Fox News anchor Chris Wallace rejected former Clinton-era independent counsel Ken Starr for criticizing the House impeachment process.
Wallace took issue with Starr claiming that the allegations against Trump were “narrow” and slanted.”
“When you compare this to the Clinton impeachment, which was basically about whether or not the president had lied under oath about sex—I’m not talking about whether or not this story is true or not—but the allegation that President Trump conditioned support for a key foreign policy ally on political benefit to him strikes me as not narrow but far broader than the Clinton impeachment and the effort that was made by you and Republicans then to impeach him,” Wallace explained.
Wallace rejects Starr’s Senate argument:
Starr also argued that the House should drop the impeachment probe because Trump is likely to be acquitted in the Senate.
Wallace pointed out that “there was certainly never any prospect that Bill Clinton was going to be removed.”
“The House and you to some degree participated in impeaching [Clinton], Wallace told Starr. “Not saying there was anything wrong with that but I’m simply saying it seems there is a very different standard in how the Clinton impeachment went and how this impeachment is being judged.”
“It seems to be a much bigger issue—whether or not you believe the president did it is a different issue—but it’s about an issue of foreign policy, national security,” he added. "The security of our elections. It is a much bigger issue than whether or not Bill Clinton lied about sex.”
Starr is not buying it:
Despite being presented with his own past impeachment role, Starr insisted that there was no “bipartisan support of this impeachment inquiry” and “we have not seen proof that a crime has been committed.”
“That seems to me to be a very relevant fact,” Starr said. “When some president has committed actual federal felonies, then that puts, it seems to me, the impeachment inquiry in a very different context.”
He added that the Democrats’ view that Trump “a clear and present danger to national security” is an “extravagant claim.”
