The Clinton DoJ charged Bill Clinton with Obstruction of Justice and Lying under oath

[uponit7771]

... this is from FAUX News.

Nepoliono is saying the OLC guidance should ... NOT ... have stopped Mueller and they're all gob smacked at why Mueller didn't charge or is not going to testify in front of congress or its something they're continuing to bring up along with Barr's lying about Mueller's decision not to charge with obstruction.

Mueller needs to testify before congress... PERIOD

[CrispyQ]

1. There are two sets of rules. One for republicans & one for democrats.

I am so sick of this GD hypocritical double standard!

[uponit7771]

2. +1

[onenote]

3. When did the Clinton DOJ do that?

Clinton never had criminal charges brought against him. And the Independent Prosecutor's office (Ken Starr), unlike the Special Counsel's office, was independent from and did not report to, the DOJ.

[uponit7771]

4. You're correct, it was Starr who claimed Clinton lied under oath.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/gperjury092498.htm

Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr's report to Congress alleged that President Clinton committed perjury, obstructed justice, tampered with witnesses and abused power. Of the 11 counts laid out by Starr, five allege that Clinton lied under oath in his Jan. 17 deposition in the Paula Jones case and again in his Aug. 17 grand jury testimony.

[hlthe2b]

5. That's right...

In Nixon v. U.S., the Court concluded the President was not immune from a grand jury subpoena, and in Clinton v. Jones, the Court held the President was not immune from a civil suit for damages arising out of his conduct prior to his inauguration. Nevertheless, the Clinton-appointed OLC, citing the 1973 opinion, concluded that Clinton was immune from prosecution.

[GulfCoast66]

6. No. They did not.