Excerpt from Kenneth Starr's Press Conference, February 22, 1997

Q. If it's so important to stay on the investigation in order to keep the confidence in it, why would you have stepped down in the first place?

A. I frankly was of the view that my role, as I had articulated it, was at such a stage that it would have been appropriate for me to step down in August and to assume the duties at Pepperdine. But it is my judgment that setting an arbitrary date was unwise. It was incorrect. In retrospect, it was a mistake for me to set an arbitrary date in which I would conclude my duties as independent counsel.

Q. But did you think it was going to go on and be completed in due course?

A. It was my sense that my role and responsibility could be discharged during the time that was left for me to serve as independent counsel. But it is my sense, and I have been in collaboration with my colleagues in the office, that that was an unwise judgment on my part.

Q. Did you consult with those colleagues before you made your announcement?

A. I consulted inadequately with my colleagues at the office. And I have since, since I have trumpeted the concerns with respect to the need in the exercise of governmental responsibility, especially this kind of responsibility, that there be a process, that there be in fact a procedure and a process that, if it's understood by the American people, will be understood as essentially a microcosm of the justice department and a well-functioning United States attorney's office, operating with integrity, operating with professionalism.

I believe that exists. I believe it exists now. I think it has existed for some time. But it is also clear to me, including from communications from outside the investigation, that that vision that I had articulated as recently as two days ago was an insufficient and incomplete view of my role, my responsibilities.

Q. But when you say you consulted inadequately, did they raise the concerns and you just didn't hear them?

A. I'm not going to --

Q. Did they not raise the concerns or did you not solicit their concerns?

A. I am taking, Mike, responsibility for the decision that I made, including the fact that I do not believe in retrospect that I adequately consulted with my colleagues. So, as Fiorello La Guardia would say, when I make a mistake, it's a beaut. I try not to make mistakes. I do make mistakes. But it is an example, by the way, of I've learned my own lesson, the importance of the deliberative process that I have been trumpeting.

Q. Has the events of the last couple of days with the Asian-American connection of possible money laundering given you more impetus, and maybe you thought it over again, or has there been some pressure for you to stay on in light of these new revelations?

A. No, I can't comment on any aspect of the substance of our ongoing work. It really was a determination that in order for public confidence to be what it needs to be in this investigation, that it was our considered judgment, and I think it was shared by each person in the office, that I should remain on with no arbitrary date for departure. And so what I have done is to determine to commit to the completion of the work of this office with no arbitrary time limit set on that. ...

Q. You now realize that you embody the investigation?

A. No, I -- it is a sense that there has been, I think, a sense on the part of my colleagues in the office, informed by their professional judgment, their professional experience, that it is unwise for the person who has been designated to lead the office to leave the office at a specific time.

Q. Some will view today's position as a suggestion that strong evidence that implicates the Clintons in this investigation has emerged. Would you react to that?

A. I can't comment at all on the evidence. I can't be issuing reports with respect to the ongoing work of the grand jury. And I think it's important for the American people to understand that basic fact. If I stand here and report facts, I will be in violation of the law. I cannot do that, either as a matter of conscience and duty or law. So I can't be commenting about that.

What I can say is what is in the public domain. And what is in the public domain is that there a number of persons, including most recently Mr. McDougal, who have entered into discussions with the government in our ongoing effort to understand all the facts. ...

Q. One of the things that's been hanging over people's head, of course, is -- hanging over the heads of both Clintons -- whether or not they may get indicted, which is a pretty important thing to be hanging over their heads and over the head of the country. Do you have any idea when you might reach some evaluative judgment on that, and if so, will you then tell the American people that you either are going to or aren't going to seek prosecution?

A. I think other than to indicate what I've already indicated, that it's inappropriate for me, for reasons that I've learned, Jack, very firmly in the last few days, it is a wrong thing for me, understanding full well the interests of the country in bringing these matters to an orderly and fair conclusion one way or the other, but I think it would be a mistake for me to be placing time frames on it, and I've learned that lesson the hard way. ...

Q. Did any of your subordinates tell you flat out that they thought you were making a mistake?

A. In so many words. I think that there was a fairly broad-based sense that I had made a mistake.