-Caveat Lector-
Electronic Telegraph
Tuesday 28 September 1999
'I have few regrets over the public shaming of Clinton'
A year ago the world could talk of nothing but Bill Clinton,
Monica Lewinsky and the man who had forced them to disclose every
sordid detail of their affair: Ken Starr. On the eve of a lecture
in London, he talks to Daniel Johnson.
THE President was impeached for high crimes and misdemeanours,
and censured by Congress but he is still in the White House.
Since then Mr Starr, the Independent Counsel, has kept his own
counsel.
Today he will deliver a lecture before a packed hall of
Telegraph readers, chaired by the Daily Telegraph's editor,
Charles Moore, under the auspices of the Institute of United
States Studies at London University. On the eve of this, his
first big public appearance since he almost drove a president
from office, he spoke to me in his hotel.
The grimly bespectacled prosecutor is only the public face. In
private he is a witty and benign companion. He enjoys a Martini
and is relaxed on the subject of sex: by no means the prudish
teetotaler portrayed by the White House. One of the best legal
minds of his generation, he speaks in perfectly grammatical
sentences, with the same exhaustive precision as his celebrated
report.
By doing his duty with such thoroughness, Mr Starr has almost
certainly sacrificed his ambition of becoming a justice on the
Supreme Court. He is still a hero to many. While we had dinner,
two Americans came up to our table to shake his hand: "A damn
fine job you did, Mr Starr."
He cannot disguise his withering contempt for Mr Clinton's
failure to face the consequences of his mendacity. But he does
not hate the President, who treated him "graciously" when grilled
by the Grand Jury. Hillary Clinton is another matter: they have
met three times and evidently detest one another.
Mr Starr brought no charges against her over Whitewater. That
did not deter the First Lady from smearing him. Was she fit to
run for the Senate in New York? "No comment."
Was last year's Lewinsky crisis worthwhile? "Yes. It was most
unfortunate for the country to have to go through this ordeal.
But there was evidence of serious wrong-doing."
He is gratified that "the report's accuracy is, I believe,
generally accepted". It was for Congress, not him, to reach a
political judgment on what to do with the President. He accepts
that judgment.
Mr Starr refuses to admit to personal feelings of disappointment
or anger at the President's clinging to office. But "I was struck
by the fact that so many commentators and editorial boards across
the country felt that [resignation] would have been the right and
honourable thing to do."
What of Miss Lewinsky? Did he not regret her personal distress?
"She - as an obviously highly intelligent young adult, a
professional, a college graduate - made a most unfortunate
judgment, and that was that she would commit federal crimes in
order to obstruct the judicial process in the form of a civil
sexual harassment action [the Paula Jones case].
"Not only that: she importuned another person, Linda Tripp, to
likewise engage in federal crimes. That was serious business. She
did it not on the spur of the moment; she did it over a
considerable period of time. She knowingly went to one of the
most powerful lawyers in the country, who in turn guided her to
another lawyer to prepare what she knew to be a perjurious
affidavit. One should not blink at those kinds of offences."
Reverting to his real quarry, Mr Starr continued: "Once the
relationship came to light in January 1998 . . . the President
decided not to tell the truth. In one of the most unfortunate
episodes of the entire drama, the President determined in
consultation with Mr [Dick] Morris to take a poll on whether to
tell the truth.
"Mr Morris had advised him that the American people would
readily forgive an adulterous relationship, but they would not be
forgiving of offences against the justice system. And the
President informed him, 'Well, we will just have to win, then'.
Thus, instead of telling the truth, admitting the facts and
seeking forgiveness of family and nation, he launched a campaign
designed to erode confidence in the duly appointed system of
justice.
"For her part, Miss Lewinsky likewise chose not to be readily
forthcoming. She put the nation through seven months of a
wretched and miserable 24-hour news cycle. Miss Lewinsky did not
co-operate until July 1998. This could have been over in
January."
Was he shocked by the fact that public opinion took such a
lenient view of Mr Clinton? "There was deep ambivalence,
manifested by the fact that those who opposed his removal from
office with almost equal fervour denounced his acts. But a line
was drawn between misconduct applying to his personal affairs and
possible abuse of his high office."
Presumably child molesting or polygamy would still not be
acceptable, he chuckled. "Congress has arrived at an uneasy
balance, a Solomonic judgment."
What evidently rankles with the Independent Counsel is the fact
that Mr Clinton has still, a year later, "admitted no offences,
other than to have the inappropriate relationship, which is not a
matter of interest to federal law. To the contrary: he has very
vigorously stated that he at no time committed any federal
offences".
Thus Mr Clinton is still lying to the American people. Mr Starr
himself admits to few regrets. Was it really necessary to wash so
much dirty linen in public? Mr Starr deplores Congress's decision
to authorise publication of the unexpurgated evidence, rather
than "screening and winnowing" the most salacious material first.
"I wish I had done more to say to Congress: be careful."
Some of the most sensitive evidence he gathered has, he says,
never been made public. But much of the detail published was
vital to the credibility of the Lewinsky testimony.
"Had the President seen fit to tell the truth, we would have
been spared the intrusive nature of the details." It was,
however, essential to prove "beyond the slightest doubt that the
President's denial was utterly false".
Many have wished that the Starr investigation had not
concentrated on the Lewinsky affair. He replies that the Arkansas
inquiry, which ended with several senior Clinton associates
behind bars, did not achieve the necessary level of "substantial
and credible" proof of wrongdoing by the Clintons.
Mr Starr is robust about his own battle scars; Richard Nixon,
too, had been "a little churlish and surly" about his special
prosecutor, Archibald Cox. He does regret the growth of public
cynicism about the "majority of honest, God-fearing folks" who
administer the legal system.
Yet Mr Starr believes that his investigation did prove
something. "The enduring lesson is that we in the United States
take the law seriously and that we are all accountable. It is one
of the great achievements of civilisation, to which this great
country [Britain] contributed in no small measure, that the king
is under God and the law.
"We have no king, but the President does embody the American
polity, and it is reassuring to know that the presidency is not
imperial . . . It is unfortunate that this lesson had to be
re-learnt in the context that it did."
The lecture begins at 6.30pm this evening at Logan Hall, 20
Bedford Way, London WC1. A limited number of £10 tickets will be
available at the door. Further inquiries: 0171 862 8692.
=================================================================
Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT
FROM THE DESK OF: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*Mike Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
~~~~~~~~ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends
Shalom, A Salaam Aleikum, and to all, A Good Day.
=================================================================
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
