Rating: 
Summary: Ken Starr is Vindicated!
Review: "The Truth at Any Cost" cuts through the hatefulClinton spin campaign against Ken Starr and his investigation ofClinton's subversion of the legal process and trampling of the rule of law and offers a clear-eyed and level-headed look at the truth behind Ken Starr and his inquiry. Starr's character is redeemed by this fascinating and insightful study and the facts it cites surrounding the investigation and how it was carried out, to say nothing of the vile depths the Clinton team went to in an attempt to bring down Starr as its only means of rescuing Clinton's soiled reputation. Ken Starr is shown in fact to be driven NOT by partisan politics, but rather by a devotion to justice and the rule of law. It is clear that what motivated Starr was his indignation over Clinton's contempt for the judicial process. Political motivations are scarcely in evidence in Starr's decision-making. If anything, Starr is portrayed as being too politically tone-deaf. Clinton is the one who comes out looking mean, partisan, hateful and on a vendetta, not to mention guilty of serious criminal malfeasance. It will be difficult for Clinton partisans to dismiss this book, as it is written by two of the nation's premier journalists from mainstream publications not known to be part of the "vast, right wing conspiracy." It will also be difficult for them to maintain the James Carville spin that the Starr investigation was about nothing more than investigating consensual sex. Anyone who comes away from this book still thinking Clinton was an innocent victim, rather than an abuser of his power to deny justice to one less powerful, and that Starr was anything other than a reasonable, fair, scholarly, yet maligned legal mind is too feircely partisan to be taken seriously. The book is balanced in making clear that Starr made mistakes in his investigation, but that they were errors made out of naivete or out of a lack of political sophistication. But there is little in this account to indicate that Starr was ever on a political "witch hunt." You would have to be in severe denial to not see that there was substance to the charges that drove Starr to put his professional reputation, his good name and even his life at risk in his brave pursuit of the truth...
Rating:
Summary: PLEASE read this book if you are undecided or confused...
Review: ...about who was right or wrong in the Lewinsky affair and why it matters. I read this book in just a couple of days. I watched the whole Lewinsky imbroglio with strange fascination like everyone else. As a conservative, I have to admit I was quick to "side" with the Independent Counsel. And this book, although written from an apolitical standpoint, buttressed my opinion in this sense: that history will record the sad but true fact that Ken Starr unflinchingly, and to his own peril, sought truth and justice at almost every single step of the way in this investigation. Equally, it is true that Clinton unflinchingly, and to his own peril, sought to AVOID truth and justice at almost every single step of the way in this investigation. Both Starr's and Clinton's reputations are permanently tarnished. But Starr's tarnishing is undeserved and will improve as time goes on. Clinton's reputation is, deservedly, unsalvagable. This book reads almost like you're watching a gripping docu-drama unfold before your eyes. It is excellent history, excellent reporting, and unrivaled for it's ability to wring information from both the OIC and White House. Thus far, if you are going to read one book about this sordid American episode, this is the one!An explanatory note: this book touches, but does not focus to any degree, on the media's role in this and also the impeachment proceedings. It's primary focus, however, is the inner machinations of the OIC and the White House from the time of Linda Tripp's bombshell until Starr's appearance before the House Judiciary Committee. For in depth coverage of the media, impeachment, etc aspects of this case, go elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: History meets readability
Review: As a history buff and a person who just oogled over the entire impeachment process (and who lost several bets concerning its outcome) I was anxious to read the books on the subject as they came out. Over the next 50 years (If I live that long) I expect to read many from all viewpoints not to mention history textbooks, which I collect. I suspect that I won't enjoy any of them as much as I enjoyed this one. This book is more that just about a historical event. It is, much like Mr. Shippers SELLOUT a book about right vs wrong, about principle. Unlike Mr. Shippers effort (which I enjoyed) this book flows. We see Starr and his staff, going forward, dodging and weaving 'round the obsticles put in their path by the White House and their friends. The story winds and keeps even one who knows the story in anticipation. The climax of the book Starr's appearance before the judiciary invokes all of the Mr. Smith Goes to Washington images that a person like me who should be more jaded lives for. It is a powerful testament to doing what you believe is right. It works as history, it works as storytelling and it most important it works by displaying all that is right about this country in the midst of all that is wrong.
Rating: 
Summary: An Easy Read, but More Balance Needed
Review: As an avid reader of history, but only a now-and-then reader of journalistic commentary/history, I found many details of what happened and why, but few important new details. It was very easy to read, and considering the number of names of key people in the investigation, the authors did and excellent job of keeping us informed of who was who. My first complaint is that the Clinton/White House side was given only a small percentage of the coverage in the book with the remainder going to the Starr Investigation. Of course the book was about the Starr investigation first and foremost, but the White House motivations and actions were not well explained, only, I presume, because the authors did not have access to them. The details in the thinking and conclusions of the Starr side were good and complete--not so the other side. My second and final complaint is that the basic thesis of the book that Starr was naive and single-minded in his approach does not pass muster. Starr showed his adroit skills throughout the process, as well as some of his blunders. Making him out to be naive is to say that he was innocent to a fault--a virute taken to an extreme became his vice. Clinton's side was never given such a look--they were always portrayed as mean-spirited and near-unethical--in other words, bad from the get-go. Such overarching characterizations take away from the larger message of the book.
