Former Massachusetts Governor and Republican candidate for president Bill Weld joined Boston Herald Radio’s “Morning Meeting” program to share his thoughts on the Mueller probe, Attorney General William Barr and the Trump presidency.

Q: Governor, talk to us about the ongoing and ever-changing situation going on with the Mueller Report.

A: I worked closely with Mueller in the Justice Department, he was my deputy and I think the world of him. I actually think he did the country a favor by laying out all of that evidence in the second volume of that report. And you probably saw in the last couple of days something like 750 former U.S. federal prosecutors, including myself, that signed a letter saying that volume two in the report sets out several instances of obstruction of justice by the president and it’s not even a close call — telling people to lie, that’s not even a close call as obstruction of justice — so I really don’t agree with Attorney General Bill Barr, who’s a hell of a lawyer and I don’t really understand why he’s gone down this line, but he says you can’t indict a president for obstruction, and that’s just not the law. I worked on the [President Richard] Nixon impeachment back in 1974 and he refused to comply with subpoenas and that was Article Three of impeachment against him.

Q: So you feel as though certainly taking issue with the way that Bill Barr had put this together, and by the way, what do you think of the fact that they did this in advance? Do you feel as though Bill Barr was successful in really getting their spin to cement, to take hold … of the American mind?

A: …I think volume two makes it clear that if it had been up to Mueller that there would have been charges sought against the president, possibly they would have been sealed so that they wouldn’t interfere with the president’s conduct of his duties. But there would have been charges sought and I think that would have been entirely proper. And I think Mueller did a good thing for the country in setting all of the evidence out there so people can draw their own conclusions. But if you read that volume two, particularly the end of it — I think it was pages 178 to 183 — he even makes it clear that the president acted with the necessary corrupt intent, so all the elements of the offense were there.

Q: Gov. Weld, would it be healthy for the country to impeach over a charge that had to do with an investigation where he was found not to have colluded?

A: He wouldn’t be charged based on anything to do with coordination or conspiracy with the Russians because Bob Mueller found that not to be the case. And Bob Mueller is a very thorough prosecutor; if there was evidence there he would have found it. No, I was talking about the separate charge of the investigation. Now the question would it be healthy for the country for the president impeached, like I say the 750 federal prosecutors make it pretty clear — the evidence is there. Does that mean Congress should go ahead? That’s entirely up to the House. Under the Constitution, the House has the sole power of impeachment. Now that’s a lot of raw power in Article One of the Constitution and it’s in the hands of Congress, so Mueller I think appropriately said, “Listen, I’m going to set out all of the facts that I, Bob Mueller, found and I’m leaving it up to Congress.” I think that’s exactly what he should have done.

Q: Gov. Weld, would it behoove the Democrats to go forward on impeachment or could it backfire in the election?

A: Oh it absolutely could backfire. But the election is 18 months away now, that’s a long time and a lot can change. Certainly my reading, and I can’t prove this, but my reading of the situation in Washington now is that President Trump and the Republicans are almost daring the Democrats to go ahead and impeach and the president has made it pretty plain — he doesn’t want to get into any discussions with the House Judiciary Committee or anybody else. He’s says we’re just not going to comply with any of these subpoenas because they’re partisans … and that to me is the president really not living up to his responsibility as a co-equal branch of government. In fact, it’s the House and the Senate that are in Article One of the Constitution, so they’ve got the primary power under the Constitution. And I think the president is ignoring that as he and his campaign have made pretty clear in the last few days that their position is there is no primary, there is no election; we don’t have to do anything and that harks back to President Nixon who was indicted and had to quit because of failure to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. That’s a core responsibility of the president and I don’t see this administration living up to that one, not by a long shot.