Jump to content

Talk:Starr Report

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

POV

[edit]

This page is absurdly biased, incomplete, and essentially advocates as an attack on the document it purports to explain. A previous commenter wrote "Wow." and I think that understates the degree of bias in this piece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.122.116.114 (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given the comments above and my personal opinion on the style of this article, I marked with POV in addition to ONESOURCE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llappall (talkcontribs) 01:09, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Llappall - Just added to Starr Report, the 11 points, so it’s no longer ONESOURCE and at least better by having more material that makes the prior POV a lesser factor. Tags have been removed. Just for completeness thought I should post: Was there anything else you particularly had in mind for here ? Cheers Markbassett (talk) 02:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Details Of The Report

[edit]

It would be great to have some details of what the report says and the evidence it provided before attacking the accuracy of the report. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorryasshere154 (talkcontribs) 06:27, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well there a google provides some reflections, not sure what would be good to add ... I think the Starr report description would be it, any comparison that the Mueller report is not the same basis (DOJ private report vs Congressional Independent prosecutor) or style would be a discussion for the general article.
--- Rebuttal ---
--- Complaints things were missed and/or that files were sealed
Maybe I'll just do the 11 grounds and skip the rebuttal and complaints about what was not gone into. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]