I heard this a.m., that Starr said she committed perjury. What I don’t understand is why in the hell did he NOT prosecute her if that’s true.
So now dozens of years later, he admits she was a filthy stinking criminal. Sure could have used an indictment.
It’s not like we didn’t know all this....the Demorats weren’t about to have Hillary prosecuted then any more than they’re doing now.....we’ve all seen the measures still taken to protect the Clintons and the Obamas to date.....however they are no longer in charge of this country so the ‘revelations’ and unfolding of all their corruption is what they’re now fighting so hard to keep in the dark.
He said there wasn’t enough real evidence to convict. And if you’re going to indict the First Lady, who had enormous support at the time (from the Left, but around 50% of Americans), you had better have solid proof of your accusations.
He clearly said it would be impossible to convict her for all her, “I don’t remember” ‘s.........not something you can prove/disprove in a court of law.......