Last week I sent many of Salon's staff a copy of an Atlanta Journal Constitution front page, above-the-fold story from their Sept. 9th edition. It concerned the fact that Kenneth Starr and his infamous Chicago law firm, Kirkland and Ellis, were cited for "obstructing justice and defrauding the court" in Georgia with respect to the infamous GM exploding gas tank case that had been in litigation for years.
In light of the fact that Starr and Co. have been repeatedly cited for what amounts to lying and deceiving the courts of several jurisdictions (see the Mother Jones story in their February 1998 edition), don't you think this might be a matter that your readers would want to consider in relation to today's story — involving an Appeals Court ruling by Judge Laurence Silberman(!) et al?
Mr. Starr seems to be VERY concerned about his public reputation in Washington regarding his citation of contempt of court for his massive and illegal leaking operation of several years' duration in his investigations into President Clinton.
Isn't this also a 'character' question?
Mr. Starr has been found to be perfectly willing to lie and to obstruct numerous state courts as a corporate lawyer, and has been cited for doing this repeatedly.
Perhaps your readers might want this information to better judge whether or not Starr might be similarly inclined to lie to a Federal magistrate and/or the Justice Dept. as well!
Perhaps the fact that Starr & Co.'s lies were about the very real incineration of HUNDREDS of people, probably unnecessarily at the hands of a highly negligent but very rich multinational corporation doesn't count for much in Washington or where the power elites meet to gather over champagne lunches.
Down here in Georgia, where we can see the victims of these corporate policies, it matters. It mattered to the jury that awarded the victims of this widely known design flaw a record amount in punitive damages.
Which is the higher moral value here?
A.)The continuing decade long cover-up of the hundreds of smoking charred bodies of the men, women and children wrongfully incinerated alive due to the deliberate negligence of a corporations' bottom line; or
B.) Zealously and probably illegally prosecuting the twice duly elected head of state of the world's only remaining superpower over 'lying' about legal and consensual 'sex', that amounted to only 9-11 instances of not very successful exercises at oral gratification?
That, in a nutshell, is Kenny's world view and his moral universe.
In short, why should a corporate shill like Ken Starr be allowed to so easily hide his lying and his ignominy from the scrutiny of the world? After all, he has so plainly made it a point of personal and professional honor to expose all others he encountered in his operations to date!