" with Department of Justice policy. 594(g)."

This effectively made the Independent Counsel (IC) sort of a second Attorney General, for the cases he was appointed to investigate. The IC's appointment was permanent under the provisions of the Act unless he directs the Attorney General that he/she has completed his/her investigations for which he/she was appointed, or if he/she is terminated/impeached by the Attorney General due to good cause, physical disability or mental incapacity, or "any other condition that substantially impairs the performance of such independent counsel's duties."

Which meant by the law of the Act, an appointed Independent Counsel could hang around and act as sort of a Grand Inquisitor. This happened with Kenneth Starr, who was initially appointed to investigate the Clintons for the Whitewater scandal, which didn't amount to a whole lot, but Starr didn't officially wash his hands of that case, and then when the Paula Jones civil suit happened, and the possibly perjury regarding Lewinski happened, Starr petitioned then-Attorney General Janet Reno to allow him to take on that case, which Reno agreed. Starr did not finish up as the Independent Counsel on the Whitewater case - some other guy took over for him, who no one remembers without googling it up.

Some felt that the creation of the Independent Counsel, under the provisions of the Ethics in Government Act, gave the IC too much independence and too much prosecutorial powers, that it gave the Legislative Branch too much Judicial and Executive powers, which upset the balance of such power between the three branches of US government.

The Office of the Independent Counsel expired in 1999, and was replaced with the Office of the Special Counsel (SC), which is what Robert Mueller was. Now, the US Attorney General does not request a special panel of the Court of Appeals of DC to appoint: he/she directly appoints the Special Counsel him/herself, usually in cases where there is a conflict of interest and the AG should recuse him/herself (see P. Sessions-R. Mueller), or where it is felt that it would be in the public interest to appoint.

The Attorney General's office directs the SC on what to investigate. The legal jurisdiction and responsibility to report findings belong with the AG office. The SC in effect operates as a "special employee" (5 U.S.C. 7511(b)(2)(C)) of the Department of Justice.

This is intended to keep the balance of powers with the appropriate branches of power, but also means that now the SC reports directly to the DOJ, as opposed to the previous IC reporting to either the DOJ or to Congress.

This means now it gives the DOJ the opportunity to abuse its' powers - if in case it is the US President, who the DOJ answers to as Chief Executive - by withholding relevant evidence & documents compiled by a SC investigation, if that investigation was into the DOJ's or the President's activities, as the Mueller Investigation was.

That is what is so different from this Impeachment Inquiry and the previous three before it: this time, the parties that are being investigated have the authority to withhold possible relevant materials of evidence discovered via investigation, from the parties responsible by the US Constitution to conduct the Inquiry. Isn't that just great?

And the Trumptards are so outraged over the House wanting to conduct closed-door meetings with persons of interest.....

Dude, nobody is reading all that shite every time you decide to post.