During NBC News live special coverage of the Senate impeachment trial on Monday, Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd completely snapped while talking about Trump defense team lawyer Ken Starr, whom he compared to a “bank robber” and accused of having “define[d] impeachment downward” during the proceeding against Bill Clinton.
As the trial entered a brief mid-afternoon break, NBC legal analyst Berit Berger observed: “I thought Ken Starr’s arguments to start off the day were interesting, to say the least....he was arguing that we’ve had too many impeachments and that we’re making it too easy to go about this process. Which aside from sort of the ironic nature of this coming from Ken Starr, it really just isn’t borne out by the facts.”
Moments later, Todd weighed in and just lost it: “Can I just make – Berit, I thought you were being very deferential or diplomatic on the Ken Starr thing. I’ll say it less diplomatically, this is akin to a bank robber complaining that banks were too easy to rob.”
The rest of the panel simply laughed as Nightly News anchor Lester Holt joked: “I would say that’s the most diplomatic.”
Todd continued his tirade:
I was just astonished. It is astonishing that Ken Starr is lamenting that’s become too easy to use impeachment, when, by any measure, the Clinton impeachment is something that a lot of people have debated, left and right, about did it sort of define impeachment downward? That that is the impeachment that isn’t like the others.
The unglued NBC political director concluded: “And so, to then use that impeachment, have Ken Starr, the sort of architect of it, make the case....I think the argument would have been more legitimate had they not had Ken Starr making the argument.”
Such disparagement of Starr only reaffirms the fact that the liberal media never thought the impeachment of Bill Clinton was legitimate, even as they hail the impeachment of President Trump as a constitutional necessity.
Here is a transcript of the January 27 coverage:
2:54 PM ET
(...)
LESTER HOLT: First of all, Berit, the arguments that they’ve brought forward so far, how do they play?
BERIT BERGER [NBC LEGAL ANALYST]: Well, I think they’re working with what they have. I mean, I thought Ken Starr’s arguments to start off the day were interesting, to say the least. I mean, sort of boiled down to its essential core, he was arguing that we’ve had too many impeachments and that we’re making it too easy to go about this process. Which aside from sort of the ironic nature of this coming from Ken Starr, it really just isn’t borne out by the facts. I mean, we really have only had in the last 20 years, you know, one presidential impeachment of Donald Trump and two judicial impeachments. So we have not seen sort of the flood gates opening and, you know, an impeachment every year. It is still a measured process. So it was an interesting way to start this day.
(...)
2:58 PM
CHUCK TODD: Can I just make – Berit, I thought you were being very deferential or diplomatic on the Ken Starr thing. I’ll say it less diplomatically, this is akin to a bank robber complaining that banks were too easy to rob. [Laughter]
LESTER HOLT: I would say that’s the most diplomatic. What would you say, Berit? [Laughter]
ANDREA MITCHELL: She’s an attorney, Chuck.
TODD: I was just astonished. It is astonishing that Ken Starr is lamenting that’s become too easy to use impeachment, when, by any measure, the Clinton impeachment is something that a lot of people have debated, left and right, about did it sort of define impeachment downward? That that is the impeachment that isn’t like the others.
And so, to then use that impeachment, have Ken Starr, the sort of architect of it, make the case that, you know, “Oh, man, we’re having impeachments every 20 years now.” And you’re like, wait a minute. It was – I do think they could have found – I think the argument would have been more legitimate had they not had Ken Starr making the argument.
(...)
