[
When Kenneth Starr put out the Star Report, he had hundreds of pages of hard evidence against Clinton. Mueller so far, has zero. At least he hasn't shown anything yet.
The hard evidence you claim is highly debatable and controversial, but even if your claim is given the benefit of the doubt, it should be noted that Starr took over the Special Counsel position from Robert Fiske in August of 1994 who had begun his investigation in January of that year. Hence, Starr took over an already half year plus investigation. The Starr Report, came out in early September 1998, almost a full four years after Starr took over the already 6 plus months investigation. So, you are comparing Mueller's special counsel status of just short of one year to Kenneth Starr's over four years of investigations. Starr = 4 years + 6 months Mueller = 1 year -1 week
Only partially true. Yeah, he did take over for Robert Fiske. But the investigation was about the Whitewater scandal. We knew pretty quick what was going on.
As for the star report about Perjury, Witness Tampering, Obstruction of Justice, and everything else that surrounding the Monica scandal.... NO you are wrong.
Linda Tripp had recordings of the obstruction of justice, by the fall of 1997. The Drudge broke the story January of 1998, and Clinton was impeached that year, with most of the evidence against him, openly known.
It was months between criminal act, evidence collected, and charges brought. The Starr report was released in September of 98, not even a year later than the criminal act, and just months before impeachment. It was not 4 years. You are wrong.