Rating:
Summary: Informative and Enlightening
Review: From the first time I saw this book, I knew I wanted to read it. I wanted the inside story, something other than what the headlines told through the impeachment saga. This book fulfilled those expectations. As a stay at home mom, I had the time to give to watching the impeachment unfold. I took in as much information as I possibly could as it happened. Even so, there was information in this book that never reached the evening news or newspapers, so I found out some things I never knew before. Some have complained that this book gave more of the Independent Council's perspective rather than that of the White House. To those with such a complaint, I would say, note the title and cover of the book. It is about Ken Starr, not Bill Clinton. Naturally, his perspective is going to be more prominent than that of the White House. If that surprises you, I can't imagine why. Even though the book is about Ken Starr, it does not present him from a biased perspective, as near as I can gather. I am a conservative, so it is possible that I could have missed something, but it seemed to me well balanced. You got a clear picture of Starr (and other's in his office) for his strengths AND his weaknesses. You can't help but wonder if perhaps some of those flaws had not been a part of the story, maybe the outcome would have been different. It is a worthwhile read, for those who want to catch up with what happened in the Monica Lewinsky situation as well as those who soaked up every detail as it happened. There is new information there for everyone.
Rating:
Summary: Kinda Disappointing
Review: I can't put my finger on it, but I was left with a dissatisfied feeling after reading this book. They do a fine job of telling what happened from Ken Starr's perspective, but too often I was overwhelmed by the minutae of what they were discussing. While far less polemical than the other takes on L'Affaire Lewinski, I just didn't get excited reading this book.
Rating:
Summary: Power over truth
Review: So Bill Clinton had his men muscle poor Ken Starr who did a fabulous job exposing this infidel. Clinton was disbarred and impeached but still allowed to finish his term, hand out pardons to criminals, steal furniture from the white house and take the economy right down the toilet. I gues that saying about the golden rule: "the man with gold makes the rules" is very true. Another reason why I am glad that I am no longer a democrat. Or is that democ(rat).
Rating: 
Summary: Finally The Truth About Ken Starr And Bill Clinton
Review: The authors have done the nation a service by laying out the truth behind the Starr-Clinton battle. Kenneth Starr comes across as a very honorable and honest person, although politically naive if not incompetent. The Clintons, their administration and their defenders, come across as absolute low-lifes who would resort to anything to avoid the truth. The book contains very little that's new to those who kept abreast of the situation from internet sources, but may be of considerable value to those who relied on the main-stream media. The only comment in the book with which I strenuously disagreed was the authors' calling Matt Drudge an internet gossip columnist. Now that most of the facts have come out, the Drudge Report was the best site to gather the truth and the whole truth. In retrospect he did the best in-depth reporting of the scandals. That is why I am disappointed in the authors disparaging Mr. Drudge. Do they want us to continue listening to a left-wing mainstream media that not only slants the news, but much worse, censures the news or just ignores many newsworthy items that would be critical of the Clinton administration?
Rating: 
Summary: Merely a disguised effort at advocacy
Review: This book is very well researched and tells a whole lot about the investigation of President Clinton. Ostensibly the point of view is very forgiving toward Starr & Co. and vilifies Clinton et al. However, amidst the entire righteous warrior vs power run amok blather, there are clear indications of the true nature of the investigation. After reading this book I am left with the sense that the lack of popularity of the OIC and Starr is completely justified. Here is a group of ego-driven individuals who have one thing in mind:"...get the guy." And now knowing that 200 FBI agents were assigned to this investigation at the very time al-Qaida terrorist cells were being formed, within the jurisdiction of the FBI, for the 9/11 attacks, I am very jaded about this investigation indeed.
Rating:
Summary: A hard hitting and balanced account
Review: This is a hard hitting and fascinating look behind the scenes of one of the most sensational investigations in history. Not being particularly partisan myself, I found it to be balanced and equally unflattering to both sides, often in ways not consistent with the news reports. During the investigation, I never found the Ken Starr described by the media to be consistent with the man I saw giving Congressional testimony. This book presents a more believable picture of the real Ken Starr. I am now convinced that it was not some right wing vendetta, but rather a quixotic quest by a politically naïve, high minded and truth obsessed prosecutor whose idealistic view of the legal system stood in the way of his effectiveness. While Starr may have out-lawyered the Clinton team in the courts, his single-minded and hubristic belief that truth would lead to justice caused many political missteps that handed his opposition all the ammunition they needed to destroy him in the arena of public opinion.... . This treatment emphasized the OIC perspective far more than that of the White House and in that way I felt it to be an incomplete account. However, that which was included was very insightful and revealing. The OIC was always subject to wild speculation and unsubstantiated attacks because of their inability to speak openly about the investigation. Though I'm sure the prosecutors took the opportunity in their interviews to put their own positive spin on events, this book at least gives their side, and in that way it is a valuable addition to the historical record. An intriguing book. I definitely recommend it.
|
