Thread by @JewhadiTM

To those claiming that if it was anyone but Trump, (@HillaryClinton for one, and currently Baghdad @BWilliams and panel), then Bill Clinton should have been in handcuffs, as well as Hillary.

Report, Rebuttal Offer House Stark Contrast
washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politic…

Kenneth W. Starr's report confronts members of Congress with the daunting task of analyzing difficult questions of criminal law, and vaguely defined constitutional standards for impeachment.

Were Clinton an ordinary target in a “run-of-the-mill criminal investigation”, it is highly unlikely, that evidence upon which Starr bases his impeachment argument that Clinton lied under oath, obstructed justice, & tampered with a witness would have resulted in criminal charges

But Starr's report depicts the president's alleged offenses as conduct that not only is unlawful, but goes to the heart of his constitutional duties.

Invoking "the enormous trust and responsibility attendant to his high office," the report argues that Clinton, perhaps more than any other citizen, has "a manifest duty to ensure that his conduct at all times complies with the law of the land."

Starr's 11 grounds for possible impeachment of the president break down into three categories:

Perjury – Clinton lied under oath about his relationship w/Monica Lewinsky & related matters, both during his deposition in Paula Jones sexual harassment suit, and grand jury testimony

Obstruction of justice – in trying to cover up the relationship, encouraging Lewinsky to lie about it, helping her get a job, trying to influence the testimony of his secretary, Betty Currie, and thwarting the subsequent grand jury investigation of his actions.

Official misconduct – including lying to the public and Congress about his relationship with Lewinsky, balking at testifying before the grand jury, and invoking executive privilege –

— that "constitute[s] an abuse of authority inconsistent with the president's constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws."

Legal experts said Starr's strongest evidence and clearest arguments appear to lie in the allegations of perjury, and particularly the charge that Clinton lied about the nature of his sexual encounters with Lewinsky.

They said that the independent counsel's evidence on the questions of obstruction and witness-tampering are, as the report acknowledges, largely circumstantial; the report offers no "smoking gun" of a Watergate-style conspiracy to thwart investigators

The weakest part of Starr's case, they said, is the attempt to transform some of the president's actions, particularly his court battles on executive privilege, into violations of his constitutional duties.

"There is substantial and credible information that the President's lies about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky were abundant and calculating," the Starr report alleges, and that claim of perjury forms the core of the case against Clinton.

Four of the 11 grounds for impeachment cited by Starr are allegations of perjury in Clinton's deposition in the Jones case and a fifth accuses Clinton of perjury in his grand jury testimony last month.

Perjury is generally a difficult crime to prove (unless you’re Mueller or Obama’s FBI and the victim knows Trump), because prosecutors must show that a defendant not only made false statements but knowingly lied.

But as the Starr report set out, some of the alleged false statements – for example, whether Clinton ever remembered being alone with Lewinsky and his recollections of the gifts they exchanged – did not involve possible misinterpretations of badly phrased questions.

Most members of Congress have said that the biggest areas of jeopardy for the president concern possible obstruction of justice – in allegedly coaching Lewinsky or Currie to lie...

... in ensuring that Lewinsky did not turn over to the Jones lawyers the gifts from the president that they had subpoenaed, or in helping secure a job for Lewinsky during the period when the Jones lawyers were seeking her testimony.

On that score, the Starr report yesterday provided extensive new evidence about Clinton's intense personal involvement in helping Lewinsky obtain a job.

For example, the report says that immediately after Clinton learned that Lewinsky was on the witness list for the Jones case, his efforts to help her find a job intensified.

"It is not a technical statute book question but whether this is worthy of undoing a national election," said Yale Law School professor Akhil Reed Amar. "That's what the debate should be about.“

So, Trump should be locked up for as yet, nothing, and his rightful election undone, but not a proven perjured obstructionist, guilty of official misconduct, to be removed from office and locked up.