General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsKen Starr: Kavanaugh would rule 'that no one is above the law'
By QUINT FORGEY 07/14/2018 01:18 PM EDT
Former Clinton independent counsel Ken Starr said Saturday that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, if confirmed, would not bend to President Donald Trumps will if a potential showdown with special counsel Robert Mueller sparked a constitutional crisis.
No, I think the country should have confidence that Brett Kavanaugh is going to set aside whatever his policy views are, and to say, What does the constitution call for? Starr told Fox News.
That's the law of the land, that no one is above the law, Starr added. That's the way, I'm confident, Judge Kavanaugh, if he becomes a justice, would rule. That a subpoena is a subpoena.
Kavanaugh, Trumps pick to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, served on Starrs team of investigators during the Whitewater probe, which led to the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/14/kavanaugh-trump-supreme-court-pick-ken-starr-mueller-subpoena-722202
Hey Starr, your Federalist Society brethren...............hates the Constitution that says "We the People" he has kinda ruled against the wishes of "We the People" and side's with items /corporations and other's let say that are not benefiting the "People" unless they have power and money ..............................just google Kavanaughs' ruling against people..........just think, Gore vs Bush, Heller and guns..........and his comments of privacy of health care.............and to trust him with a traitor...........no thanks..................your a piece of work Starr.............
November 2018 cannot get fast enough....................vote
rurallib
(62,406 posts)turbinetree
(24,695 posts)and now the right wing media............is trying to normalize this asshole................absolutely fucking amazing................this is the same "Society" that attacks the fifth estate....................
November 2018 cannot get here fast enough............................vote
Baitball Blogger
(46,699 posts)Solly Mack
(90,762 posts)That statement is meaningless unless put into practice and enforced.
dalton99a
(81,442 posts)PoorMonger
(844 posts)Turd in puchbowl claims punch is just fine - invites you to take a drink
skip fox
(19,356 posts)A graduate student at the time, Jack Gillis (now Dr. Jack Gillis), and I spent several months contesting that "The Talking Points" Starr used to extend his authority from Whitewater to "the Lewinsky affair," was not written by the President or the President's men, as Starr contended, but was probably written by Linda Tripp and then fed over the phone to Lewinsky to type up and give back to Tripp (who was wearing a wire for Starr at the time).
The real point, here, is that Starr knew the Talking Points document was bogus (because of irrefutable evidence Gillis and I pointed out such as it directly contradicted statements in Clinton's sealed deposition) and yet he continued to use them. He even would parry the arguments we would make to the press (CNN, large newspapers, columnists like Oliphant and Conason) week by week, delaying his report to Congress for several weeks until the dress blew everything out of the water.
As a Special Prosecutor, a high public official charged with upholding the law, he was LYING. And continues to lie.
I've never take his word on anything-
(Google "Talking Points" Fox Gillis for more.)