>>5486620 (lb)
Q's post #2937 got me to thinking about Bob Barr's role in Bill Clinton's Impeachment, so I did a search and came across this article written by Barr in 2018 about the sealed evidence against Clinton that has never been disclosed publicly. During Bill Clinton's Impeachment Trial, only 'publicly known evidence' was allowed to be used against Clinton. The sealed, Non Public Evidence could not be used, according to Impeachment rules set in place by the then Senate.
Just what is in those hidden files, that has been, and continues to be hidden by Congress? What is the evidence that is being Kept from the public about Bill Clinton? Is there corresponding FBI and DOJ files that can and will be used against Clinton by Barr, thus rendering the sealed impeachment evidence files redundant and thus moot?
The Logical Thinking Guess would be Yes.
Here in his article, Barr flat-out says Bill Clinton is a Sexual Predator who escaped justice. Barr also uses this article to implore the then-Republican House of Reps to Unseal the Non-Public Impeachment Investigation Evidence Against Clinton, because that evidence could then be used to defend the then Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh against scorched-earth accusations by the Democrats: "Clearly, one of the avenues down which the Democrats will travel in their Blitzkrieg, will be to attack Kavanaugh for his role as a lawyer assisting Ken Starr in preparing his Report to the House. The Independent Counsel Report laid out the evidence showing that Clinton engaged in offenses impeachable under Article I of the Constitution. In the coming confirmation maelstrom, it is a virtual certainty that Kavanaugh’s detractors will claim evidence was manufactured, manipulated, and misapplied in order to secure the President’s impeachment."
But that didn't happen. The Dems did not accuse Kavanaugh, as an attorney working with the Independent Counsel, as having engaged in a purely partisan campaign against Clinton, designed for the sole purpose of impeaching a despised president. They did not assert that the charges against Clinton were based on evidence that was manipulated, deliberately exaggerated, mischaracterized, and unfounde[d]. Was Barr wrong or was this a warning shot across the Democrat bow to 'don't go there or else we will unseal Clinton's Non Public Evidence?
Why didn't the Dems mention Kavanaugh's role in Clinton's Impeachment like Barr had predicted they would? The only Logical reason I can think of is that the Non-Public Clinton Impeachment Evidence is so scandelously damaging, that the Dems could not risk that evidence becoming Public a couple of months prior to the 2018 Mid-term elections, and for no other logical reason.
Now, WHY do you Anons think the Republican Controlled House in 2018 didn't heed Barr's call to Unseal Clinton's Non-Public Impeachment Evidence? Would we have won the House too if they had?
Or is there a bigger plan for this hidden evidence? Is that same evidence available to the now Attorney General Barr in a different form within the DOJ and FBI files and Unsealing by the House is moot/unnecessary? Let's hope Barr intends to go Scorched-Earth across the Clintons with all available and Hidden/Sealed Evidence.
http://bobbarr.org/2018/07/11/unseal-clinton-impeachment-files-now/