This post is by Caleb Howe from Mediaite
Click here to view on the original site: Original Post
The special prosecutor who investigated President Bill Clinton, an investigation that led to impeachment, said on Face the Nation Sunday that Donald Trump has a “moral obligation” to sit down with current special counsel Robert Mueller. The name Kenneth Starr has long been a bad word in Clinton circles, but today the former Solicitor General of the United States turned his attention to Donald Trump. Host Margaret Brennan asked if this is a political witch hunt, as President Trump has repeatedly characterized it, or whether it’s a serious investigation. “It’s definitely a serious case,” said Starr. “We know that from the indictments and guilty pleas that’ve already been obtained.” Starr said Mueller is just “following the evidence” and that he is “very seriously” investigating. Brennan pointed out that Starr ultimately had to subpoena Bill Clinton before he actually sat for an interview, and asked whether he would advise to sit with Mueller were he advising Trump. “I think they better be cautious, and I think they are being cautious,” Starr said, adding that as a defense lawyer you never want your client to be exposed in such a way. On the question of whether Trump has an “obligation” to sit and answer Mueller’s questions, Starr’s answer was in parts.
STARR: I think there may be a moral obligation, frankly, because he is the president of the United States. And unless he takes very decisive action, such as directing the firing of the special counsel – and there’s been no suggestion to my knowledge that’s in the offing at all–Coming from Kenneth Starr, that moral obligation line should mean something to those Republicans who places so much emphasis on moral code and honesty in the Clinton case.
BRENNAN: But you believe he could?
STARR: Oh yes, the President clearly has the authority to direct the firing if not a direct firing himself.
BRENNAN: What would that signify to you?
STARR: It would be, I think..it’s a political question, I don’t think it’s obstruction of justice, and I disagree with those who seem to find obstruction of justice in almost anything the president has done. But it certainly would be, I think, a political firefight of the highest order, because you have people in both parties saying ‘this is an authorized investigation, let it run its course.'”